Unions+Mills=Taxpayers Screwed

[Albert Hidel]

[ham]

“Do I want to then go back to that same union and ask them to reopen the contract—remember you cannot unilaterally open a contract. Did I want to go back and ask them to do that or did I want to wait one more year and take care of it in the upcoming negotiations in 2007? As the chief administrative officer I made the decision to not reopen. I made the decision to continue on and made the decision to inform the labor negotiator and the assistant chief that would be handling the negotiations in 2007 to take care of it at that time.”

Hmm...
So mr. gray mustache is saying that no contract negotiation ever took place since degree mills became a visible problem? PFFT!

Union goons negotiate contracts with government management dimwits calling for pay raises at taxpayer expense for “degrees” without specifying the nature or quality of the degree. Then the diploma mill goons sell their bogus paper to the government employee dimwits, who pay for it with more taxpayer dollars.

Unions are just the 'legalized' version of mob and mafia, typically engaging in the same sordid tactics their 'illegal' brothers love.
Why do I say 'legalized'?
Because unions do stem from violent mob & mafia being legalized as big brother saw the light about the justness of their 'cause'.

[Martin Eisenstadt]

So mr. gray mustache is saying that no contract negotiation ever took place since degree mills became a visible problem? PFFT!

I also like Mr. Gray Mustache's account of how he discovered the problem.  

"2003-2004 many public safety departments across the state of California recognized these degrees.  The state fire marshal’s office approved over 500.  Later on, 2006, I start to have my suspicions about these Almeda degrees.  I know that other agencies are no longer accepting them.  I see the 60 Minutes segment, and I make a decision."

If Dan Rather says it, it must be true.  Damn, that's some top notch research, worthy of Princeton, and he didn't even have an extra 15 guys to help him.  

This shows how government slugs make decisions with public tax money.  If everybody else is doing it, it must be okay.  If everybody else stops doing it maybe I ought to stop, or at least think about stopping when I get around to it.  If 60 Minutes is covering it I need to call my lawyer and get a story together.

So since Almeda isn't doing anything much differently than SRU, why is Dixie rotting in jail while Almeda is proudly proclaiming "Almeda University Silences the Critics"? ("The evidence is overwhelming that Almeda University is not only legitimate, it is in many ways superior to traditional mortar and brick colleges. What such institution can claim 100% student satisfaction as Almeda can?")

Not only did Dixie forget to pay off the pols, she obviously didn't tighten up the union goons either.  What was that deal with Shafiq and the UAW?  Dixie had to give them back the money or get her thumbs broken?  She should have spent some money with her local public employees union.  Hell, she would be superintendent of schools by now.

Chronicles of Union Greed

[Herbert Spencer]

So since Almeda isn't doing anything much differently than SRU, why is Dixie rotting in jail while Almeda is proudly proclaiming "Almeda University Silences the Critics"?

Say what you will about Almeda, they have some great stuff on their website.  

Here's something from "Traditional Universities Struggle to Compete with Online Counterparts":

Using a vast array of media contacts and high-powered public relations firms and mouthpieces, the higher-education establishment has gone on the offensive against life-experience schools, seeking to discredit them and convince the public at large that their degrees aren't worth the paper they're printed on.  

Their all-too-willing cohorts in this dark enterprise are various accreditation boards, which have set themselves up as arbiters of what does and does not constitute a quality degree.  Seeing their establishment threatened, they have either refused to accredit life-experience universities or laid out requirements for the accreditation that would destroy the essence of what they are trying to achieve: educational equality for those who chose to make their way in the world outside the higher-learning establishment.

The facts are simple: nontraditional school enrollment is skyrocketing, whereas traditional universities find themselves fighting tooth and nail for an ever-dwindling pool of applicants.  The big boys are scared, and rather than make changes to try and compete they are using all the clout they can muster to drive the competition off the board.  Like a chess Grandmaster beaten by a novice who throws a tantrum and sweeps the pieces from the board, they are attempting to win the game by rendering it null and void.

. . .

The world today is evolving beyond traditional ways of doing things.  In every facet of life, we are seeing an acceleration of learning, success and self-improvement that outstrips the very idea of a four-year college degree.  Young adults two years out of high school are becoming millionaires using the strength of their intellect and determination, rather than riding on a piece of pretty paper bestowed upon them for four years of rote work.

Traditional universities can't deal with that, and so they are simply pretending it's not happening.  Fingers in their ears and eyes shut tight, they stagger into the new millennium.

I'm not seeing anything in the above I don't agree with.  I particularly like their distinction between real-world learning and whatever it is that the higher education establishment purports to offer.  We are seeing that distinction in other, real-world contexts, such as Microsoft certifications, securities licensing, and insurance and financial planning designations.  

In the UK only "universities" may issue "degrees."  Non-universities (e.g., "colleges" or "institutes") may issue non-degrees (e.g., "diplomas" or "certificates").  I'm not aware of any such semantic distinctions in the US, but perhaps that day is coming.  The US higher education establishment has no trademark or copyright on the term "degree," so I don't see why someone outside that establishment shouldn't be able to use it.  

But if non-establishment skills evaluators like Almeda were to adopt non-establishment terminology for their designations, how would the establishment be able to challenge their legitimacy?  

Or alternatively, create distinctions between "degrees" demonstrating skills versus "degrees" demonstrating whatever it is that traditional college degrees supposedly demonstrate.  For example, a "practical degree," in distinction to an "academic degree."

These distinctions are blurred in the traditional higher education establishment, as evidenced by "life-experience" degrees being offered by RA schools like the Easy 3, or "academic" degrees being offered by ACCSCT-accredited trade schools.  Obvious the establishment would prefer to preempt the entire area, thereby excluding non-establishment competitors.

But logically it seems that even if the life experience schools are using identical terminology, as long as they are not representing that their designations (in whatever terminology they might use) are the same as the similarly named academic designations no one could say there are being dishonest or even creating confusion.  Just different things that happen to use the same terminology, like homonyms.  

But since it's Dixie rotting in jail and not TESC or COSC clearly there is something wrong somewhere.

[ham]

This shows how government slugs make decisions with public tax money. If everybody else is doing it, it must be okay. If everybody else stops doing it maybe I ought to stop, or at least think about stopping when I get around to it. If 60 Minutes is covering it I need to call my lawyer and get a story together.

Many people get their facts from tabloids and watered down, politically tainted TV shows...the adult version of high school 'approved' books written by political hacks.