I agree Justin, and if all the teachers fail to show up, which is likely, they should fire all of them and rehire teachers at steps 1 thru 5. Not only would this send a strong message to the teachers union, it would cut the school budget in half, making for a much lower property tax bill.

But they’re striking “for the children,” right? Of course not.
I guess they think that their annual extortion attempts of local taxpayers helps build good will.

http://theunionnews.blogspot.com/2007/08/teachers-out-on-strike-in-rhode-island.html
“’We wanted to try and get this resolved,’ said the official, Patrick M. Crowley, assistant executive director of the National Education Association of Rhode Island … Crowley was less specific when he was asked to identify sticking points in the negotiations. ‘Management is asking for things they can’t afford to buy this year,’ he said. ‘The system wants to change the role of teachers from professionals to staffers who take direction,’ Crowley said. He declined to elaborate.”
It’s all ducked-up in Burrillville, eh Crowley? Are you wearing your duck costume to the negotiating table????
I’ve got news for you:
Professionals aren’t compensated based on seniority, but on individual performance and reputation.
Professionals are accountable for their individual performance – and don’t rely upon tenure to hold their positions.
Professionals don’t walk picket lines.
So let’s stop pretending that the members of your union are “professionals,” OK? Maybe calling them that is good for intra-union PR and political correctness, and for your members “self-esteem,” but let’s deal with the reality of what they do and how they comport themselves as directed by your organization.
Teachers CAN be true professionals, but not so long as they are under an NEA regime.
Quack quack!

When the Union came to the table in East Greenwich last time the President said ” we’re not here for the kids”.
All the districts that are going through this dog and pony show should have a plan to get tutors lined up, start a search maybe in India with a personel agency and show the NEA they mean business.This Union needs to be broken now!

The Burrillville teachers have fulfilled the terms of the existing contract, which expires August 31st. Had a new agreement been in place, there would have been no issue with starting the next contract “early”, although it is not in effect until September 1st. In fact, in hopes an agreement would be reached, two days were worked earlier this week.
The case law is quite clear on these matters – if a judge orders the teachers back to work after a hearing (this still being America, after all), and the teachers defy the court order, that would constitute a violation of the law. The case law also says that if no new agreemwnt has been reached after the current contract expires (this Friday), the terms and conditions of the old contract stay in effect until a new agreement is reached.

Mike,
I think in this context Pat was referring to the Superintendent and School Committee. Generally, the proposals we see in bargaining represent a combination of issues put forward by both (but the School Committee is ultimately responsible for the proposals).
I think that I am more likely to use the term “management” when typing than speaking, and in generic situations as opposed to specific ones, as I think I did earlier tonight when addressing the buyback issue on another thread.
Ironically, in NEARI’s structure, I am technically “management” to Pat.

there are 203 teachers..they could replace 100 in a flash.. the rest will be teachers that cross the picket line that don’t wnat to loses their great gig…
the pat and bob show is getting really piggish, peopel of tired of it…with the pending deficit next year, if i was a union leader, i woluld read the writing on the wall and try to work with the students….rahter than aggravate the public

“The case law is quite clear on these matters – if a judge orders the teachers back to work after a hearing (this still being America, after all), and the teachers defy the court order, that would constitute a violation of the law.”
Is that how a professional conducts him/herself? Waits for a court order to go back to work? This is where we are reminded that teacher contracts are framed on an industrial, not professional, basis.

Spin it however you like, Bob, but the fact is that children are not in school when they were supposed to be, and the reason is that the union knows that lengthy periods of that experience are intolerable to a community.
Extortion. Unconscionable.
I still say: put out a call for applications (with emergency certification available) and tell the teachers that contracts will expire when they expire for any of them who aren’t in their classrooms by the end of the week.

Sheesh. I wonder how much you could save just by canning HALF of those people… I mean, if Bob didn’t have his hand up his arse, Pat Crowley would just be aimlessly running around the state with his duck suit on. One has to assume that the people BELOW Pat are cronies who sucked all the right people to get cushy jobs doing little or nothing.
It’s the union way!

Well, I guess this kind of answers the question as to why we have 36 school districts, doesn’t it? 7 “Assistant Executive Directors” in a state with only 5 counties — counties that we don’t even bother using because we’re smaller than a lot of icebergs? Is Deputy Vice Assistant Executive Director available, because I want in on the action! Does anyoone over their have a sense of shame? Geesh!
Executive Director
Robert A. Walsh, Jr. RWalsh@nea.org
Deputy Executive Director
Vincent P. Santaniello, Esq. VSantaniello@nea.org
Assistant Executive Directors/UniServ
Jane Argentieri JArgentieri@nea.org
Patrick Crowley PCrowley@nea.org
Jerome Egan JEgan@nea.org
Peter Gingras PGingras@nea.org
Thomas Landry TLandry@nea.org
John Leidecker JLeidecker@nea.org
Jeanette Woolley JWoolley@nea.org

“Which no doubt means that by contract they get time off for conducting “union business” – POSSIBLY STILL BEING PAID BY US INSTEAD OF BY THE UNION …”
Not possibly, definitely. There was a wonderful principal in South Kingstown by the name of Donna Sennett. In her first year, she put her foot down on some reasonable things, including teachers meeting with union reps during school hours. They set on her like a pack of ravening wolves. We unfortunately lost her to a voc-tech school.
It sounds, by the way, like Burrillville is trying to implement some of those same basic management practices – hence, Pat Crowley’s mature response.

SueD, arbiter of truth, justice, and now maturity! Great job you have appointed yourself to.
Justin, I wish you would take the time to really investigate the issues instead of having this ivory tower, knee-jerk reaction.
TomW, if the Assembly is controlled by the unions, then why did they level fund education and pass Paiva-Weed?

>>TomW, if the Assembly is controlled by the unions, then why did they level fund education and pass Paiva-Weed?
Because the General Assembly’s back is to the wall (a situation of its own making).
It not only has to please its teachers union constituency, but its other constituencies – e.g., the other government unions, the welfare lobby (including the unionized staffers that man it), and the construction unions (do you really think that, in this “crisis” budget year the Lincoln courthouse was passed merely to please Frank Williams, and not also the construction unions now that Twin Rivers is completed?).
The level funding this year was to shove the problem onto municipal governments while using the “savings” to placate the aforementioned other constituencies.
As for Paiva-Weed, it was enacted during an election year to head-off the drive for citizen initiative, which in turn was gaining momentum due to the brewing property tax revolt in this State. Let’s see if / how long it sticks before concluding that the Democrat General Assembly “sold out” the union bosses.