patrick.net

"House passage is considered a foregone conclusion, but Ford said the union will keep seeking changes to make the bill more palatable."

Do the UNIONS think we are stupid, more palatable meaning allowing them to bend over parents and students while they get paid. Get outta here!

"That includes adding a due-process element to let teachers appeal poor evaluations that can lead to missing out on merit pay or outright dismissal. The union also wants to reduce the state Department of Education's power and give more authority for implementation to local school districts."

Ohh, you mean you want to be like New York and have us fund 100 million in salaries for lemon teachers who are undeserving. Get outta here!!!!!

"Evaluations would be based 50 percent on student performance over a three-year period with the rest based on principals' assessments and other factors including advanced degrees -- but only if they are in the teacher's subject area."

Whats unfair about that?

Tell some talented kid he should become a teacher. Hey, there's no job security, but if you are good, and can fit in well politically at your school, they will give you the kind of students that you can move ahead well and be paid accordingly.

But yeah, no job security. When you're 55 or so, maybe sooner, don't be surprised if some cost saving administrator, decides he can save the school money (maybe get a bonus for lowering costs) by replacing you with a 23 year old. At that point, you may wish you had chosen a career that was more lucrative than a public service job working with kids. But hey, at least you will know that for a while you made a difference, maybe enjoyed it in many ways.

Just make sure you have some skills to cover you those last 15 years. Maybe you can find some sort of charter school in a terrible neighborhood to go to.

And to think, a lot of teachers don't make it 5 years in the profession now, even with the job security , and benefits. They're making it real attractive down in Tallahassee.

I guess it's easy to be an expert on something you know next to nothing about. Clarence, or Ray, whatever your name is, welcome to my ignore list.

The school system is broken because the premise is flawed: there is no such thing as a one sized solution to education. Kids are all different - their parents priorities, their environment, their personal druthers and expectations, etc. -- and forcing them all into the same monopolized, kid warehousing system only creates disaster. Using the system "as it is" as a baseline for arguing is like arguing about what the best direction was for the titanic to motor on after it hit the iceberg: it's a complete and utter useless distraction from the problem.

What's needed is radical reform, bottom up, top down. Scrap it. Start new. Rid us of all laws related. Rid us of compulsory education. Rid us of mandatory union requirements to teach. Rid us of school districts. Rid us of the education industrial complex and its $ billion lobby. Sell off all the public held assets. The market will solve the problem far better of turning the highest % of kids in the most productive citizens they can become.

but it requires radical thinking outside of the box. It requires radical inventiveness. It requires shattering the protected nature (primarily about self-interest) of the status quo. It requires no longer subsidizing mediocrity and failure. It requires ending the inevitable ever-growing problems related to all things redistributionista related. It requires freeing up the $billions of dollars dedicated to education from those who control the system, allowing the most inventive educators to access the capital to provide results, vs. the current structure which rewards those who have the greatest political power, at the expense of all else.

Another education expert has the easy answers. The idea that the whole thing is broken is insane.

People, please read this.

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2010/09/27/100927taco_talk_lemann

Teacher tenure is an outdated concept. It needs to be eliminated. Tomorrow would be fine with me.

Marcus... no one has job security anymore. The new employement reality is that everyone is expendable and we all need to keep our skills diversified so that WHEN we lose our current job, we are good candidates for another, hopefully better, job.

I am not qualified to offer a valid opinion on how teachers should be evaluated, as I have never taught school for a living. Frankly, there is no amount of pay that would entice me to spend 5 days a week with youngsters required to be someplace they don't want to be and learn stuff they don't want to learn.
That said, somebody has to do it. I'm a big fan of home schooling for those who are willing to make that commitment.
I'm also a big fan of year round schooling. It just makes sense. We are no longer an agrarian society. Get full time use out of those buildings that cost so much to build, operate and maintain. Students retain more when their breaks are shorter and more frequent. Scheduling can be worked out to keep families on the same cycle of breaks. There's these things called computers.

marcus says

Tell some talented kid he should become a teacher. Hey, there’s no job security, but if you are good, and can fit in well politically at your school, they will give you the kind of students that you can move ahead well and be paid accordingly.

Lots of people, including private school teachers, have long careers without unions. Where does their job security come from?

I really like the idea of tying pay to performance. I don't think using standardized tests is a good way, though there's definite appeal due to the simplicity of such a system.

