This is the real rub, I suspect, in all the legislation going down concerning the right to collective bargaining by public employees. In the end, you can't FORCE them to work, and at least in the case of teachers, they are not easy to replace.

It will be very interesting to see how this goes down. It's possible they'll all be fired, but replacing an entire school district is no easy task, and the performance of the school will suffer in any case... for the first few months at least, it will be like having a school FULL of substitute teachers.

So pass the laws you want... people with strong enough convictions can still make their voices heard. Funny how this sort of thing comes up every time one group of people tries to vote, or rule, on what specific rights another group of people is allowed to have.

The teachers may well lose this round... but they seem willing to pay the consequences if they do, and you have to respect them for sticking to their guns, even in the current political climate concerning Public Unions.

Interesting Economic Sidenote- Suppose, for a second, that the Court orders the district to fire the teachers, as the judge is considering. That is a lot of positions to fill. Such a large, sudden draw on the available teachers is essentially a raise in demand, and the effect would surely touch other areas as well, which could lead to pay raises for teachers simply due to issues of supply/demand.

Have the teachers in question created a win/win situation, if not for themselves, then for their profession?