The signs being carried by striking teachers in the South Butler School District are familiar. They are no doubt similar to signs carried by Seneca Valley teachers when they went on strike in 2007.

South Butler teachers' signs shown in photographs on the Butler Eagle's front page say "No teacher left behind" and "You can't nickel and dime a good education."

Few people would argue about the value of a good teacher. But most people looking at the South Butler teachers — and some of the demands over which they are striking — have to question the wisdom of the teachers union representatives, or the teachers' collective decision to strike over demands that probably most people see as unreasonable.

While there is never a good time to strike, the current economic conditions suggest this could be about the worst time to strike in recent memory. Economic uncertainty is being felt by nearly everyone, including taxpayers in the South Butler district who fund teachers' salaries.

Regardless of the timing, most people are surprised, even stunned, at the teachers' demand that they should contribute less for their health care in the future.

At at time when nearly all workers are contributing more and employers are struggling under rising health care insurance costs, South Butler teachers began their strike demanding a reduction in their monthly payments from $10 to $3.33 for individuals and from $20 to $6.67 for families. This week, after a two-hour meeting on Tuesday, teachers nudged their proposal up to $5 a month for an individual and $15 for a family — amounts still below the current levels of $10 a month for individuals and $20 for family coverage.

These demands surely seem unreasonable to most people, given that health care insurance costs employers about $4,000 a year for an individual and about $12,000 for a family. And most employees share these health care burdens, contributing in the range of 10 percent to 20 percent of the cost of insurance.

Government employees, including teachers, have historically paid a lower percentage. But the South Butler teachers' position offering to pay a little more than one-tenth of one percent is not reasonable or realistic.

A letter to the editor in yesterday's Butler Eagle from a man working for a large corporation in Pittsburgh noted that he pays more than $200 a month for his family's health coverage. That figure is fairly typical.

South Butler teachers are not gaining support for their cause by demanding that they pay less than an already-too-small amount for their health insurance.

Even the board's offer of $20 per month for individuals and $30 per month for families is inadequate, based on conditions just about everywhere else.

In addition to the stunning demand that monthly contributions for health care coverage be reduced, most people are struck by the teachers union's demand for annual salary increases of 5.9 percent.

Even before the national economy began heading into recession, most workers were receiving increases of 2 percent or so — if they were receiving wage increases at all. Taxpayers, through their representatives on the school board, are not likely to be sympathetic to a demand for annual salary increases that are more than double what the most optimistic worker is expecting these days.

Workers covered by collective bargaining agreements in other industries have acknowledged that they must contribute reasonable amounts for their health care coverage and keep wage demands within reason. It's time for teachers at SouthButler, and elsewhere, to understand that the days of free, or essentially free, health care are over. They also must recognize that there are limits to taxpayers' ability to pay, and tolerance for unrealistic employment demands.

If the union is taking these far-out positions as a negotiation strategy, they are making a mistake.

And it's not anti-teacher to think so or say so.