Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Top teachers union lobbied CDC on school reopening

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Top teachers union lobbied CDC on school reopening

    Top teachers union lobbied CDC on school reopening

    Classic current example of Teachers Unions working for their dues-paying members AGAINST the interests of parents, children, education, and SCIENCE.

    The nation’s second-largest teachers union, the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), regularly communicated with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the White House on school reopening, emails showed Saturday.

    Communication obtained by the New York Post through a Freedom of Information Act request issued by the conservative group, Americans for Public Trust, showed numerous emails between top CDC officials and the union just days before the administration released school reopening guidelines in February.

    “Thank you again for Friday’s rich discussion about forthcoming CDC guidance and for your openness to the suggestions made by our president, Randi Weingarten, and the AFT,” senior director for health issues with the AFT, Kelly Trautner, said in a Feb. 1 email to the CDC.

    TEACHERS UNIONS CONTINUE NEGOTIATIONS EVEN AFTER 80% OF TEACHERS GET VACCINATED

    “We were able to review a copy of the draft guidance document over the weekend and were able to provide some initial feedback to several staff this morning about possible ways to strengthen the document,” Trautner added. “We believe our experiences on the ground can inform and enrich thinking around what is practicable and prudent in future guidance documents.”

    The lobbying efforts were a reported success as the Post found at least two instances when “suggestions” were used nearly word-for-word within the CDC’s guidelines.

    The CDC had been prepared to allow in-school instruction regardless of transmission rates. But at the suggestion of the union, the guidelines were adjusted to include a provision that said, “In the event of high community-transmission results from a new variant of SARS-CoV-2, a new update of these guidelines may be necessary.”

    The union further requested that teachers be granted remote work access for those “who have documented high-risk conditions or who are at increased risk.” Similar provisions were included for “staff who have a household member” that is considered high risk to the virus.

    Parents nationwide have been frustrated with the slow rate of school reopenings for in-person instruction, even after the CDC said it was safe for teachers to re-enter the classroom – prompting legal battles from San Francisco to Chicago.

    An agreement in late March to reopen Oakland, Calif., classrooms for high-needs students, including homeless, foster, and special needs kids, fell through after not enough teachers agreed to return to the classroom, despite cash incentives and vaccine prioritization.

    Parents have suspected unions of utilizing the pandemic as a way to bargain for increased pay and benefits.

    ...
    "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

  • #2
    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
    Top teachers union lobbied CDC on school reopening

    Classic current example of Teachers Unions working for their dues-paying members AGAINST the interests of parents, children, education, and SCIENCE.

    The nation’s second-largest teachers union, the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), regularly communicated with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the White House on school reopening, emails showed Saturday.

    Communication obtained by the New York Post through a Freedom of Information Act request issued by the conservative group, Americans for Public Trust, showed numerous emails between top CDC officials and the union just days before the administration released school reopening guidelines in February.

    “Thank you again for Friday’s rich discussion about forthcoming CDC guidance and for your openness to the suggestions made by our president, Randi Weingarten, and the AFT,” senior director for health issues with the AFT, Kelly Trautner, said in a Feb. 1 email to the CDC.

    TEACHERS UNIONS CONTINUE NEGOTIATIONS EVEN AFTER 80% OF TEACHERS GET VACCINATED

    “We were able to review a copy of the draft guidance document over the weekend and were able to provide some initial feedback to several staff this morning about possible ways to strengthen the document,” Trautner added. “We believe our experiences on the ground can inform and enrich thinking around what is practicable and prudent in future guidance documents.”

    The lobbying efforts were a reported success as the Post found at least two instances when “suggestions” were used nearly word-for-word within the CDC’s guidelines.

    The CDC had been prepared to allow in-school instruction regardless of transmission rates. But at the suggestion of the union, the guidelines were adjusted to include a provision that said, “In the event of high community-transmission results from a new variant of SARS-CoV-2, a new update of these guidelines may be necessary.”

    The union further requested that teachers be granted remote work access for those “who have documented high-risk conditions or who are at increased risk.” Similar provisions were included for “staff who have a household member” that is considered high risk to the virus.

    Parents nationwide have been frustrated with the slow rate of school reopenings for in-person instruction, even after the CDC said it was safe for teachers to re-enter the classroom – prompting legal battles from San Francisco to Chicago.

