item #1 -- "The only thing experience teaches us is that experience teaches us nothing." -- André Maurois
You don't have to have a kid in one of Maine Township District 207's high schools to have a legitimate interest in the budget cuts being considered by the District 207 School Board. So we strongly urge everyone who's got the time to show up to the public meeting set to take place tonight in the Maine East school auditorium, beginning at 7 p.m.
And to the teacher's union we offer the frequently used, WTF???
item #2 -- "Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live in the real world." -- Mary Shafer
The PRU Crew still hates red light cameras. We feel they're a fraudulent public offering on the issue of traffic safety -- nothing more than revenue-generating ventures for cash-sucking municipal governments. And as soon as Commonwealth Edison gets around to turning on the power for the new red light camera at Oakton and Northwest Hwy., we'll all begin to hear that old familiar sucking sound, but we're sure the ball-less will feel perfectly safe.
item #3 -- "The treatment process does reduce the liklihood of recidivism." -- Dr. Jesus Padilla
In today's Journal & Topics on page 3A we had the displeasure of reading a small article titled, "Ald. Allegretti Refutes Story, Will Run Again"
In the article 4th ward Ald. Jim Allspaghetti denies being unhappy in his role as an alderdunce and claims he will seek re-election in 2011.
In other words, Ald. Allspaghetti promises to be a repeat offender. The PRU Crew feels the appropriate treatment process is for voters to have the opportunity to elect somebody else and send Allspaghetti back under the rock from which he crawled.
item #4 -- "You can tell whether a man is clever by his answers. You can tell whether a man is wise by his questions." -- Naguib Mahfouz
The Pub-dogs post today asks "the following question for Messrs. Ryan and Wsol: Why did you vote to make the City the appllicant for the zoning ordinance amendments to permit billboards, especially where doing so allowed GGI to avoid the disclosure requirements of the City’s ethics ordinance that are designed to combat kinky deals?"
If the Pub-dogs get any answers at all, we expect they will be very clever answers.
January 20, 2010
Freewheeling PRU Briefs!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
i read the journal today-alderman allgritty is a big cry baby-i cant count the # of times he has complained about length of mtgs-wanting to limit presentations-being alderman for only 100 per month-talking issues to death-got snotty against citizens questioning his motivations-if all that isnt frustrated with the process then i dont know what is- what would keep him going back for more of the same?
There are so many people out of work and the teachers voted to put more people out of work. Their own colleagues. Nice.
What is the name of the web site that lists teachers pay for all school districts?
Championnews.net
I attended almost two hours of the D207 meeting tonight, and that time was mainly spent listening to students lament about teachers who have been cut. I understand their sense of loss. It appears that the teachers being cut are those who are not tenured. They are younger, generally, and tend to be more enthusiastic. They connect with the kids. But at the same time, I found myself pretty angry with the large group of teachers in attendance who cheered mightily when their union leader spoke, and came out in large numbers for the meeting tonight, but who wouldn't agree to even consider a pay freeze that could have saved most of the jobs being cut.... !!! I don't know how to categorize that as anything but selfish. Can someone educate me otherwise?
Wow!!! Look, I am not a teacher (thank god) and have never even been a member of a union but exactly what cloud do you live on?? It is selfish for a person/people to fight to keep their earnings? How about this. How about all the teachers voluntarily give up 50% of there wages and benefits? That way we could keep the same number of teachers and pay less taxes. How about PR public works does the same thing? How about the police and fire department? Of course they are expected to give this up knowing full well they will probably never get it back. How selfish of them to not want to take a pay cut!!! I guess you can include me in the selfish. On more than one occasion in my career I have gladly accepted significant bonuses while others in the company were being laid off.
Anonymous 11:18:
If you took those bonuses while others in your company were being laid off and your company was operating in the red, you should be ASHAMED of yourself.
Time our poor fragile high schoolers realized the harsh realities of life.
So some of their favorite teachers are being fired. Boo hoo, cry us a river. If their union brothers and sisters weren't so damn greedy and would re-negotiate raises and benefits,
But high school students don't care because none of them pay property taxes or wonder whether they will lose their job next week and be unable to pay their mortgage or feed their family.
That's why they're kids rather than responsible adults. And that's why greedy teachers and indulgent parents tell them to show up at public meetings and put on their emotional displays.
Great theater. Boo hoo.
11:18,
Are you serious? Fight for their earnings?! What happened to merit based pay? Simply because one decideds to stick around from one year to the next- you believe that is worthy of an automatic pay increase?
The comment of 50% pay cut? I'm hoping that was an exaggeration to punctuate your point, however let's be clear, the offer was a 1% cut from a 3% increase.