Maybe it's not feasible, but ideally the measure of performance should be how well the student performs in the real world. The problem with that is that by the time the first wave of students from XYZ teacher's 1st grade class hit the real world, 11 to 15 or even more years have passed. Perhaps something along these lines would be best:

Measure the performance of a teacher by through the performance of her students using the best info available for each student. For each student who *ever* passed through teacher XYZ's class, get the latest/greatest measure of their success. If the student is currently in the next grade, their current grade would have to suffice - or some standardized test. But years later, if that teacher is still teaching and the 1st grader is now an 11th grader, why not consider the student's GPA over the intervening years? And if the student has gone on to college, use their GPA there instead. If a student has entered the workforce, use their tax information to estimate their financial success in life.

The pay scale could be made not relative to all other teachers in a state or district, but inversely proportional to average family income of students at the school the teacher works at. Work at a poor school and make a difference, and you get very, very well rewarded. Work at a posh school where the parents will ensure their kids turn out well regardless, and your pay can be affected by performance only as it relates to other teachers at the same school.

This would encourage teachers to get their students to do well on standardized tests (the current system does the same). Current students will affect your salary next year .. through their scores (or grade). However, it also encourages teachers to give their students lessons that will help through succeed all throughout public school - and beyond, into the work force. It would allow some teachers to thrive simply because their students are good test takers - but if those same students begin to fail later in life, that teacher will not reap continued rewards. If, on the other hand, a statistically significant number of students that passed through a particular class have moved on to become very successful in life, that (now much older) teacher will reap life-long rewards, as long as he/she teaches, that will vastly outweigh any short-term consequences associated with truly preparing students for life in a way that does not merely maximize standardized test results.

Such a system would be vastly more complicated and there are some potential flaws. For instance, students who achieve great success and happiness in life ... through financially unrewarding endeavors ... would not benefit their teachers. Of course, rewarding teachers on the basis of test results doesn't help with this problem, either.

All my life I've bubbled in answers on pages on standardized tests.

You think any of these tests measure "success" somewhere down the line?

I don't.

Thus using them as some sort of bedrock measure of effectiveness to be tied to salaries is pointless.

marcus says

I guess it’s easy to be an expert on something you know next to nothing about. Clarence, or Ray, whatever your name is, welcome to my ignore list.

I am not RAYAMERICA...I am fine with that because you are not open to anyone's opinions/views other than your own. Even though I dispute with RAY, BAP33, and SHREK here they have never ignored me because I disagreed with their philosophies.

marcus says

But yeah, no job security. When you’re 55 or so, maybe sooner, don’t be surprised if some cost saving administrator, decides he can save the school money (maybe get a bonus for lowering costs) by replacing you with a 23 year old. At that point, you may wish you had chosen a career that was more lucrative than a public service job working with kids. But hey, at least you will know that for a while you made a difference, maybe enjoyed it in many ways.

That goes on in the workforce everywhere, however, in most cases employers are only looking to keep top performers. I cannot say that this does not or will not happen, however, if those 23 year olds can outperform the veterans then I am all for it. You missed another scenario. The one where all the teachers in the ghetto are fired because their students are not motivated enough to study for their tests. The teachers at most risk are those who serve inner city youth and youth that dont speak English.

I understand these viewpoints, however, we cant stand by and allow LEMON teachers to waste taxpayer dollars.

shrekgrinch says

Careful there, Clarence. They’ll start calling you a ‘birther’ if you keep this up…despite the fact that birther ideology has very little to do with unions.

Man, I now see how much heat conservatives take at every turn for going against liberal ideals. All this is silly, especially, when Rick Scott has brought on more change than Obama has. Where is Obama in this revolution founded by Michelle Rhee?...staying silent because he cant challenge the Unions power and risk losing their funding.

I voted for Obama yet when I challenge Obama's supporters to stand up for positive change I am on Marcus ignore list....funny!

Vicente says

All my life I’ve bubbled in answers on pages on standardized tests.
You think any of these tests measure “success” somewhere down the line?
I don’t.
Thus using them as some sort of bedrock measure of effectiveness to be tied to salaries is pointless.
“Eagles are dandified vultures” - Teddy Roosevelt

No, determination, resiliency, and work ethic are what count most....in conjunction to conformance to the business climate and cultures. Test scores are a measure of how much one is willing or can to apply themselves to learn a specific subject.

Maybe we should remove all the test scores of non-English speakers, mentally ill from the brackets so that we can see the true rankings of our nation.