    An agreement in late March to reopen Oakland, Calif., classrooms for high-needs students, including homeless, foster, and special needs kids, fell through after not enough teachers agreed to return to the classroom, despite cash incentives and vaccine prioritization.

    Parents have suspected unions of utilizing the pandemic as a way to bargain for increased pay and benefits.

    ...
    Part of this is pure politics. I read an article (unfortunately I've been unable to find it again, since this was a mention, not the thrust of the article, think it was in the NYT) that had a superintendent talk about how his teachers were ready to go back to class, until trump pushed for re-opening, then teachers immediately knee-jerked into staying closed. I think at this point, that political position has become somewhat ingrained, and re-opening seen as a conservative agenda item, that getting re-opening now has to fight not just health and safety concerns, but pure political tribalism.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
      Top teachers union lobbied CDC on school reopening

      Classic current example of Teachers Unions working for their dues-paying members AGAINST the interests of parents, children, education, and SCIENCE.

      The nation’s second-largest teachers union, the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), regularly communicated with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the White House on school reopening, emails showed Saturday.

      Communication obtained by the New York Post through a Freedom of Information Act request issued by the conservative group, Americans for Public Trust, showed numerous emails between top CDC officials and the union just days before the administration released school reopening guidelines in February.

      “Thank you again for Friday’s rich discussion about forthcoming CDC guidance and for your openness to the suggestions made by our president, Randi Weingarten, and the AFT,” senior director for health issues with the AFT, Kelly Trautner, said in a Feb. 1 email to the CDC.

      TEACHERS UNIONS CONTINUE NEGOTIATIONS EVEN AFTER 80% OF TEACHERS GET VACCINATED

      “We were able to review a copy of the draft guidance document over the weekend and were able to provide some initial feedback to several staff this morning about possible ways to strengthen the document,” Trautner added. “We believe our experiences on the ground can inform and enrich thinking around what is practicable and prudent in future guidance documents.”

      The lobbying efforts were a reported success as the Post found at least two instances when “suggestions” were used nearly word-for-word within the CDC’s guidelines.

      The CDC had been prepared to allow in-school instruction regardless of transmission rates. But at the suggestion of the union, the guidelines were adjusted to include a provision that said, “In the event of high community-transmission results from a new variant of SARS-CoV-2, a new update of these guidelines may be necessary.”

      The union further requested that teachers be granted remote work access for those “who have documented high-risk conditions or who are at increased risk.” Similar provisions were included for “staff who have a household member” that is considered high risk to the virus.

      Parents nationwide have been frustrated with the slow rate of school reopenings for in-person instruction, even after the CDC said it was safe for teachers to re-enter the classroom – prompting legal battles from San Francisco to Chicago.

      An agreement in late March to reopen Oakland, Calif., classrooms for high-needs students, including homeless, foster, and special needs kids, fell through after not enough teachers agreed to return to the classroom, despite cash incentives and vaccine prioritization.

      Parents have suspected unions of utilizing the pandemic as a way to bargain for increased pay and benefits.

      ...
      Meanwhile, while steadfastly refusing to conduct in-person classes for American citizens, a bunch of union teachers taught in-person to the kids of illegal immigrants in San Diego and elsewhere over the Easter break.

      Maybe at some point this should be regarded as a national emergency and any teacher that continues to refuse will be considered to have handed in their resignation.

      I'm always still in trouble again

      "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
      "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
        Meanwhile, while steadfastly refusing to conduct in-person classes for American citizens, a bunch of union teachers taught in-person to the kids of illegal immigrants in San Diego and elsewhere over the Easter break.
        Yup!

        Maybe at some point this should be regarded as a national emergency and any teacher that continues to refuse will be considered to have handed in their resignation.
        Like Reagan did the ATC!

        "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
          Boy did a bunch of guys end up losing high-paying jobs because they were more beholden to their union than their employer.

          I'm always still in trouble again

          "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
          "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
            Boy did a bunch of guys end up losing high-paying jobs because they were more beholden to their union than their employer.
            And planes kept flying and airports kept operating and life went on.

            We had one of those displaced ATC guys in our Church when I was in Tyler, and I was surprised by his reaction.... "He should have done it sooner".

