OKPOLICY.ORG
In February, the Oklahoma House approved a bill (HB 1749) that would ban payroll deductions for membership dues to any organization that conducts collective bargaining on behalf of public employees. This week the bill was narrowly approved by a Senate committee, and it could come before the full Senate by next week.
HB 1749 would prevent teachers, school bus drivers, janitors, cafeteria workers, and other school employees who voluntarily choose to be union members from using payroll deduction to pay their union dues. That’s a benefit that these workers have had for decades. It’s something they can also choose to do for charitable contributions, such as the United Way, or for payments to credit unions and insurance companies.
Oklahoma is already a “right to work” state, which means that every single employee using this benefit is a volunteer. And HB 1749 wouldn’t save taxpayers any money, since it keeps the deduction system in place for insurance companies, credit unions, and charities, and the system has minimal costs to begin with. Likewise, this bill isn’t about keeping money away from entities that engage in politics generally, given that insurance companies and even credit unions take part in the political process. What HB 1749 would do is inconvenience those teachers who choose to exercise their voice as members of a union.
While not saving the state any money, the bill would create a costly administrative burden for groups that advocate on behalf of school employees. If payroll deductions are banned, the Oklahoma Education Association and American Federation of Teachers would need to go to every one of their members and set up a new way to collect dues. The bill would also create an ongoing cost burden, since these groups would need extra staff hours to ensure their members’ credit card or bank information is kept current.
Though the bill never mentions them by name, it was carefully written to affect only teachers and other school employees, and not, for example, state troopers, firefighters, or any other public employees.
Debating against the bill on the House floor, Rep. David Dank (R-Oklahoma City) said:
“There’s not a person in this chamber … that doesn’t know why we’re doing this. We’re doing this to punish a group. I’m for school choice. I’m for homeschooling. … I have never been endorsed, supported, taken a dime from any teacher organization. … But I will not contribute to what I consider to be the hypocrisy today. If you think that this is being done for philosophical reasons, if you think that this is being done because, you know, gosh we just don’t want to be withdrawing money for people who negotiate or bargain with the state, you believe in the tooth fairy.”
Rep. Dank went on to argue that the bill was really intended to punish the Oklahoma Education Association for opposing school choice, a reference to a controversial proposal that would have allowed taxpayer money to be used for private school vouchers or homeschooling. The author withdrew the voucher bill for this year after pushback from many citizens and education groups.
Oklahoma has already achieved the dubious distinction of making the worst cuts in the nation to state aid funding for schools over the last five years. With nearly the lowest pay in the U.S., Oklahoma schools are struggling to recruit and retain qualified teachers, which has left classrooms with about one thousand teacher vacancies.
In this context, taking away another benefit from Oklahoma teachers could add to an already dire problem of a shrinking teacher force. It’s inappropriate for legislators to target retribution against a group for not agreeing with their policies, and it’s a bad sign for our children’s education if the Legislature has decided punishing teachers should be their priority.
As Sen. Ralph Shortey, another Republican who is opposing the bill, put it, “I’m not going to cast a vote that’s going to poke a teacher in the eye. I’d much rather put an arm around them and tell them what a good job they do.”
I READ THE BILL. YOU ARE SO RIGHT, THEY PURPOSELY PHRASED EVERYTHING TO SINGLE EDUCATORS. HOWEVER, I AM A STRONG BELIEVER, THIS WILL NOT PASS CONSTITUTIONAL MUSTER. IT IS UNLAWFUL TO SINGLE OUT A GROUP. WE HAVE SEVERAL OTHER UNIONS IN OUR GREAT STATE WITH UNIONS, ALL OF WHICH ARE PARTICIPANTS IN THE PAYROLL DEDUCTION PLAN. IF MARY FALIN SIGNS IT, I’D BE SURPRISED.
MY WIFE IS A TEACHER OF 35 YEARS. SHE IS RETIRING THIS YEAR AND SHE CAN’T WAIT. BUT SHE WORRIES EVERY DAY ABOUT THE KIDS AND WHAT WILL BECOME OF THEM WHEN SHE LEAVES. IT IS A SAD STATE OF AFFAIRS. OUR EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM IS IN CHAOS AND ALWAYS HAS BEEN.
WHAT IS UNBELIEVABLE TO MOST CITIZENS WHO LISTEN TO WHAT IS GOING ON IS THAT WE HAVE 250 SEPARATE SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN OKLAHOMA. THIS MEANS WE HAVE 250 SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENTS. THE TOTAL SALARIES ARE $50,000,000. I WILL GUARANTEE 200 OF THOSE HIGH PAYING POSITIONS, ARE PART-TIME JOBS AT BEST.