No other nation has to deal with so many cultures as we do.

Matt.BayArea says

Maybe it’s not feasible, but ideally the measure of performance should be how well the student performs in the real world. The problem with that is that by the time the first wave of students from XYZ teacher’s 1st grade class hit the real world, 11 to 15 or even more years have passed. Perhaps something along these lines would be best:...

WTF? So is this how teachers get raises? They get a little bit every year based on little Johnny's & Shakisha's success. Hmm.
Wait, that could work. Call it a pension.
The more kids they taught who are successful, the higher their pension. I don't even think the taxpayers would object to such a measurable reward system.
But BS with the standardized test score thing. The kids have to demonstrate understanding and achievement. Like a science fair for each subject. And when some kid gets elected mayor or president all his former teachers get a boost in their pension. Yeah, pfffft.

Cook County resident says

Lots of people, including private school teachers, have long careers without unions. Where does their job security come from?

That's not my point. MY point is if someone has talent, and could do a lot of other things, could build a lot of other careers with those first 15 or more years, including careers that pay much better, is it too much to ask that in exchange for doing a job which is a service to others, and the community, that he or she can get a little security for his or her trouble ?

I'll put it differently. If we transition to where job security is no better in teaching than it is in any other career, then please be willing to pay more to bring talented people in. Because lets face it, that job security you are taking away has a value.

Let's put this puzzle together. Educators need to do better. Solution: take away their union, maybe lower their pay and their pensions and take away their job security.

What ? Bring the entrepreneurs in ? OH, yes. I'm sorry, I forgot, this is America. I almost forgot about our can do spirit.

"The Student Success Act is part of his objective of creating 700,000 new jobs for Florida residents over the next seven years.

This legislation will make major changes in the way teachers are paid and evaluated."

Huh? Did I miss something? How does this create jobs? Rick Scott has drastically cut funding for education. He also turned down high speed rail. Last time I checked, both these measures DESTROY jobs.

"Where is Obama in this revolution founded by Michelle Rhee?"

Michelle Rhee is a total fraud. First, it was recently discovered that she exaggerated the imporvements her students made while she was a teacher in Baltimore. And secondly, a judge recently found Rhee unlawfully fired 75 teachers in 2008 and ordered them to be re-instated with back pay for the last 2 years. Now she is working with the US Chamber of Commerce, the biggest pro outsourcing/ illegal alien amnesty organization in America.

Rhee's downfall is around the corner and in 2-3 years nobody will know who she is.

HousingWatcher says

“The Student Success Act is part of his objective of creating 700,000 new jobs for Florida residents over the next seven years.
This legislation will make major changes in the way teachers are paid and evaluated.”
Huh? Did I miss something? How does this create jobs? Rick Scott has drastically cut funding for education. He also turned down high speed rail. Last time I checked, both these measures DESTROY jobs.

Heck if I know....that is why I cited the article and its links. I think the thought is that they can produce highly skilled workers who will be able to perform the jobs that are going overseas. According to "Waiting for Superman" the US is losing jobs because we are barely pumping out highschool diplomas let alone college degrees.

HousingWatcher says

Michelle Rhee is a total fraud. First, it was recently discovered that she exaggerated the imporvements her students made while she was a teacher in Baltimore. And secondly, a judge recently found Rhee unlawfully fired 75 teachers in 2008 and ordered them to be re-instated with back pay for the last 2 years. Now she is working with the US Chamber of Commerce, the biggest pro outsourcing/ illegal alien amnesty organization in America.

Wouldnt you agree though that it is suspicious that these folks would get re-instated. What law guarantees a person a job? Last I remember we were mostly an at will employment type of country. Guess now I have to do my research on Michelle Rhee.

HousingWatcher says

“Where is Obama in this revolution founded by Michelle Rhee?”
Michelle Rhee is a total fraud. First, it was recently discovered that she exaggerated the imporvements her students made while she was a teacher in Baltimore. And secondly, a judge recently found Rhee unlawfully fired 75 teachers in 2008 and ordered them to be re-instated with back pay for the last 2 years. Now she is working with the US Chamber of Commerce, the biggest pro outsourcing/ illegal alien amnesty organization in America.
Rhee’s downfall is around the corner and in 2-3 years nobody will know who she is.

