Report Inappropriate Comments

Hello again Thecaptain:

I likewise find it curious that the fake "mayor" would talk about getting off-track when he, himself, has a documented record of commenting about the teacher contract on honor roll articles. It's especially entertaining when such a comment follows his regurgitation of already-disproven talking points and bullying of other commenters.

Along with your request for one comment in support of his behavior, I'd add a request for one factual detail to support his comments about the union's stance. I found this interesting document online -- it's a school department recap of the contract situation through last October: https://sites.google.com/a/warwickschools.org/teacherscontractinformation/#TOC-Rhode-Island-State-Labor-Relations-Board-Ruling

It hasn't been updated since then, so the court rejection of the NLRB ruling is not included. But it explains in very specific detail what the school committee initially offered vs. what the union was seeking.

So, for instance, when a union rep tells you the teachers will be "losing" sick days by going from 90 to 18, wait to see if they also note that the WSC offer would allow them to collect TDI after 18 days out sick, create a "sick bank" to cover longer absences, and roll over unused sick days, up to 90 days total. Or when they talk about electronic grading, see if they also explain that electronic grading was suspended in April for elementary schools, and that the WTU actually agreed to language governing electronic grading but won't formally approve it until the whole contract is approved by both sides.

Or when they talk about layoffs, which had been restricted to 20 before the contract expired and the district closed three schools, do they also mention that the school administration identified 64 potential layoffs before eligible teachers retirements and other moves reduced the actual number to 22? Will they admit that the legal cost of fighting the consolidation-related layoffs at the NLRB and losing in Superior Court might not have been worth it? Will they explain how their taxpayer funded union dues paid toward this legal dispute compare to the amount that the WTU president keeps blaming the school administration for spending in defending it?

I think you would agree that these are not the actions of a group seeking resolution to the contract dispute or looking to hold the entire agreement open to negotiation as the fake "mayor" claims.