Monday, December 04, 2017

THE COST OF PAID FAMILY LEAVE IS NOT GOING TO BANKRUPT ANYONE

When I write about the UFT pushing for paid family leave, I am still somewhat surprised by some of the negative comments. The main argument seems to be that having a family is a choice so pay for it yourself.

I can counter that point very easily by saying if we follow that logic, we should end the tax deduction and tax credits for children. Having children is a choice. Take it a step further,why bother educating these children that people choose to have? Why not pay for education yourself parents? By the logic of some people commenting, we should not have public schools nor our jobs. We could end up as a society discouraging children. Children are a major financial liability these days, unlike in an agrarian society, but I am sure glad my parents decided to take on the burden. My parents were both teachers and I wish they had a paid benefit to take care of my brother, sister and me.

Please review some expert research showing that infants bonding with their parents is good for all of us.

If we are willing as a society to accept that paid family leave is a good idea, which New York State has already done in the private sector, the question is how do we pay for it? Since public sector unions in NY have absolutely no credible strike threat, we basically do collective begging and have to give something to get anything. I wonder if people opposing the benefit would be willing to go on strike for anything? What would you strike for? Since a strike for any reason is unthinkable and paid family leave is coming, let's talk cost.

The price the city managers paid was .47% from their raise along with giving up two vacation days. That turned out to be way too expensive as they paid $8 million for $2 million worth of benefits. Therefore, unless Mulgrew is dumber than we think, the cost to us will be significantly lower than what the city managers paid.

Nobody is going to lose their lump sum payments or have their sick bank days cut in half unless UFT generosity is even greater than we think it is but we are going to give back something. My guess is it will be a slightly smaller salary increase in the next contract.

My two kids are beyond the age where I can take advantage of this benefit but I can see myself supporting paid family leave if the price is neutral. That said, the city can afford to give us this benefit free of charge but will not because the city unions including the UFT are so weak that we have no leverage.

People can cry here all they want about not wanting to pay a dime for motherhood, but paid family leave is coming. All we can do is push for the lowest possible cost so the city does not gain from giving parents this benefit.

24 comments:

Anonymous said...

You said it James, thats why our students may be so lousy, poor parenting combined with welfare leads to crap.

Michael Fiorillo said...

"... unless MUlgrew is dumber than we think."

I would never underestimate his and his handlers' ability to grab defeat from the jaws of victory.

That said, kudos for making the points you do, James; the whole point of a union is solidarity with your colleagues and other workers, and it amazes me how many people commenting on this blog have no idea of that...

Anonymous said...

So how much less than 1% raises can we get?

Anonymous said...

How about if we overpay like the city managers did we get a nice fat check?

Anonymous said...

Your blog leaves so much to chance!

If this if that? My head is spinning!

We will give something up but what it will be remains to be seen!

Anonymous said...

I am one of those people who believes that paid maternity leave will cost the city plenty and it will be paid for one way or another off the backs of teachers via givebacks or a smaller raise. If paid leave did not "cost" the city much, why have we not implemented it a while ago?

Anonymous said...

Why not have teachers at the start of their careers make a choice if they want the benefit?

If they do, they pay for the benefit, much like paying into an insurance pool.
If they decline, no benefit. They pay out of pocket.

They must make their choice before the conclusion of their first year and it is irrevocable.

This is better than the socialist idea currently being floated.

Anonymous said...

THANK YOU ANNO 6:21. You hit the nail on the head on this. Create a buy in for teachers. This is the fairest way to "pay" for maternity leave. Oh yeah, love following the UFT Facebook feed on paid leave. It seems like a bunch of teachers are thinking that we are actually going to be able to vote on paid maternity leave. Me says that if any deal happens it will be the usual back room, secret bullshit that happens with the UFT/DOE. Only way we would be able to vote on it is if it is a part of any new contract that must eventually get ratified by the rank and file. (I do not see that happening) If there are any form of givebacks on this such as a longer school day or reduction in sick days I will be promptly quitting the UFT after Janus comes through. Why? Because Mulgrew is saying there will be no givebacks. If he lies to us on this, he will continue to lie to us in the future, just like with his lies about the DOE wanting more observations when in fact it was the UFT that demanded more observations.

Harris L. said...

Well said and well done, James!

Anonymous said...

Socialism is never fair

Anonymous said...

And capitalism is fair?

Anonymous said...

Republican capitalism. Fair system for sure. NOT.

Anonymous said...

That wasn't my point. Nice try!

Anonymous said...

My prediction for what it's worth: Less of a raise will barely be noticed. As with the last lousy contract, members will see a shiny signing bonus and be distracted from seeing a couple of 0% raises on a multiyear contract. Lowering number of sick days is what will set off alarm bells for members. Some of our suburban peers get more than our allotted 10 days so taking from our 10 will be another slap in the face from our union. Roseanne McCosh

Anonymous said...

Taking away sick days will "cost" career teachers a l lot over the years. Teachers such as I only take 2 days a year for sick days. I have banked over 120 days in my CAR. The less days I can bank, means less money that I can cash out at retirement? I do not plan on ever having kids but now I will be punished so as to pay for teachers to have a paid leave? This is total bullshit. As a couple of posters mentioned above, creating a buy in for teachers who want to go on leave is the fairest and most sane way to do this. Any givebacks will pit teacher against teacher on this topic. People underestimate how many teachers either don't have kids, already had kids and don't want anymore, or are never going to have kids. These teachers will be fuming at loosing CAR days.

Anonymous said...

Newsflash 7:44,7:59,8:02: Life isn't fair.

And it's interesting how all the losers in society are always crowing for "fairness"

Anonymous said...

The buy in idea seems interesting!

Those of you who hold up your hands and surrender without any input need to reevaluate!

Anonymous said...

Read the post. Nobody is going to lose sick days. Slightly lower raise in next contract or this one is coming.

Anonymous said...

Get over it selfish people.

Anonymous said...

It's selfish to think someone else should pay for you to stay home my confused liberal friend. I would not want to stay home if it meant taking away the saved sick days of other teachers. They earned them and sacrificed to save them why would I be entitled to some of them. Liberalism! You can't help yourselves to someone else's property!

Anonymous said...

You obviously have a reading problem my conservative friend. Losing sick bank days was rejected by the UFT and is not on the table. That has been documented everywhere.

Anonymous said...

And you obviously have a trust problem. Do you really trust the uft? When mikey opens his mouth it's a lie. I will believe it when I see it. As of now I believe he will give away members car days because he doesn't care if older teachers don't like him. They can't hate him anymore than they do now. It's all about keeping the newbies happy

Anonymous said...

the world is overpopulated! resource depletion! global warming! anyone who has a child should be taxed more to offset the damage they will do to the planet! parents of said child should forfeit days in their CARs to those who sacrifice for the common good by not having children!
resist!
sound about right?

Anonymous said...

I think you need to go back on your meds. Have a Merry Christmas and God Bless