            He had the same perspective on public sector unions as I do (in fact, he's one of the reasons I have this opinion) -- that the public sector unions only protect bad employees and do nothing for the "good guys".
            "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
              He had the same perspective on public sector unions as I do (in fact, he's one of the reasons I have this opinion) -- that the public sector unions only protect bad employees and do nothing for the "good guys".
              Unions CAN be good, but I see why he came to that conclusion. Think about it.

              For the sake of argument, let's assume a perfectly fair, non-corrupt police union that works as intended.

              They have made agreements about wages, retirement, healthcare for the employees. Those aren't "big" changes. After all, a small pay-raise isn't amazingly impactful, even if it wouldn't have happened without the union, and built upon multiple pay raises also earned. So, in effect, the "good" that the union is doing isn't truly seen or felt, and is largely un-noticed.

              The other thing that the union got, was disciplinary protections to protect from unfair discipline. A good thing to have, you don't want to be fired because the chief suddenly took a disliking to you. Who's going to actually benefit from the protections? The union, representing the employees, are going to start sympathetic to their cause until they get both sides. That initial sympathy has to be overcome, and in cases of shades of grey and uncertainty, the union will favor the employee. This tilts the scales, generally, in favor of the employee. The thing is, which cops are going to be needing this protection more often? The good cops generally won't because they are following the rules. It'll be the bad cops. There was a saying in the navy (pretty sure elsewhere) about leaders. "80% of your time is spent on 20% of your sailors".

              Again as i've said before, the protection of bad employees ends up as a feature, not a bug. It's a natural outcome, even for perfectly fair and good unions.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post
                Unions CAN be good, but I see why he came to that conclusion. Think about it.
                I most certainly think they had their day!

                For the sake of argument, let's assume a perfectly fair, non-corrupt police union that works as intended.
                So good so far. But what is "intended"? It's clear that they exist to be one-sided.... their salaries and power come from collecting dues from, and representing the interests of, their dues-paying members.

                They have made agreements about wages, retirement, healthcare for the employees. Those aren't "big" changes. After all, a small pay-raise isn't amazingly impactful, even if it wouldn't have happened without the union, and built upon multiple pay raises also earned. So, in effect, the "good" that the union is doing isn't truly seen or felt, and is largely un-noticed.
                OK, if that was how it worked, I wouldn't be so opposed...

                The other thing that the union got, was disciplinary protections to protect from unfair discipline. A good thing to have, you don't want to be fired because the chief suddenly took a disliking to you. Who's going to actually benefit from the protections? The union, representing the employees, are going to start sympathetic to their cause until they get both sides. That initial sympathy has to be overcome, and in cases of shades of grey and uncertainty, the union will favor the employee. This tilts the scales, generally, in favor of the employee. The thing is, which cops are going to be needing this protection more often? The good cops generally won't because they are following the rules. It'll be the bad cops. There was a saying in the navy (pretty sure elsewhere) about leaders. "80% of your time is spent on 20% of your sailors".
                OK, but the union is paid by the members -- they have no interest in "fair" -- their interest is in protecting their members' interests at all costs.

                Again as i've said before, the protection of bad employees ends up as a feature, not a bug. It's a natural outcome, even for perfectly fair and good unions.
                And, to be clear, I don't think we're actually arguing against each other -- just fleshing this out.

                "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

                  I most certainly think they had their day!



                  So good so far. But what is "intended"? It's clear that they exist to be one-sided.... their salaries and power come from collecting dues from, and representing the interests of, their dues-paying members.



                  OK, if that was how it worked, I wouldn't be so opposed...



                  OK, but the union is paid by the members -- they have no interest in "fair" -- their interest is in protecting their members' interests at all costs.



                  And, to be clear, I don't think we're actually arguing against each other -- just fleshing this out.
                  We aren't arguing against each other. Unions are one of those things that are complicated. They have good and bad parts, and even the good parts can have unintended consequences. Or those consequences can create false impressions.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post
                    We aren't arguing against each other. Unions are one of those things that are complicated. They have good and bad parts, and even the good parts can have unintended consequences. Or those consequences can create false impressions.
                    I think, however, that unlike any other time in history, unions - particularly police unions - seem to be coming under scrutiny.

