ACTIVE TEACHERS: Get the REAL story on OEA here!!!

From Tom Curtis
12/03/05

Hello Tom,

Sounds like grandpa was a very wise man. The OEA is primarily responsible for where retirees find themselves today. They have willingly taken our dues money throughout our career, supposedly to support and protect us, when in fact; they were fleecing us every step of the way. It sure would be interesting to know just how much money the OEA has taken from Ohio teachers throughout all of it's years of operation. It would have to be in the billions. That is HUGE! The knowledge that such a HUGE flow of dedicated income has gone to the OEA makes me sick.

What do we have to show for paying into the OEA for all of these years? I can think of only a few positive benefits for the dues paid throughout our careers. On the other hand, I can certainly list numerous detrimental outcomes to both active and retired educators. Let me list a few.

* Actives do the OEA's grunt work at the local and state level for FREE, while the OEA leadership and upper management are grossly overpaid. Few at the local level even know what goes on at the OEA. (Example: Last year, most actives did not even know who Rollo Beach was. Further, they did not know he was the OEA endorsed executive committee member running for an active seat on the STRS board)

* The OEA has always increased dues, thus taking more from the active teacher each and every year. If they did not increase dues, they asked for PAC money donations. Result, the teacher always paid more in.

* The leadership of the OEA managed to take control of the STRS by funding the election expenses of their own past and present executive committee members. They easily placed these people on the STRS board by using our dues or PAC money. (They have spent millions in doing such. They have spent roughly $150,000 in the past two years and have been unsuccessful in seating any of their candidates)

*The OEA has held a majority control (5 of 9 board members) of the STRS board from 1992 to 2004. They may have held a majority prior to 1992; I have not researched that to date.

* The OEA is responsible for hiring Herb Dyer in 1992.

* The OEA is responsible for permitting Herb Dyer to retire in January 2004, thus permitting him to leave the STRS with an outrageous $550,000 severance package. He should have been fired for his misdeeds and prosecuted for his failure of fiduciary responsibility. They let him go scot free.

* OEA-trained board members voted to spend our funds in ways that were extremely poor business practices, thus permitting management and staff to become the highest paid work force of all five public retirement systems in Ohio.

* OEA-trained board members voted to hire the largest staff of all five public retirement systems in Ohio.

* OEA-trained board members provide a false hope for a health care benefit for the rest of our lives and then failed to fund it properly.

* OEA-trained board members have been looking for another dedicated flow of income to fund the health care stabilization fund as far back as 1992.

* The OEA leadership has chaired the Health Care Advocacy Committee for three long years. The only result they could come up with is to increase the amount the active teacher and the employer pays.

* OEA provides little to no representation for retirees; we are faceless to them.

* The OEA is responsible for teachers not having a guaranteed health care benefit.

* We had no support from the OEA when their own people misspent our retirement funds; they attempted a cover-up by failure to acknowledge that any wrongdoing had taken place.

* To the contrary, the OEA in writing, slandered Dennis Leone's position paper, "STRS Organizational Matters and Spending Practices" of 2003 and called it full of "allegations and misrepresentations". Yet, the OEA has never provided one shred of evidence for their claims.

* The OEA is responsible for SB190, which disproportionately provides for retirees and may well be extremely detrimental to the future liquidity of the STRS.

* The OEA did not support SB133. To the contrary, they opposed SB133 to the very last minute, because they did not want to give up the majority control they had for over a decade of the STRS board.

I could probably list numerous more reasons why the OEA has been detrimental to Ohio educators, but the list above should be very sufficient in showing just what they have done for us.

In reality, the OEA has been very costly to the educators of Ohio and should be held accountable for such. Will the educators' of Ohio ever have enough unity to do such, probably not? This is exactly why the OEA can and continues to take advantage of the educators in Ohio. We have been and continue to be sheep.

Take care,
Tom Curtis


From: Tom Cooper

Sent: Friday, December 02, 2005

Subject: Re: 120205 Curtis Resp To Doyle; Re Ted Strickland

Thomas Curtis wrote:I have now realized, the OEA is nothing more then a parasite on the teacher's back. In my opinion, they have been more detrimental to our progress in wages and benefits then one would ever have dreamed.

I am sure that OEA officially supported Taft the first time he ran..I remember being stunned...I'm not sure about the second run, but why would they change? If any one knows/remembers who OEA supported officially for Taft's second run, I would like to know. I think NOW, while we have proof, is the time to inform actives that OEA does not act in teachers' best interests. I can think of NO reason why OEA would even consider supporting a guy who is so anti-teacher, and my grandpa always told me when things with the government don't make sense, find the money trail, and you'll find the answer.

TC