[Bob Seger]

I bolded the part that confuses me about you statement. You say that you understand the work conditions and wages, but in the very next statement you say that it should not be held for teachers and state workers.

My question is this: why?

If you say because it is considered a service, is not the medical field a service or air traffic controllers a service. If you say because you should not because you are working with someone elses money, but I would say doesn't everybody. If you say you signed up for this type of service, you are right but now people are changing the rules in midstream, at which point I did not sign up for.

So again ask why is a teacher not allowed to have the same benefits as say a union employee in any other field?

The others are employed by private enterprise. Teachers, and other state, and federal workers are employed by the tax payer. They have no right, IMO, to hold the tax payer hostage by striking and walking out . Nobody forced anybody to work for the government. My opinion is if they are not satisfied with their employment, they should seek employment in another field in the private sector. By the way ,that's really working out great right now, isn't it?. Should the ones that are footing the bills have to live at a substandard way of life than those they are paying? I would say that the great percentage of teachers acquired their jobs coming straight out college, and have never held a real private sector job to begin with. Most probably dont have an inkling as to what those paying their salaries have to deal with to make their livings. They may find out they dont have it all that bad.