|
Who could be against 65%?
Quote:
Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Job security creates lazy people. Lazy people do shitty jobs. Hence, the only answer remains putting these people in job jeopardy. We should all have to handle the fear of the ax. How else are people going to hone their talents? I think if you set up a system where some of the teachers could get paid serious cash, and mangement was encouraged to run a tight, economical ship, you'd see some wonderful teachers. And very happy ones. What could be better? Certainly, its better than this socialist lockstep system that encourages those who come into the system giving a shit and trying to do a good job into phoning it in after a few years.
You can't get peak performance out of anyone who hasn't got an incentive. How many firms have people on this boatrd fucked over because they knew exactly where they could stop and still get the max bonus?
|
I don't believe I was disagreeing with anything you said above. But suppose that a school district has limited funds, perhaps because some of Spanky's conservative friends passed a statewide initiative preventing raises in property taxes to pay for education. Faced with difficulty negotiations with the teachers' union, and constrained by their budget, might they not agree to give the union job protections in lieu of a pay increase?
__________________
“It was fortunate that so few men acted according to moral principle, because it was so easy to get principles wrong, and a determined person acting on mistaken principles could really do some damage." - Larissa MacFarquhar
|