                    It would be almost impossible to wipe out the bigger unions in bigger cities, but maybe some "wakeup" is happening among mayors, city councils, the electorate -- that things need to drastically change.

                    "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      In general, unions work best when there is a power imbalance between employees and employer due to lopsided supply/demand of workers.

                      One on one, an employer holds the cards. If you don't want to accept the pay/benefits they offer you, they can find 100 other people who will. A union works to shift that power dynamic by organizing the workers into one negotiating unit. Sure, they might find 100 other people for one person, but they can't replace their entire work-force, at least not easily or efficiently.

                      The thing is, once you reach a point where the supply/demand is more balanced, then the need for the union to equalize the power is largely negated. After all, if your skill-set is rare enough, then the cost of finding/interviewing/hiring a replacement is high enough to make negotiations more fair

                      I'll be honest, I don't know much about law enforcement hiring, so I have no idea where along the spectrum law enforcement fall.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post

                        We aren't arguing against each other. Unions are one of those things that are complicated. They have good and bad parts, and even the good parts can have unintended consequences. Or those consequences can create false impressions.
                        I think that for the most part unions are a relic of the past. They served a valuable purpose in their time, kind of like a buggy whip.

                        I'm always still in trouble again

                        "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                        "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                          I think that for the most part unions are a relic of the past. They served a valuable purpose in their time, kind of like a buggy whip.
                          I don't think they are entirely relegated to the past. See my post right above your reply.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post
                            In general, unions work best when there is a power imbalance between employees and employer due to lopsided supply/demand of workers.

                            One on one, an employer holds the cards. If you don't want to accept the pay/benefits they offer you, they can find 100 other people who will. A union works to shift that power dynamic by organizing the workers into one negotiating unit. Sure, they might find 100 other people for one person, but they can't replace their entire work-force, at least not easily or efficiently.

                            The thing is, once you reach a point where the supply/demand is more balanced, then the need for the union to equalize the power is largely negated. After all, if your skill-set is rare enough, then the cost of finding/interviewing/hiring a replacement is high enough to make negotiations more fair

                            I'll be honest, I don't know much about law enforcement hiring, so I have no idea where along the spectrum law enforcement fall.
                            But here's the deal --- you're obviously referring to a private sector union - employer and employees, and the employer holds all the cards. If he/she has invested their own money, time, talent, etc into that company, then they should, indeed, hold all the cards. But if they want to be a successful business, they're going to know that they need to hire quality employees and treat them right.

                            Before labor laws and OSHA and other protections, there needed to be some protection for the workers due to health and safety and other abuses.

                            On the other hand, is the public sector union -- the ones I hate. They pit the "employees" NOT against the "employer", but against the TAX PAYER.
                            That's the key.
                            The union gets filthy rich collecting the dues of its members, and representing them AGAINST (I'm not shouting ) the city government, the people who need police protection, the homes that need fire protection, etc.
                            And the members know that they union will be there to protect them if they screw up, or if they're just bad actors.

                            And, in the case of so many public sector unions - the union members who retire make out like bandits with bloated pension or retirement (as early as 55) packages that the city/municipality has to pay in addition to the active duty police, fire, paramedics, etc.

                            "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post

                              I don't think they are entirely relegated to the past. See my post right above your reply.
                              I'm sure that their are incidences where they could serve a purpose but there is a reason that membership in the public sector has been plummeting for decades.

                              When I was in my 20s everyone of my friends who worked at Lockheed belonged to the union and were strong supporters. They stood on picket lines, they made life hard for "scabs" and other non-union employees. But over the years every single one dropped their membership until none belonged to the union by 2000.

                              I'm always still in trouble again

                              "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                              "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by CivilDiscourse, Yesterday, 10:07 AM
                              11 responses
                              64 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Teallaura  
                              Started by Stoic, 05-12-2021, 07:03 PM
                              30 responses
                              169 views
                              1 like
                              Last Post Sparko
                              by Sparko
                               
                              Started by Cow Poke, 05-12-2021, 02:16 PM
                              31 responses
                              162 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Teallaura  
                              Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 05-12-2021, 11:07 AM
                              9 responses
                              93 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                              Started by CivilDiscourse, 05-12-2021, 06:31 AM
                              31 responses
                              175 views
                              1 like
                              Last Post CivilDiscourse  
                              Working...
                              X