CONCERNING STUDENT SUSPENSIONS: IT IS UP TO EACH INDIVIDUAL PRINCIPAL’S DISCRETION WHEN SUSPENDING A STUDENT. WHAT???? THERE IS NO WRITTEN POLICY FOR SUSPENDING A STUDENT???? GENERALLY SPEAKING, THE STUDENTS WHO ARE SUSPENDED, HAVE PARENTS WHO DO NOT SPEAK OUT. WHEN A PARENT GOES UP TO THE SCHOOL TO SEE WHY THEIR CHILD IS SUSPENDED, THAT CHILD IS PUT BACK IN CLASS, BECAUSE THE PRINCIPAL IS AFRAID OF BEING SUED. OF COURSE, STUDENT WHO HAVE BEEN EXTREMELY VIOLENT OR BROKEN THE LAWS ARE NOT ALLOWED BACK IN CLASS, FOR THE MOST PART. THERE HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN CASES WHERE THEY WERE ALLOWED BACK IN CLASS.
RECENTLY AT MY WIFE’S SCHOOL, A TEACHER WHO TEACHES THE MENTALLY CHALLENGED CHILDREN, WAS HIT BY ONE OF THE STUDENTS. THIS CHILD WAS IN THE 5TH GRADE AND LARGE ENOUGH TO HURT THE TEACHER, WHICH HE DID. SHE WILL HAVE TO HAVE SURGERY. OF COURSE THE SCHOOL IS PAYING THE MEDICAL BILLS, BUT SHE SHOULD BE ABLE TO SUE THE PARENTS AND THE SCHOOL SYSTEM FOR THIS JUNK. THE SCHOOLS CONSISTENTLY PUT CHILDREN INTO THE SCHOOL SYSTEM WHO HAVE A HISTORY OF VIOLENT BEHAVIOR AND EXTREME MENTAL DISORDERS.
CHARTER SCHOOLS:
WHY DO CHARTER SCHOOLS SHOW SUCH HIGH STUDENT GRADES?
BECAUSE, IN ORDER TO ENROLL IN A CHARTER SCHOOL, THE STUDENT MUST TAKE AN ENTRANCE EXAMINATION. IF YOU DON’T PASS, YOU DON’T GET IN. IF CHARTER SCHOOLS BECOME A TREND, THEN ALL THE LOWER INTELLIGENCE STUDENTS WILL REMAIN IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS, LEAVING PUBLIC SCHOOLS WITH THE LOWEST GRADES. ALL THE WHILE, THE SCHOOL SYSTEM ADMINISTRATORS WILL BE PRESSURING THE TEACHERS TO RAISE TEST SCORES. THE ONLY WAY TO COMBAT LOW TEST SCORES AT THAT POINT WILL BE TO LOWER THE CURRICULUM. WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED WITH FORCED BUSING IN THE 1970’S.
WE NEED A BOARD OF “EDUCATORS” TO EXPLORE REVAMPING THE ENTIRE SYSTEM, NOT A BOARD OF UN-EXPERIENCED ADMINISTRATORS OR LEGISLATORS. IN THE BUSINESS WORLD, WHEN WE NEED HELP WITH MATTERS OF POLICY, WE SEEK OUT PROFESSIONALS WHO ARE WELL EQUIPPED TO ANSWER OUR QUESTIONS.
PARDON THE TYPO’S AND OR POOR GRAMMAR, I RAN THROUGH THIS RATHER QUICKLY.
OH, I ALMOST FORGOT. MY WIFE IS A DIED IN THE WOOL DEMOCRAT. BECAUSE OF HER EXPERIENCE IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM AND THE INFLUENCE OF THE NEWS MEDIA, SHE HAS A VERY BAD OPINION OF REPUBLICANS. I MYSELF AM A REPUBLICAN AND I HAVE TRIED TO CONVERT HER, TO NO AVAIL. I AM VERY HAPPY TO SEE YOUR ARTICLE QUOTING 2 REPUBLICAN HOUSE MEMBERS. I FORWARDED YOUR ARTICLE ON TO HER, JUST TO SHOW WE ARE NOT OGER’S.
In a season of silliness, this has to steal the cupcakes. This is just another method for the Haves to attempt to put the Have Nots in “their place.” Oklahoma claims, in front of witnesses, that it has education and children at it heart when it creates such offensive legal loopholes for itself. If Oklahoma, as a state, were to hold true to what the elected officials keep spouting there would be no need for billions of dollars in tax breaks to the wealthy, special interest groups, and preferred business. That money would go into education and medical services for our citizens.
One again, I call BS on our state legislature. Mostly for just being themselves, but in particular for stealing the future of our children and selling off their birthrights for a mess of pottage and political contributions.