Deseret News | Should school districts pay salaries of union presidents?

Reader comments
Should school districts pay salaries of union presidents?

No Way!!! | 7:42 p.m. Nov. 12, 2009

A union rep salary should come from union dues!!! just like any other union rep.

Re: No Way! | 8:01 p.m. Nov. 12, 2009

I agree! I am offended that taxpayers dollars are spent on this!

Anonymous | 8:06 p.m. Nov. 12, 2009

Sounds good, Herrod. You better make the restriction apply to police department union reps too, otherwise you might have a constitutional issue on your hands.

Comments continue below

get it right | 8:39 p.m. Nov. 12, 2009

There are no such things as Union Reps for teachers. Utah is a right to work state so there are no local unions. It is the UEA or the Utah Education Association. Association being the important word. I agree we shouldn't pay union reps, we should however pay association reps. If anyone thinks there isn't a difference between the two ask yourself when the last successful strike was called. If Utah teachers had a real union we wouldn't be 51 out of 51 states (and the District of Columbia) in funding education on a per student level.

Good for the goose | 8:50 p.m. Nov. 12, 2009

If this bill passes, then I say we don't pay our legislators at all either. Stop giving our legislators insurance and retirement too. They all have other jobs and don't need our states money. That money could be better used filling potholes.

Are you kidding??? | 9:19 p.m. Nov. 12, 2009

The concept is too crazy to deserve comment.

UEA out of line. | 5:12 a.m. Nov. 13, 2009

It is not the UEA's job to interfere with education and I am grossly offended that they think they are. Unions represent its workers, not the manufacturing and products they make. Who ever elected the UEA to represent the schools or education or citizens? I have never seen them on any ballots. The UEA is way out of their authority to act as my representative and I demand they be stopped, by law if necessary.

The UEA cripples education and should be severely punished for their irresponsible interference and fraud. They don't represent me and I demand they stay away from the education system and concentrate their duties to their members only. It's one thing for a union to represent its member's, but to lay claim to representing the citizens and education is a gross affront to the taxpayers and education.

Any Union representative that deserves any union pay should be paid by union dues and funds, not education funds. It also sounds like there is a severe misappropriation of union funds and dues to non union activities. Where are the union dues going and being spent?

Why | 5:15 a.m. Nov. 13, 2009

"The concept is too crazy to deserve comment. " So, why did you comment?

Anonymous | 5:46 a.m. Nov. 13, 2009

I am sure these "teachers" will gladly give some of their pay back to the schools for the kids. This is a wise idea.

Updating | 5:49 a.m. Nov. 13, 2009

Jay Blain is no longer GEA President. When was this article written?

Another Example | 5:51 a.m. Nov. 13, 2009

Why do we allow laws and regulations that make NO sense?
This is so EASY to solve. The institution/comp that the person works for pays the wage. If a rep actually teaches, then he /she is paid for that AND ONLY THAT. If they are a rep then get paid for that.

Associations/Unions are a detriment to society. They had there place at one time, but now they're nothing more than lobby groups for special interests. OBSOLETE! I prefer my Gov't to listen to the "people" and not cater to ANY special interest group.

Astounded | 7:26 a.m. Nov. 13, 2009

The school districts are paying the Union Presidents? That's ridiculous. If the teachers want a union then the union administration needs to be paid from union dues.

wallofvoodoo | 7:35 a.m. Nov. 13, 2009

I am for unions in education & was even a member of the union. We shouldn't pay union presidents out of educational money. I also wholeheartedly agree we shouldn't pay the legislators at all or give them retirement or medical insurance.

Backward Story | 7:59 a.m. Nov. 13, 2009

The teachers who serve as association presidents are district employees--most have been for many, many years. When they leave teaching to be president, they are still district employees. The vast majority of the work they do is of direct benefit to the district. And, their salary is partially subsidized by the teachers. It's a great deal for taxpayers.

Follow the money | 8:00 a.m. Nov. 13, 2009

This article is great as an illustrator of why education doesn't need more money. Get rid of the waste that is the UEA and lose 90% of administrators. Once that's done come up with some new and innovative ways to teach our children. There really is so much that can be done, but we the people don't push the real needs. The UEA and THEIR reps only look for one thing, more money. They whine and cry year after year that Utah is low for pay. Focus on education, not the money!

Mike | 8:52 a.m. Nov. 13, 2009

I don't want my tax money paying for an "Association" rep. The "Association" is a private entity. The "Association" needs to pay them. Of course if they use the "Association" dues to pay the "Association" rep, then that's money they can't use to lobby and twist arms and support the Democrats. So everyone wins when the "Association" pays the reps.

By the way, if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, quacks like a duck, it is a duck.

The UEA looks like a union, it quacks like a union, and it swims like union, so it is a union. Don't let anyone tell you different.

A Few Thoughts | 9:40 a.m. Nov. 13, 2009

1. "Follow the Money" has no idea what administrators do.
2. I the salaries for these teacher reps are cut from the district's payroll, they will, by necessity, be hired and paid full time by the district. These are liaison positions that are present and needed in districts this size.
3. People need to learn to ignore their biases and judge a situation on its individual merits, not a set of preconceived notions.
4. If anyone thinks unions were once needed, but are no longer necessary, they are fooling themselves and have no concept of human nature. Look at the fact that management earns as much as 35X as much as the workers. Only in America.