Translation.....A 2% INCREASE TO MAINTAIN A FULL TEACHING STAFF TO PROVIDE THE EDUCATION OUR CHILDREN DESERVE AND WE PAY FOR.
2% instead of 3%. I'm not quite sure how that becomes loss, it would still be an increase.
Given the state of the economy, I remain shocked that the teachers would not agree to a smaller raise to save a significant number of jobs. These are extraordinary times, which can certainly justify reopening the contract. One of the most cherished benefits of a union is that you are able to stand together as a group for mutual protection and benefit. They had a perfect chance to do that in this case, and they didn't do it. I don't really think the teachers are selfish, generally, so I can only guess that they are adherening to the position of their leadership, who may be misrepresenting the facts of the district's financial situation to them.
Anon 11:18, you represent the new American ethos: "We're all in this alone" -- and as such, you represent the ugliest of Park Ridge and of the United States. God forgive you. And PRU, darlink sir or madam, you are all wet on the cameras - if you hate them because they don't reduce accidents, ok, but to characterize anyone who doesn't want his guts mashed as the 7th grader's were on Devon last year as "ball-less" is grotesque. You are better than this. You hate bullies, I know you do; that's what all-about-me folk like 11:18 are when they're behind the wheel and your loved one is in the crosswalk. Pedestrians having to scrabble like cockroaches to avoid their manslaughtering neighbors strikes me, no pun intended, as totally sucky. If money is all that some people care about, maybe a ticket or two will make them realize those objects in front of them are human beings with a stray couple of rights themselves.
Anon@4:02 --
You ball-less darlink, what were the circumstances of the kid that got hit on Devon? And would a red light camera have prevented that accident? Do red light cameras prevent any accidents? Do red light cameras prove to increase rear-end collisions? Did Bachtard reintroduce the idea of installing red light cameras because of a t-bone accident at an intersection which, after being studied by the red light camera companies, proved not to qualify for the installation of a red light camera? If red light cameras actually increase safety then why is there a qualifying number of accidents and--or red light running necessary before these cameras are installed?
It's all a safety fraud on the public for the purpose of raising revenue and that kind of government action we find ball-less, disgusting, dishonest and stupid.
wow!! Guess I pissed you off 4:02...so be it. I simply calls them as I sees them. The teachers want the existing contract to be honored and people, I would guess including you, call them selfish. Of course what you and most want is to have no cut backs in teachers but have the teachers take a reduction in pay. What if someone were to say that we were being selfish for not wanting to pay more taxes? After all they are our fellow man, right?? If you were in that position and had any bargaining power, would you do that?? Can you please provide me with a list or a few examples where you sacraficed your pay and or benefits to save a fellow employee. In this economy it is a fairly good chance that you have been throught a situation where your place of business was cutting back. Did you give some of what you were to be paid back for the team??
5:36 PM:
I'm not the person to whom you are responding, but I can tell you that the only reason I haven't had to give any back is because two people in our department were canned (without any consultation or opportunity for anybody to say or do anything to change it) so the rest of us are just working harder and longer.
How much harder will all you teachers be working after these cuts? Will you work your way up to 9 months of actual workdays this year?
One problem with the world is that our kids are being taught by people who think they're entitled to this kind of "employment."
4:02 here again - I am an active avocate of the public sector employees working harder and longer to make up for those who have been laid off due to the taxpayers' own struggles. For example, I am outraged by Mr. Zingheim's breezy assumption that laying off some public works employees will automatically, no problem, mean a reduction in services My take on that was, let public sector employees do what the rest of us are doing -- work better, faster,cheaper and say thanks for the chance to keep working! HOWEVER, I think it stinks when employees who DO get to say what happens to their colleagues choose to act like Wall Street shitheads. Every man for himself is a pretty bleak world -- even for the Masters of the Universe we seem to have a few of here. You may not always be the big dog, and then you'll wish your peers gave a damn about the wellbeing of your family.
Can someone explain what this "get there say" is all about?? I cannot be the only one on this blog who has been through a situation where there were layoffs. I cannot be the only one on this board who is at a level where, while not in the room, they were aware that these layoffs were coming. How is it that this person does not get theri say?? So for those of you who fit that catagory, did you mention at a senior management meeting, "gee, maybe we should all take a pay cut so these folks can keep working?" Did you say, "gee I know that I am due a bonus this year for making my numbers but I will not accept that bonus in light of these layoffs!!" I do not think it is appropriate to name company names but there are tons of companies in Chicago that have gone through layoffs. So let's hear some stories from all of you who stepped up to the plate and offered up your raises, bonuses or benefits to help your fellow employee who is/was going to get wacked.
Post a Comment