Geez according to this she fired damn near 1000 teachers. Here is the whole story: http://www.tbd.com/articles/2011/02/d-c-teachers-fired-by-rhee-to-be-reinstated-51340.html

The 75 teachers in question should have been the least controversial firings that Rhee presided over during her four-year tenure. These were not the 241 teachers fired for largely performance-based reasons last summer. Nor were they the roughly 250 teachers similarly fired the previous summer, or for that matter, the 229 teachers fired just a few months after that.

Instead, these were 75 probationary teachers, meaning educators who were only in their first or second years of teaching and had yet to be certified or hired as permanent teachers. They were let go by Rhee way back in July of 2008, at the same time as approximately 200 others who were fired as a matter of course for failing to meet a mandatory deadline to obtain their teaching certification. The federal No Child Left Behind law requires that all teachers be certified following the standard two-year probation period.

marcus says

That’s not my point. MY point is if someone has talent, and could do a lot of other things, could build a lot of other careers with those first 15 or more years, including careers that pay much better, is it too much to ask that in exchange for doing a job which is a service to others, and the community, that he or she can get a little security for his or her trouble ?

I’ll put it differently. If we transition to where job security is no better in teaching than it is in any other career, then please be willing to pay more to bring talented people in. Because lets face it, that job security you are taking away has a value.

Let’s put this puzzle together. Educators need to do better. Solution: take away their union, maybe lower their pay and their pensions and take away their job security.

What ? Bring the entrepreneurs in ? OH, yes. I’m sorry, I forgot, this is America. I almost forgot about our can do spirit.

OK, let's pay more talented teachers more money. (Ignoring the fact that there are a large number of private school teachers who are both talented and lower paid than public school teachers).

How do we measure talent?

Payoff2011 says

WTF? So is this how teachers get raises? They get a little bit every year based on little Johnny’s & Shakisha’s success. Hmm.
Wait, that could work. Call it a pension.
The more kids they taught who are successful, the higher their pension. I don’t even think the taxpayers would object to such a measurable reward system.
But BS with the standardized test score thing. The kids have to demonstrate understanding and achievement. Like a science fair for each subject. And when some kid gets elected mayor or president all his former teachers get a boost in their pension. Yeah, pfffft.

I like the idea of connecting teacher compensation to student performance but there's a conflict with that approach.

It would be in the teacher's interest to turn their students into self-interested economic machines rather than just average Joes. Would society be better served if there were more Wall Street Crooks and fewer happy, well-adjusted slackers?

Not like I think teachers have anything like that sort of power, though. Most of us go into school pretty much reflecting our background and we come out pretty much the same way.

marcus says

Tell some talented kid he should become a teacher. Hey, there’s no job security, but if you are good, and can fit in well politically at your school, they will give you the kind of students that you can move ahead well and be paid accordingly.
But yeah, no job security. When you’re 55 or so, maybe sooner, don’t be surprised if some cost saving administrator, decides he can save the school money (maybe get a bonus for lowering costs) by replacing you with a 23 year old. At that point, you may wish you had chosen a career that was more lucrative than a public service job working with kids. But hey, at least you will know that for a while you made a difference, maybe enjoyed it in many ways.
Just make sure you have some skills to cover you those last 15 years. Maybe you can find some sort of charter school in a terrible neighborhood to go to.

As I read this passionate post, I wept so much (waaaaaaaaaaaa) pardon me, that I could hardly read the words (I could only because of a teacher ... thanks). Wow! Imagine that!! No job security!! Oh the humanity of it all. Welcome to the real world Marcus (or whatever your name is).

Cook County resident says

(Ignoring the fact that there are a large number of private school teachers who are both talented and lower paid than public school teachers).

Teaching students who know their parent are paying 15K a year for school are easier to teach than kids who have a F^&* you attitude and don't want to be there. That's why public school teachers are paid more.

Cook County resident says

How do we measure talent?

It's subjective, and using tests only is problematic. Preparing for tests is not such great preparation for real life problem solving and critical thinking, but also it gets political. Who gets the kids that are the easiest to move up to the next level?

Who gets the very low end F%*k you kids ? Also, for those working with those kids, will they be rewarding them for bringing a child up up from 3 years below grade level to 1 years below ? And what about the grade level kids in the same classes that need to be moved up from grade level to the next years level (or else)?

How do you serve both groups well, and simultaneously ?