Fred | 10:11 a.m. Nov. 13, 2009

Typical of many of the Utah legislators to make a mountain out of a mole hill when it involves education. We are talking about 3 district here, not 40. We are talking about three people. Why not give the district credit for knowing what they are doing. In our district our non-release president misses a lot of class time at the request of the district, not the teachers association to attend meetings, trainings, etc. This article is a gross distortion of what actually happens. Maybe Mr. Herrod could get excited about ethics reform for he and his legislative colleagues. Lets also look at the benefits that these "part time" legislators are receiving in terms of insurance and retirement.

Unions exist to... | 10:26 a.m. Nov. 13, 2009

Unions only exist so union leaders can siphon money from business.

Whether it's from union dues or paid directly, union bosses get paid by the school district.

@ 9:40 | 10:31 a.m. Nov. 13, 2009

You argue for waste, I do know what is involved with Administration, as well as the UEA, and the two combined are bad for Utah's education system. They're great examples of what is found in D&C 121:39 talking about "human nature"
"We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion.

There is so much waste in what is done with our system, but no one will stand up and fix it for fear of there own self-interest.

As for #4 point, administrators by definition are the managers of the school system, are they paid too much?

re: @ 9:40 | 11:52 a.m. Nov. 13, 2009

Administrators exist to take care of the jobs that teachers can't/don't/don't have time to/don't know how to do. They deal with discliplinary issues so that teachers can carry on their classroom functions. They create and implement programs and stand accountable for their success.

As for your D&C quote: Give me a break, I can say the same thing about my Bishop. Taking an administrative responsibility seriously does not equate to unrighteous dominion. A school without an effective administrator is paramount to a nation without law and government. THAT is where our failure lies. I'm not arguing for more administartion, only more effective administartion.

I am not a member of UEA, but I shudder to think of what our education system would be like if it were left up to the right wing fascists in our state legislature.

I know of no administrator in Utah who makes 35X more than his/her employees. Those who are effective in their jobs would earn far more in the private secor for equivelant reponsibility and accountability.

Legislature -vs- Teachers | 11:57 a.m. Nov. 13, 2009

The Utah Legislature is pretty much anti-teacher. First they have a law that the union reps must not be professionals--they must be teacher-volunteers; then they want to make it so they will not have a source of income if they take on the position. Also, like posted earlier, we are talking about three people. Surely there are more than three legislators that do not deserve to be paid either.

Fred | 11:57 a.m. Nov. 13, 2009

Ok lets eliminate the full time release presidents, and save the $180,000 that Mr. Herrod is so offended by. The audit probably cost more than the salary of these three. Now lets start making some real savings. We could eliminate the health care benefit that the part-time legislators recieve? That would save over a million dollars. What if we then eliminated the per-diem that legislators get even if they stay in the own homes. Should a part-time job really warrant a retirement plan without having to work at that job for at least 30 years? Lets eliminate those costs. Lets also not pay any legislator who is recieving a paycheck from his full-time job while he/she is working in the legislature (legislators hate double dipping). Now we talking some savings.

One last thing, what if we created legislative voting districts based on population centers rather than reelection of the majority party. New census means districts must be looked at. Lets not have Senate district that starts in Tooele and ends in Salina.

Robert | 12:39 p.m. Nov. 13, 2009

NO! Students, districts, and taxpayers would be MUCH better off without the unions.

Anonymous | 12:39 p.m. Nov. 13, 2009

I'm tired of the Dnews only publishing positive stories about charter schools but every story about regular schools has something negative about the UEA.

You are too blatant with your "hidden" agenda.

What good? | 1:13 p.m. Nov. 13, 2009

What has the UEA done for the Education system here in Utah?

12:39 is offended by charter schools, why? The are state funded, BUT the UEA has no say over independent teachers! That says I want more charters, they cost less.

just say no... | 2:45 p.m. Nov. 13, 2009

to unions getting anything at all from public schools. It's ironic that school districts are paying union people to do things that actually make schools worse. If it weren't for the UEA, we might have merit pay, vouchers, and a lot of other things that would improve our schools.

Hey Everybody... | 5:57 p.m. Nov. 13, 2009

...let's play "Fact or Opinion."

Quit trying to pass your ultra-right-wing fascist opinions off as fact. I'm not buying it. Now, go find the people who do your thinking and ask them what to say in response. Or, here's a novel idea, try thinking for yourselves. It's actually quite refreshing.

Getting even | 7:06 a.m. Nov. 14, 2009

This legislation is just one more way the legislators are getting even with the union because UEA opposed their voucher mess. Come on guys, enough already -- leave the teachers alone and consume your time with something that really matters: like how to get Utah out of its $1 billion shortfall this coming year!

Utah Dem | 4:19 p.m. Nov. 15, 2009

As a member of a local school board in Utah I would never support pay union reps or assocation reps for anything period.

Although I will disagree with the constant comments of some believing that teachers whine too much of being underpaid or that there are too many administrators. First if teachers were allowed to just teach we would all hear less whining but no they have to spend so much time doing the jobs of parents it truly takes away from their teaching time. Second yes I agree that in some instances there are too many administrators or deputies/secretaries/assistants to administrators but if we paid our teachers better than so many of them wouldn't want to move up into administration just to make a good living wage.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.