Yes, but...

Stephen Henderson continues to give me a sliver of hope for the Free Press--his commentary on teachers and their compensation vis-a-vis their peformance was for the most part, very fair and well thought out.  Still, two points I think he missed....

For one, the idea that somehow we're going to have the first profession in history that has no below average performing employees is, I think, a bit naive.  That's not to say it isn't a goal worth striving for, it's just that there are no tests or performance evaluations in a profession of thousands that are going to completely eliminate incompetence.  And how to judge talented individuals who might not swallow the groupthink?

The second, and more important, I think, is that no one seems to notice that paying teachers less and making their benefit package worse is not exactly going to draw the best and the brightest to the profession.  Seriously--in what other field would anyone consider paying people with four years of college (and many of them much more), the very people you depend upon to lead and grow your business, less money to be a good decision for the future of the business?

As an aside, Mr. Henderson might want to get a word with the Free Press editorial board--it's going to be awfully hard to get some of his sensible suggestions in place if the traditional media keep giving Snyder kudos such as this:  "On the whole, Snyder's budget remains the boldest fundamental blueprint we've seen for reinventing the Michigan economy."  Bold would suggest new and good, but Snyder's budget is little more than Reagan's and Bush the lesser's trickle down economy, both of which were unmitigated disasters for the poor and the middle class.  Which basically leaves Snyder's plan as a retread which will do very little to create jobs for those in Michigan who need them.  About as bold as rice pudding is savory....

Peace,
emaycee