The only solution to this problem, if you understand it, is tracking. But then who gets to teach the tracks that are easiest to work with "honors kids." Many of these kids will move up in spite of the teacher. This is a good question, even if compensation isn't based on how well you move kids to the next level. IS it the most senior teacher ? The most qualified teacher, and who is that ?

Too much tracking is unfair, because often a child with a lot of potential is a little behind (now) for whatever reason, but will be harmed by being in the same class with only the reject kids. So the sort of regular level classes need to somewhat mixed, in terms of ability level, and behavior.

But just so you know, changing evaluation methods, and making it easier to remove low performing teachers are two reforms high on the agenda of teacher unions and district negotiations. IT is coming. But the answers aren't as easy as what you hear from most commentators.

Maybe we should hear from some of our Patrick education experts on this.

marcus says

Teaching students who know their parent are paying 15K a year for school are easier to teach than kids who have a F^&* you attitude and don’t want to be there. That’s why public school teachers are paid more.

In general, public school teachers are paid more because of political clout. Specifically, public school teachers in high achieving districts are paid more than public school teachers in low achieving districts because they are paid out of the tax base and the tax base reflects their parent's achievement orientation and wealth.

Some of us have the curious experience of living in a modest achievement/tax base district with disproportionately well-paid teachers.

Go figure.

marcus says

But just so you know, changing evaluation methods, and making it easier to remove low performing teachers are two reforms high on the agenda of teacher unions and district negotiations. IT is coming. But the answers aren’t as easy as what you hear from most commentators.

Various Republicans have been trying to kick the chair out from under the existing system. To counter, there's little but a vigorous defense of the status quo.

Why aren't better plans getting high profile attention right now? Has this attack come as a surprise to the unions and Democrats?

The plans and attempted reforms that are always going on with schools, are independent of the PR and media perception of what goes on in schools. Schools and teachers have a lot on their plate (as you may scratch the surface from my last post, if you wish), that is without worrying about informing the public to the difficulty and complexity of their challenges.

What politicians and simpleton commentators have to say about education, is sort of like what we have to say about middle east foreign policy. At least some of us know when we don't know enough to have formed an opinion (yet).

But yes that does get us in trouble, when the politicians and the simpletons are calling the shots. As somebody around here likes to say (Troy), we get the government we deserve. It's hard to trust the politicians to do the right thing, even if you don't have enough knowledge really to have a well thought out opinion.

marcus says

But yes that does get us in trouble, when the politicians and the simpletons are calling the shots. As somebody around here likes to say (Troy), we get the government we deserve. It’s hard to trust the politicians to do the right thing, even if you don’t have enough knowledge really to have a well thought out opinion.

Ultimately, the voters will be calling the shots. And the voters will be influenced by brain-dead campaign ads and half-assed information. That's politics.

There is risk in the status quo campaign. After the demonstrators have shouted themselves hoarse the Republicans can start pressing the point -- The union contracts raise your taxes (x) number of dollars! They are taking money out of your pockets!!.

Of course, it's just as likely that the Republicans will go back to their old line - The top 1% pay ALL the taxes!, or whatever bogus claim they were making a couple of years ago.

But really, news stories about a controversy are binary. Right now, it's cuts vs. the status quo, not cuts vs. a better way.

"Heck if I know….that is why I cited the article and its links."

So your posting articles and links that you know absolutely nothing about?

"I think the thought is that they can produce highly skilled workers who will be able to perform the jobs that are going overseas. According to “Waiting for Superman” the US is losing jobs because we are barely pumping out highschool diplomas let alone college degrees."

The US is producing far more college graduates than there are jobs. One college professor recently found in his research that a PLUMBER with no college education stands to make more money during their lifetime than a doctor.

Oh, and do you honestly think that jobs are being outsourced because of the number of college and HS grads we produce? Are you saying it has NOTHING to do with cheap overseas labor that the US can NEVER compete with?

http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/forget-harvard-and-a-4-year-degree-you-can-make-more-as-a-plumber-in-the-long-run-says-prof.-kotlikoff-536046.html

Some colleges are now charging $200,000 for a bachelors degree. No, I am not kidding. At that price, you stand virtually no chance of ever making that money back when you enter the workforce. We need LESS college graduates, not more. Go to any big box store and you will be very surpirsed to see how many of their workers have college degrees.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/29/the-most-expensive-colleg_n_517861.html#s76585&title=Sarah_Lawrence_College

Cook County resident says

ut really, news stories about a controversy are binary. Right now, it’s cuts vs. the status quo, not cuts vs. a better way.

