Comments on: Solidarity With the DCU—Call, E-mail or Write Your School Board Today

By: Steve Buel

Steve Buel — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 19:43:16 +0000

Dear Himself,
It is not that it benefits SFC and PSF, it is they think it benefits them because they are told it will save money. How does it benefit the people in these organizations for the rotten middle schools in lower economic areas to keep churning out huge numbers of dropouts, kids on drugs, kids into alcohol, gang members, and early pregnancies. Wouldn’t you think they would figure out this is a terrible drain on the city where they pay taxes. But they don’t see it that way — all they see is fixing these schools will take resources away from their kids and their schools. This attitude is no different than the major corporations who continue to look at the short term agenda (the upper management pocketbooks) instead of what is good for the long run. I have a very good friend who taught for years and always complained about not being paid enough — until he retired and complained about having to pay too many taxes for schools. Same principle here.

By: Becky

Becky — Wed, 11 Jul 2007 17:34:52 +0000

Just a few nights ago I watched a really great film about outsourcing called The Navigators by Ken Loach. It made me sad and angry (but it is a very beautiful film - I just wish it was a total fantasy and not fiction based on reality.)

By: Terry

Terry — Wed, 11 Jul 2007 06:07:53 +0000

Here’s the message I fired off to Ruth:

“Just saw the school board meeting and need to ask –what’s up with the maintenance department? Has the decision already been made to contract out their jobs? If so, I strenuously object. Hasn’t the district learned anything from the whole custodian fiasco?

“You know, the citizen comment protocol really bothers me. Why can’t board members ask questions of those who testify? The silence of the board makes it seem as though none of the testimony has been heard, or if it has been heard, it’s totally ignored. Tonight’s testimony was highly reminiscent of the Jefferson reconfiguration hearings. Glenda Simmons never got a response, at least publicly, from either the board or the superintendent.

“I know you’re the new kid on the block, Ruth, but maybe you could at least raise the issue of citizen comment to fellow board members. Some public give and take would be a really good thing.”

By: Terry

Terry — Wed, 11 Jul 2007 05:49:27 +0000

Just came across this excellent piece. I watched the meeting last night on Ch 28 and was so disturbed that I e-mailed Ruth to see what she knew. Nothing apparently.

I also was motivated to write my own take on what I saw. I just posted it on my blog.

By: Himself

Himself — Tue, 10 Jul 2007 18:40:26 +0000

Actually, this was their first crack at appealing directly to the board. It’s the district’s labor relations team, led by Thomas C. Gunn, that’s been giving these guys the run around for three years.

The real shame is that a lot of these skilled guys are in high demand in the open labor market. There’s already been a ton of attrition, and there will only be more if they can’t get a measly frickin’ cost of living raise. Which leads to the ironic conclusion that the district will be spending more on outside contractors to fill the gap if they keep jerking these guys around.

Steve, you’ve got a point about SFC and PSF, but honestly, physical plant maintenance doesn’t respect class boundaries. All of our schools are in crappy condition, and they’re just getting worse. If we start bringing in $100/hr. contractors to replace light switches, how does that benefit Wilson and Lincoln over Jefferson? It’s just plain bad policy.

By: Steve Buel

Steve Buel — Tue, 10 Jul 2007 18:17:42 +0000

It is not much of a surprise that these people can’t get a fair shake from the school board — after all, what do they have in common with this group? The School Foundation and Stand for Children, the two groups who control the school board, undoubtedly don’t see any direct benefit to their kids or “their” schools particularly by having a fair settlement, in fact, just the opposite. More money to “laborers” means less money to something that more directly benefits upper middle class kids. Since they have the power, why give some of it up? In this world today, these actions make perfect sense.