In a nonprofit environment like public education, what is the motivation to end a strike? Compare it to a for-profit environment, like Boeing, which loses millions of dollars a day when its workers are on strike. There is a definite motivation to get workers back on the job. I guess I don’t see what the administration has to lose by not having teachers in the classroom. After all, our administrators are collecting their paychecks.
Also, what’s the deal with negotiations? Isn’t the job of a mediator to bring the two sides together and hammer out an agreement? Why aren’t the union and district meeting daily with the mediator? If the answer to that is that neither of the two sides are bringing any offers to the table, well, isn’t that the job of the mediator to assist them in doing so? I assume taxpayers’ dollars are funding the mediator’s paycheck. I’m fairly certain the citizens of Marysville would be willing have their tax dollars go toward paying the mediator to work 12-hour days to help the union and district hammer out an agreement so our children and teachers can get back in the classroom.
And finally, it was my understanding that the board directed our superintendent, Linda Whitehead, to come up with a plan to open our schools in the event the teachers went out on strike. Obviously, our schools didn’t open. Did the superintendent come up with a plan? If she did, what is it and why hasn’t it been communicated? If not, is she being held accountable for not following through on this directive?
If there are no consequences and nobody is being held responsible, where is the motivation to end this strike? And don’t tell me it’s the students. This isn’t about the students.
Marysville
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
