Note: There is a maximum of 200 words per comment. If you wish to post more, please visit our forum.
sig wrote on May 20, 2009 11:04 PM:
fishslayer wrote on May 20, 2009 12:29 PM:
its sad that teachers are blamed for this contract dialog, who wrote the contract, the teachers union
and the students who cares right!
coos bay, get it together
The Brutal Truth wrote on May 18, 2009 5:32 PM:
This is NOT true.
Tag Urit wrote on May 17, 2009 6:08 PM:
Isn't education about the children?
AnOldDude wrote on May 14, 2009 6:57 AM:
no complaints on how great a teacher's life is ? how they are over paid?
Are you mad that "teach" assigned you some homework? (research)
Lets see an UNBIASED article.
teacher wrote on May 14, 2009 6:18 AM:
For instance, when you stated that the teachers want a pay raise and no freeze, did you do ANY research why they may be asking for this?
There is a history you know that led up to this point. Cuts have been made, promises broken. But that would take research.
It's much more fun to lead the public to believe the teachers are being greedy during a financial crisis.
Secondly, yes, the negotiators were speaking of future problems....because the board chose to open over 30 articles of the contract for rewording.
Why didn't the paper research the rewording a little and ask why the board would choose to do this during such a complicated financial time?
If you want to be in the news game, it takes more work than getting a few quotes and being simplistic. Anything short of thorough in these situations is only making things worse.
teacher wrote on May 14, 2009 6:02 AM:
The teacchers HAVE taken pay freezes in the past, and still cuts were made. We are wary at best.
The classified union has also left open the option of going back to the table if the teachers don't freeze salary, so it's not all what has been reported.
Contract negotiations take a few sessions, this the first of 3 after all the budget cuts. Money wasn't even discussed until the bitter end because the board took 2 dinner breaks so the teachers who were there would leave.
Secondly, we have not voted on what provisions we will agree to, so to call us deadlocked is ridiculous. This is flame-fanning by our paper.
Thirdly, I don't understand why the paper chose to write whether they perceived the teachers were paying attention. Could this paper just even pretend to be professional and just report the facts and stop interpreting them?
Steve wrote on May 13, 2009 3:36 PM:




The World welcomes your comments about stories, and we encourage a robust dialogue on this site. All comments must meet reasonable standards of decency and civility.
Please follow these basic rules:
- No defamatory comments about individuals or businesses.
- No deliberately false information.
- No obscenity or racially offensive language.
- No harassment, verbal abuse, threats or personal attacks.
- No information that invades another person's privacy.
- No business solicitations or charitable solicitations.
Comments that violate these standards will not be posted. Users with repeated violations may be banned from future posting.Comments will be approved throughout the day during business hours. After hours and weekend comments may not appear until the following business day. It may take a couple of hours before comments are approved.
The World generally does not edit comments, but we reserve the right to edit any comment that does not meet our standards.
Close Guidelines