Yes, but under the "status quo" choice, we are under pressure to do better. My school is undergoing massive reforms, even though in many ways we are doing well, especially as an urban school.

To put it differently if you mean literally "staus quo," then that is nowhere near an option.

And it's not a binary choice. There are reforms going on and big money and politics behind charter schools. Many charter will fail, but it puts competitive pressure on public schools. But the many successful public schools will flourish. My issue is with the simple minded folk on here and elsewhere that say throw away the entire public school model.

reposting:

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2010/09/27/100927taco_talk_lemann

The idea of merit pay is a good one but doing it on a standardized test is an awful idea. I've taught high school Chemistry & Physics for 2 years. We don't need tests to measure talent. Everyone knows who the good teachers are and who the bad ones are. The kids, who are brutally honest, will tell it to you straight. The parents know as well. So do the other teachers around you. It's no secret. Honestly, it should be up to the administration to offer people to get paid what they deserve.

As for the unions. I'm currently a member of the NJEA. I've never seen more disgusting behavior than I've seen from the behavior of the unions. My local union is currently in the process of supporting a reduction in staff (10-20 teachers) in order to secure a 1.5% raise. They never posed the issue to a single member or even the lower representatives. The union is 3 selfish sociopaths who act behind close doors making decisions for the hundreds of members. Approximately 50 teachers have voiced their minds to agree to a pay freeze to prevent the staff reductions. It falls on deaf ears.

I've officially decided to leave the union after this year and a lot of my colleagues are doing the same. They will still garnish our wages to collect dues after we leave. But, those of us that keep our jobs refuse to sit by and support their decision to throw our coworkers under the bus so that they can collect an extra $900 next year. Anyone that thinks the teachers unions stick up for the little guy is kidding themselves. They use them as pawns and sacrificial lambs.

Why are you carrying water for Chris Christie's attacks against teachers? Christie said that layoffs would be avoided if teachers agreed to a wage freeze, but that was a total LIE:

"The few dozen school districts where employees agreed to concessions last year still saw layoffs and cuts in academic programs."

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/10/nyregion/10christie.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1&hp

Only 10 to 20 teachers ? Doesn't seem like that much for all of New Jersey.

In my district that decision (by the union) is ALWAYS put to a vote. I fully expect this year to take more furlough days in order to prevent more layoffs.

Sometimes if it is a new contract with many agreements, that also is always put to a vote.

I'm not defending what your union did, or am I saying mine doesn't frequently disappoint its members in one way or another. Only that they would not do that.

HousingWatcher says

Why are you carrying water for Chris Christie’s attacks against teachers?

Who said that some teachers aren't republicans ? Note: For the rest of his teaching career, he will reluctantly take the benefits that his disgusting union gets for him.

http://www.njea.org/news/2010/11/30/christie%20takes%20aim%20at%20your%20paycheck

See the tables at the bottom.

I find it hard to respect someone who wouldn't pay their share for the battle against this, but who would gladly receive the benefits. Wow.

My republican teacher friends have issues with the union, but would never take such a position.

theoakman says

My local union is currently in the process of supporting a reduction in staff (10-20 teachers) in order to secure a 1.5% raise.

I would bet an ounce of gold that this is total spin, and that what they are negotiating is far more complex, preventing many of the other things Christie is trying to do, which actually cut take home pay by nearly 10%.

marcus says

theoakman says

My local union is currently in the process of supporting a reduction in staff (10-20 teachers) in order to secure a 1.5% raise.

I would bet an ounce of gold that this is total spin, and that what they are negotiating is far more complex, preventing many of the other things Christie is trying to do, which actually cut take home pay by nearly 10%.

No, you are talking about things on the state level. This is the local level. Our board proposed an 8 period day to reduce staff in order to budget for future possible cuts from Christie. Our union never said a word and supported it because they thought they could argue for a 1.5% raise based on the fact that they would spend more minutes into the classroom. Now, 5 months later, it appears as though they have no shot at their raise because of the budget woes and they are now scrambling to revert back on their original support because the cutting of staff will result in them losing revenue from the dues. We have been working without a contract for the entire year. It's not complex at all. Some people want their raise and they are going for it. Most of us voiced that we would choose to save jobs rather than receive a measly 1.5%. The union leadership doesn't care.

Most of the people leaving the union in my district are 100% anti-Christie and vote democrat.