Don’t be confused, I am still in Michigan. But the rumblings are starting to sound very much like Wisconsin …
In a letter to MEA local presidents, President Iris Salters points to a motion approved by the union’s Board of Directors that directs them to hold meetings to determine if their members will authorize “crisis activities, up to and including job action.”
“Let me be very clear on what this vote means,” the letter reads. “It authorizes the MEA to engage in significant activities — up to and including a work stoppage.”
The letter advises employees that they could be fired for striking, but reads that “It is simply not possible to replace all or most school employees in the state…It is to, say the least, a time-consuming and expensive process for school districts.”
The letter also warns “There may be some inconvenience for your students.”
It is illegal for teachers to strike or “sick out” in the State of Michigan. Of course the President of the Michigan Education Association (Salters) wouldn’t be putting her own job on the line with a strike. And then of course there’s that pesky little problem about “inconveniencing students”.
There’s a lot of grumbling about collective bargaining rights and how unfair it will be for a teacher to have to pay a little bit of the cost of their health insurance. The unions would rather watch a lot of Michigan residents lose their jobs and their homes instead of all of us (union members included) making small sacrifices and working together.
Unions may have a stronger hold here in Michigan than any other state; Governor Snyder has a tough road ahead of him.
In other news: last Friday I reported our gas was down to $3.60, today it’s back up to $3.70. Tomorrow it is likely we will see gas up to $3.80 or $3.85/gallon. I won’t be surprised to see $4 gas in our neighborhood by next week.
OneMom
Sounds to me like they are moving towards sidestepping the law and a possible strike action. It wouldn’t surprise me in the least.
LD Jackson recently posted..Sharia Law In Florida
Sidestep the law? They wouldn’t do that …. would they? Things could get pretty messy here in Michigan.
I have to comment on this and I’m sure some will disagree.
I work for the University of Texas Medical Branch Hospitals in Galveston Texas. Since we are a teaching institution. I am a member of the Texas State Teachers Retirement Program. About 10 years ago there was some paperwork left in our break room encouraging us to join a state union. Well, with so much vacation time and sick leave granted that you can’t use it all, holidays on top of that, 1/2 of our retirement is paid by the state and all of our health insurance paid, what more could I ask for? And that’s not even all our benefits. So, I didn’t want to pay union dues when there was no reason for them to fight for me for anything since I was very happy with my benefits and pay. I didn’t join.
Now they do not pay for dependents on your insurance or dental or vision coverage. If you want that it comes out of your pocket. The state pays for a little less than 1/2 of our retirement and we pay the other half. It wouldn’t bother me at all if I had to pay more of my health insurance benefits. So, I can’t understand why they have a problem with paying for health insurance and retirement benefits. Times are hard. They should be glad they have a job!!!
Stated very well, Cindy … but of course you are a rational, unselfish person.
Hugs to all the hounds (and you!).
Thanks OM! Hugs to you and your family too.