Thursday, July 7, 2016

More Fun at St Paul Schools

This article is interesting,It reminds me why the unlucky students are so SCREWED. MP St Paul Schools Change Rationale

"The DFL and Education Minnesota wanted increased compensation for the Teachers and reduced accountability for the Teachers, so they backed a board that would execute this plan.  The new Board Members then paid them back for their support. 
MP St Paul Schools: History 

I am always fascinated that Boards are allowed to sign Teacher Contracts right after the Teachers pay to get them voted in.  Can you imagine the conflict of interest case that would result if something like this occurred in the Private business world." G2A
Thoughts on the article or the comments? 


Sean said...

"Can you imagine the conflict of interest case that would result if something like this occurred in the Private business world."

Dude, it happens all the time in the private sector. Major shareholders frequently make plays to change the composition of the board of directors in order to pursue different strategies -- which usually end up resulting in more money going into the pockets of those major shareholders.

John said...

Please remember that the major shareholders are the Owners... And it is their money that is at risk... So yes they do have a valid interest in how the company is run...

The Union Members are simply employees who work for compensation.

The Union donations are like me giving my Manager $500 2 months before reviews/raises occur in hopes that I would benefit even more.

Now I think you are against big money donating to politicians for fear of "kick backs". How is what the Union did in St Paul any different?

They paid to get "friendly generous agreeable" bosses put in place. And they got a lot of money and change for their investment.

The only people who will pay are the tax payers and the students.

Sean said...

Teachers are taxpayers, and they too have a valid interest in how the schools are run.

There are a lot more non-teachers than teachers, so if the teachers are way off-base, their candidates ought not be winning.

John said...

Oh come now. You know the game.

They apparently hold their elections in an off year to ensure only those with the most to gain show up to vote.

John said...

That of course includes workers and middle class parents of school age children.

Sean said...

I think there's a valid reason to hold school board election is the odd year -- it matches with the state budgeting process, and allows candidates to campaign based on knowing what the two-year financial scenario for the district is. YMMV.

John said...

That would make some sense if there were wild swings in the funding model or if they had any say in the funding model. Since neither is the case, I don't think that is so important.

RDale went back to even years a few years back, it ensures more citizens are at the polls and it reduces the cost of the district's election cost.

jerrye92002 said...

When was the last time a union-endorsed candidate lost? It cannot be because they are always the best person for the job. I've seen it too many times to know otherwise, that it is the candidate willing to give the teachers and parents more of Other People's Money.

John said...

That is what I find most disturbing about this topic. Those board members often push for the agendas of the Teachers and the Parents of the Lucky kids. (ie more compensation, enrichment programs and sports)

Now these are good things unless it reduces the number and quality of Teachers for the Unlucky kids.

jerrye92002 said...

I find that the ONLY result of this corrupt system is that the school district spends MORE to get the same result.