Am I reading this right?? Board votes to dismiss all Providence teachers

[Triple Zero]

Public school teachers, that is (didn't fit in the topic title).

http://www.projo.com/news/content/PROVIDENCE_SCHOOL_MEETINGS_02-25-11_MCMMBSG_v26.1bd455c.html

But without teachers, what will the kids do at the schools?

Not everyone can afford private schools can they?

Also doesn't this mean they also have to fire all the public school janitors, deans, school administration jobs, the board of whatever, head of the school etc etc? I mean, there's probably not much administering to do without the teachers teaching any kids.

Apart from those obvious practical concerns, it's also bat-shit-fucking-crazy. And dumb.

[Jasper]

It's a self-correcting problem.  The less education there is, the less people will care about education, so when there finally isn't any left, nobody will mind.  No problem.

[Durivan]

This is basically a way to get around the current teacher contracts.  Why negotiate pay/benefit cuts when you can just fire them all then hire some of them back at reduced salaries and benefits.  You can not only save money but get rid of any and all the "problem teachers" at once.

[*GrumpButt*]

I don't even.....

[Rumckle]

They aren't actually firing all of the teachers, it is just that they need to give the teachers a warning of a few months, so rather than make the decision of who they will be firing now they just send out notices to everyone, so they can decide later. Just because a teacher did get the letter does not necessarily mean they will be fired. But it does look like a lot of teachers will be out of work.

It is a bit of a dick move.

Also Suu made a post about this in Apple Talk:
http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=28503.0

[Luna]

Here's the thing.

They know there are going to be cutbacks, but they don't know which schools, and how many teachers.

The contracts demand that if an individual teacher will be dismissed before the beginning of the next school year, they MUST be notified by March 1st.

The budgets won't be ready until the end of June, at best, which means that they don't know how many teachers will need to be cut, much less which ones.

If they just send layoff notices, the contract demands that they keep the teachers with the most seniority, not necessarily the ones they actually NEED.

So...  Termination notices across the board, to give them the freedom to determine which teachers they need to keep next year.

[Rumckle]

That's all well and good, I understand they are in a tight spot regarding this. But, they are putting all the teachers in a really shitty situation. Surely they must have some idea (before the budget comes up) of how many they'll need to lay off and the areas, I'm not talking exact figures, but some rough estimate, so they wouldn't need to send out all these notices. Because even if a teacher isn't going to be fired, this still isn't good for them, because they need to think about the future of where they will be working, rather than focus on their current job, (not to mention being in a very undervalued profession to begin with, and the message it sends to potential new teachers).

Anyway, I just watched this TED Talk video about state budgets and education in general:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jiUKpX09zo4

Nothing particularly new their, but it is short and does give a good overview.

[Juana]

That's all well and good, I understand they are in a tight spot regarding this. But, they are putting all the teachers in a really shitty situation. Surely they must have some idea (before the budget comes up) of how many they'll need to lay off and the areas, I'm not talking exact figures, but some rough estimate, so they wouldn't need to send out all these notices. Because even if a teacher isn't going to be fired, this still isn't good for them, because they need to think about the future of where they will be working, rather than focus on their current job, (not to mention being in a very undervalued profession to begin with, and the message it sends to potential new teachers).

Exactly the reason I'm not going to teach high school like I wanted.
And yeah, you'd think so. But that probably depends on how they deal with funds.

[Luna]

It absolutely does suck for the teachers.  My brother in law is one of the people who got one of those notices.

The mayor cut a half million in school administration jobs, and the shortfall now looks to be at $28 million, rather than $40 million, so they're not going to have to cut as deeply as they thought they would.

There's been a decline in the number of students, apparently, 4,400 students in the last six years, a 16% decline, which means there's room to close schools and consolidate.

Not too long ago, the former board wanted to start cutting back on the number of schools, and the union organized such a fuss that he was unable to do so.  I believe he managed to get two closed, rather than the six he wanted.  This is what it came down to, now...  Wide termination notices that has the union crapping itself, in order to get them to budge on negotiations.

I've seen what this particular union does in order to get what they want.  They're bloody insane.  This is the same union that demanded my university assign a private office to each and every one of our adjunct professors.  Our adjuncts are our part-time professors, they teach, by contract, no more than THREE classes per semester, most teach one or two, and we have around 2,000 of them per semester.  (I know, when the union made this demand, I got the phone call from the OGC to find out how many there were.)  I'm not quite sure whose ass we were supposed to pull an office building that size out of.

[Triple Zero]

Here's the thing.

They know there are going to be cutbacks, but they don't know which schools, and how many teachers.

The contracts demand that if an individual teacher will be dismissed before the beginning of the next school year, they MUST be notified by March 1st.

The budgets won't be ready until the end of June, at best, which means that they don't know how many teachers will need to be cut, much less which ones.

If they just send layoff notices, the contract demands that they keep the teachers with the most seniority, not necessarily the ones they actually NEED.

Hm okay, that makes slightly more sense. It's still crappy, though. So the article I linked was kind of misleading (to someone who doesn't know anything about the subject), cause it sounded to me like *poof!* no more teachers, leave our kids alone!

So the seniority rule is over the entire public school system, and not per school?

Cause if they'd just keep the senior teachers on a per-school basis, that would at least solve the "which schools, how many teachers" part of the problem.

Let me guess, was it the unions that demanded the seniority rule to be over the entire system and not per school? Not exactly working in their members best interest, is it? It's a bit late now, however, to learn that it's not just about who pulls hardest.

Anyway, so, given the shitty situation, was this really the best way to handle it?

[Luna]

Yeah, it's crappy, but the way the unions have it set up, crappy is the only way to deal with it.

I believe the seniority rule is system wide, the city's small enough that, in order to keep their jobs, the teachers can fairly easily shift around from school to school.  Heck, the STATE is small enough that they could.

They'll keep most of the teachers, this just gives them the freedom to decide, based on the needs of the students NOT on who's been warming a chair the longest, which ones to keep.

[Luna]

Huh, bedarned.

They fired the lot of 'em.

http://www.projo.com/news/content/PROVIDENCE_SCHOOL_MEETINGS_02-25-11_MCMMBSG_v26.1bd455c.html

[Triple Zero]

Um. That's the link I started the thread with?

[Luna]

Um. That's the link I started the thread with?

I'm an idiot, that's all.

Went back and looked, came to 'fess up to being an idiot.

[Dysfunctional Cunt]

I think this has more to do with "seniority" than people realize.  Senior teachers a) make more money b) cost more in benefits and c) have less time left to work. 

This way they can bring back or in the new teachers who are making less, are younger and theoretically healthier and who have more years to slave away....