According to The Herald’s editorial, my state senator and at least one of my state representatives are supporting a bill outlawing strikes and requiring binding arbitration to settle unresolved contract negotiations between public school districts and teachers’ unions (“Letbinding arbitration decide teacher disputes,” Jan. 15).
I find it ironic that the only people who don’t seem to be able to read and understand existing state law that already forbids strikes by public employees are our elected school board members and the teachers they hire to teach our children.
The major reason we are seeing a proliferation of unlawful work stoppages by teachers is that our elected school boards are unwilling to take the necessary action to stop it.
Having said all that, I support binding arbitration if the arbitrator has only two options: the district’s position or the union’s position, no compromise. This puts pressure on each side to be reasonable in its position or demands or risk losing in arbitration.
As far as adding more language outlawing teacher work stoppages: what makes you think those who have been unwilling to enforce existing law will suddenly get backbone and enforce another such law?
Snohomish
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
