I'm pretty sure they won't have to worry about this teacher much longer now that his mug is on the front page of the DC.

I agree, it is the job of the board and admin to fire lousy teachers. And they can, for any (or no) reason during a teacher's first three years. The union doesn't stand in their way. And if a teacher is shown to be truly lousy, there is a process to have them removed. The problem isn't the union -- its the disinterest of administrators. They're too busy building cap-feathering programs, attending district meetings, and jumping through central admin hoops. I've seen bad 'tenured' teachers get fired, and the union didn't obstruct the process at all.

It's not the union's fault that administrators don't like to deal with the minutia of what actually goes on in classrooms.

Why are the teachers disgruntled? Seems pretty simple to me.

1. The district had an enormous influx of new dollars this year, plus they have a history of huge budget surpluses after every fiscal year which simply "disappear." The district (thanks to the voters and Amendment 23) is rolling in new cash.
2. They have chosen to spend these new dollars in areas other than teacher salaries. Particularly on new cap-feathering programs that further centralize power away from the schools and towards central administration.

Most of the objections I'm reading seem to boil down to this argument: the economy is bad, people are losing their jobs, so teachers should take a hit just like the rest of us. Imagine you work hard for your company, and because of that the company posts record sales for the year. Millions of new dollars are flowing into the company's coffers. Wouldn't you expect to see an equitable piece of that new money? Wouldn't you be upset if management took all that new money and poured it into executive bonuses and designing new programs that create more work for you? And then, after spending all that money, they take a look at what's left over, divide it up by the number of employees, and act as if they are being incredibly generous to offer you a 1% raise? You see your colleagues at other companies (who are not doing as well financially) getting 2, 3, 4 percent raises. I think you'd be upset too.

My sense is that most teachers wanted to put this contract impasse behind them. They are thoroughly demoralized and frustrated with the district's actions. I have talked to several of my colleagues who are actively pursuing getting out of teaching or transferring to other districts. The fact that a majority of teacher voted this offer down despite all of that is a reflection of the ineffectiveness, combativeness, and plain ineptitude of Chris King's leadership.