Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

pmv8899 t1_j7djihh wrote

How nice of their mayor to want to demand they pay $250k for police details……..you’d think fellow union workers would gladly support at no cost

https://www.cbsnews.com/boston/news/woburn-weeklong-teachers-strike-ends/

32

Yeti_Poet t1_j7e2v6a wrote

Word is that Haverhill made a similar payment, so Mayor Galvin demanded it from the woburn teachers union since there was precedent. Not sure how common it is.

The PTOs from the schools made fun of it by having a bake sale today with a $250,000 goal.

17

CosmicQuantum42 t1_j7eoqty wrote

They can make as much fun as they want. They just have to pay it.

−18

Yeti_Poet t1_j7fj37f wrote

No they don't. The parent teacher organizations are not on the hook. Lol

10

LumberJack732 t1_j7dtj06 wrote

Yea I thought that was bull shit too. As a tax payer I’m happy to pay for police detail so teachers can strike as long as they need to until they’re getting properly treated. Also I don’t get how the strike can be illegal.

14

gerkin123 t1_j7i2mxw wrote

Freedom of assembly and speech sure is expensive if you're an essential worker... :/

Galvin, along with the rest of the school committee, set the conditions for a strike by refusing to negotiate in good faith. Galvin, along with the rest of the school committee, set the conditions for the strike to last by lowballing and offering little in the way of compromise. Galvin personally set the conditions for the strike to go longer than it did by walking out of a meeting to go on TV while the union was at the table ready to keep talking.

The idea that the union's actions are responsible for $250,000 for the taxpayer is, on its face, ridiculous.

Galvin could have walked out two more times, hardballed them for four more days, and said a cool half-million ought to cover it.

1

96suluman t1_j7dzhyz wrote

Given that Healey refuses to legalize public strikes, we need a ballot initiative

10

somegridplayer t1_j7fkoxn wrote

Healey refuses to? The state legislature refuses to.

Just so you know, this isn't the first teacher strike in the state. Might want to brush up on your history there a touch.

5

96suluman t1_j7fmtrc wrote

Public strikes are banned in Massachusetts. Since 1919. The first red scare was used as an excuse to ban strikes.

1

somegridplayer t1_j7fn4bd wrote

Yet they still happen. Funny that.

2

Principal_Scudworth_ t1_j7g3lkj wrote

And unions are still subject to massive fines, and police action, if they choose to strike. Funny that.

1

somegridplayer t1_j7g3z3j wrote

And every so often a bill gets introduced to overturn it, yet it gets killed, but I'm sure you totally knew that already.

That sadly isn't funny, just uniformed like usual.

1

Principal_Scudworth_ t1_j7g4zb5 wrote

Right, and that's why having the ability to strike is so important. It forces the municipalities to negotiate in good faith. Because, as recent evidence suggests, municipalities don't need to argue in good faith.

2

AmputatorBot t1_j7dfa4a wrote

It looks like OP posted an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of concerns over privacy and the Open Web.

Maybe check out the canonical page instead: https://www.nbcboston.com/news/local/deal-reached-in-woburn-to-end-teacher-strike-schools-will-be-open-monday/2964644/

^(I'm a bot | )^(Why & About)^( | )^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)

3