Tag: MEA

"Oh, it doesn't bother me one bit. I love it."

That is my response to a question asked by MSU labor and industrial relations professor Richard Block.

"The question of compensation is always a difficult one. What is the right amount?"

"Levels of compensation are a function of the responsibility of the person, the culture of the organization as well as what other local officials are getting."

[...]

"It may not bother the membership, and the membership is paying the bills, so why should it bother us?"

"S.O.S." members were in Lansing on behalf of the statewide public school establishment, demanding that politicians restore $292 per-pupil K-12 budget cut enacted a few weeks ago both by the Legislature and through an executive order signed by Gov. Jennifer Granholm. For the Merrill district, which had been slated to receive a per-pupil foundation allowance of $7,316 in FY 2010, this cut represents a reduction of just 4 percent.

By Ken Braun

As I noted yesterday, there's speculation swirling about the capitol regarding whether the Republicans "have the guts" to vote for budget cuts. And as I referenced last week, one of those cuts is a $218 reduction to the K-12 budget. So it comes as little surprise that the MIRS Capitol Capsule (subscription required) now reports a "source" who claims that the Michigan Education Association is cranking up the heat on some of them to "back away" from the $218 million reduction.

The list of MEA "targeted" legislators is as follows:

But you know what they say... the more things change the more they stay the same.  

Lest you lose your footing, your grip on reality or your general intellectual equilibrium, there is evidence in fish-wraps across the state today that things aren't as topsy-turvy as the MEA / Dillon spat might indicate, and what good is a site like Right Michigan if we don't keep you grounded in reality?  

Not that reality is eeeeveryone's strong suit, though, but isn't that about what we've come to expect from paper's like the Ivory Tower?  The state's leading Lefty pub carries an AP story with an interesting headline that proclaims "Teenagers may receive pay raise this week."

Michigan teenagers who have jobs might see a pay raise this week.

Michigan's subminimum wage, a wage paid to employees younger than 18, will jump from $6.55 to $7.25 when the federal minimum wage rises to that rate on Friday.

And they're right, technically, though I couldn't help but be carried away to the bygone days of the Cold War when a two-car automobile race between the Soviets and the United States once produced a Moscow Headline proclaiming- "Soviets finish second, Americans second to last."

Yes.  Some teenagers might get a pay raise this week as the government introduces another bureaucratic regulation on job makers across the country, even here in a state where job makers have become an endangered species. Alas, many teenagers will also get a pretty serious pay reduction this week when their bosses crunch the numbers and decided instead of paying the higher wage they'll do without the seasonal help the rest of the way.

And as teenagers across the state find their jobs no longer exist, their parents back at home suddenly find themselves dealing with skyrocketing prices on their monthly utility bill, thanks in large part to the MEA's whipping boy, Andy Dillon.  The Grand Rapids Press reports on new, and unstoppable, rate hikes headed our way from Consumers and DTE.

Read on...

From For a Better Day

Most of you are local-government kind of people.  You realize that the closer government is to us, the more say we can have in how it operates.  That is why contemplating the question of county-wide school districts has been an interesting proposition.

After looking at our county and all the changes that are going on, it seems like the perfect time for Livingston to become the first county-wide district.  While this goes against local government philosophy, we don't really have that much say in our districts anyway. Most of the curriculum is decided at the State level via the MEAP.  The MEA, a state-wide union, strong arms districts into submission by electing school board members who will vote for their interests or by threatening action if the districts don't cooperate.  With all the increased Federal and State involvement, there are laws that cover most everything else.  

Yes, school boards are charged with passing the budget.  However, the State determines how much money we get and the union determines how much we spend, given 88% of our budget is wrapped up in personnel.   We get to decide what to cut.  Yes, we are charged with making policy, but much of that is governed by law and the Department of Education.  Some of it isn't but we are given "model" policies that we are (wink, wink) free to use if we want to.  

So what are the advantages of having a county-wide school district?

"This is really a winning situation for everyone," [communication director for the MEA Doug] Pratt said. "Schools get to pay the extra amount over the long haul and open spots for new teachers."We're coming up on graduation day, and there's a lot of homegrown talent that is going to leave the state if there are no jobs for them." (emphasis mine)

Maybe Pratt thinks we're too dumb to notice, but this proposal doesn't create a single new job. It's a retread of existing jobs in teaching. The same number of teachers remain. The theory of the MEA proposal is that the new teachers will make less than current teachers, and that that will save the district money. However, in addition to the new teachers' lower salaries, the districts will have to pay for the old teachers retirement benefits including healthcare. In a few years, the freshman teachers will climb the salary ladder and you will have the same problem you have now in addition to a bunch of retired teachers that you are paying for as well. How is this "a winning situation for everyone" again? The only benefit of this proposal is to the MEA. There is no way around the math no matter how long they stretch out the supposed pay-back period. Even there, spreading the cost out over 30 years rather than 5 is a false premise in itself because they don't put healthcare into the numbers. Any way you slice it, it's long term pain for short-term gain, even though the latter isn't true in and of itself!

Yesterday, the Republican-controlled MI Senate fell short by 2 votes to push through a constitutional amendment, which would have to be voted on by Michigan residents in November, to prevent property taxes from increasing while home values are decreasing. Makes sense to me, but the Democrats sure don't like it. From the DetNews today: Mich. Senate comes up short in property tax relief vote. (The AP has a shorter report over at MLive)

The vote was 23-11 in favor of the resolution with three Senate members absent. It takes approval by two-thirds of the members in each chamber of the Legislature to put a proposed constitutional amendment on the ballot, meaning 25 Senate votes would be needed to move the resolution over to the House for a vote.

Matt Marsden, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop, R-Rochester, said there probably will be another vote on the resolution Wednesday.