Teacher Strikes Are Old-Fashioned And Damaging

Are teacher strikes a waste of time and money?

The answer to that is a resounding “Yes!”

Teachers who think that strikes make a difference are deluded.

Strikes are divisive, they harm pupils and they erode public confidence.

Unions will of course disagree but then they are happy to gobble up your fees and waste it on expensive balloons and banners – not to mention colossal salaries of those “fighting your corner”.

We need to get this right: education is supposed to serve pupils. They are not supposed to be politically abused and used as leverage.

Striking is so old-fashioned. It’s a throwback to the 70s and 80s, a time when striking was all the rage and they proved just as ineffective then. They are a bit like boycotting the SATs – clueless and damaging.

Unions are out of touch with what works – they are stuck in a time warp. They are often hijacked by Socialist Worker which means every strike is stained in red and drips in anarchy. You will also see plenty of V for Vendetta Guy Fawkes protest masks.

What Michael Zwaagstra said in 2012 still holds true no matter where in the world you teach….

Question: Who is most negatively affected by teacher strikes? Answer: Students. Logical conclusion: Teacher strikes should not be permitted. It really is that simple. If student achievement is the top priority of our public education system, teacher strikes should never happen. No one can seriously argue that students benefit when teachers withdraw their services. Sadly, students often are punished in these labour disputes that have nothing to do with them.

Some argue that teachers strike because they are all out of options? Really? And striking helps?

Okay then, if teachers want to protest then do it at a weekend when children won’t be disrupted.