Lately I haven’t written much about my home school district of Lakota and their runaway budgets dictated by collective bargaining agreements and radical union collectivist philosophy—because honestly I have said much of everything that can be said. It’s been a while since reports of teachers seducing students, and pornography driven nut cases trying to turn their elementary school classes into third world brothels occurred. So Lakota has kept their act pretty clean and have actually tried to manage their budget within the limits that the law imposes. So I haven’t written much about them as it is a tired subject.
However, I did receive the below note from a union radical who has taken notice of Lakota’s attempt at some management of their train wreck salary structure. The disaster isn’t in the lack of pay, but in being too highly committed to mediocre employees. It is that salary structure which causes the need for tax increases so Lakota has been trying to make plans going into the future that will avoid becoming too top-heavy in salary obligations. After the last levy passage in 2013 just a few months later raises were handed out like candy just like I always said they would be—and people learned too late who was telling them the truth all along. But to avoid those kinds of criticisms in the future Lakota as a management team has made some meager attempts to get the situation under control as the next projected levy increase is set for 2017. Those financial burdens are caused by unreasonably high salary structures. But for the pro union crowd—even those radicals not even part of the Lakota district they see such attempts as a threat to their state-wide collective bargaining extortion racket leaving one to write the following to me:
I am sure you are thrilled with the way that Lakota is systematically freezing out their employees on the vertical advancement on the salary scale. In fact, why does Lakota even print a vertical scale? If a teacher was hired in 2011, they would still be at step 1 on the scale. At this rate, no newly hired teacher will ever achieve the top of the salary chart. Did YOU write this part of the memorandum of understanding? It smacks of a teacher bashing slant.
I will be offering my advice to newly hired teachers soon. Guaranteed that it will include a provision not to make any additional effort to improve instruction beyond what they brought to the district when hired. To the newly hired teachers, I would advise “work to the contract” as far as hours served until step increases are reestablished. Unless step increases are reestablished, there is no reason to put forth an extra effort.
In that letter Schmidt feels entitled just because of his affiliation with a collective bargaining agreement through the state union to impose himself into the local management of tax dollars in the district of Lakota. His intentions are just one example of how such outside people lobby and manipulate the situation to cause local problems due to state-wide collective desire—to see chaos and political ineptitude in regard to public school finance. People like Schmidt want uncontrolled budgets and when they don’t get them they actually encourage teachers to do less.
For every teacher who claims that they are in the profession to help children, people like William Schmidt expose the real desires in the teaching profession. There is no question that there are some who would give their left arm to teach children—but they are rare. Most teachers simply use children as cover fire for their greedy desire for social respect and high wages doing as little as possible to earn them. Most teachers are not worth $60,000 per year to be glorified baby sitters, yet according to William Schmidt if teachers do not reach that high destination within a the union standard time—he is encouraging them to do even less—as if that were possible.
There aren’t many professions these days which allow adults to show up for work at 6:30 or 7:00 AM and leave around 4 PM and make such high salaries. Sure they take home some work to do, which might encompass a few hours per night while they watch television on the couch—but for those who claim to be following their “calling” in helping children, that kind of work shouldn’t be work at all. And here is a union radical openly telling teachers to do less than they already do unless they get paid on a step-increase scale that the state union supports. Such a proposal takes the local management of their district completely out of the equation which is the real desire of William Schmidt.
This is yet another example of how outside radicals inject themselves into the affairs of a government locality to attempt wrecking the budgets tax payers are expected to support. These types of radical correspondences in activism are left undetected by the local media and avoided completely in public dialogue—yet they are one of the most pronounced elements that cause inflated wages in public schools all over the country. The assumption is that all teachers are equal just because they are in the profession instead of graded on performance and that is detrimental because it sets in the minds of children a presumption that the rest of the world operates the way that William Schmidt wishes. Unfortunately they learn too late that the world does not function this way—only government labor unions expect such insanely foolish proposals. And that is what is behind William Schmidt’s grief stricken diatribe against Lakota schools. When it is wondered who is pulling the strings behind the scenes to cause teachers to become radicalized despots—look no further than collectivist radicals like William Schmidt.