Ed Notes Extended

Sunday, January 7, 2007

Teacher Union Actions in LA and Boston

Union calls for action by its teachers

Members urged to boycott meetings, activities

BY NAUSH BOGHOSSIAN, Staff Writer

Article Last Updated: 01/05/2007 09:19:16 PM PST

In its first major job action amid ongoing contract negotiations, Los Angeles Unified's teachers union on Friday called for its 48,000 members to boycott faculty meetings and unpaid after-school activities.

The boycotts are scheduled to begin at Tuesday's faculty meeting, roughly one month before United Teachers Los Angeles has scheduled a strike-authorization vote.

Union officials said the moves will not affect educational programs or children but are designed to step up pressure on the district to lower class size; give teachers, parents and others more control; and give teachers and health and human service professionals a raise.

Teachers union threatens 1-day strike

Seeks progress in contract talks

By Tracy Jan, Globe Staff | January 7, 2007

The Boston Teachers Union yesterday threatened a one-day strike as early as Feb. 15 to protest a lack of progress in contract negotiations.

In an e-mail sent to the union's 8,000 members, Union president Richard Stutman said it will hold a meeting on Feb. 14 for teachers and others to consider a strike the following day or an alternate day.

2 comments:

  1. So how long have they been without a contract in Boston? I like the one-day idea, but I believe the Taylor Law here would apply, and all contractual protections could be voided. Correct me if I'm wrong.

    The boycott of unpaid activities is a good idea too, but I believe in NYC that would also invoke the Taylor Law. It's very good they picked something that administrators value but did not involve kids.

    ReplyDelete

Comments are welcome. Irrelevant and abusive comments will be deleted, as will all commercial links. Comment moderation is on, so if your comment does not appear it is because I have not been at my computer (I do not do cell phone moderating). Or because your comment is irrelevant or idiotic.