Support NeoGAF

[GhostWriter24]

Allegations, allegations, allegations. Show some hard evidence of his foul play then we can judge. Until then, good for him, he's laughing all the way to the bank on NY's dollar.

 

[jamesinclair]

If hes innocent, why shouldnt he do this?

He wants to teach, they wont let him, so yes, a fuck you is appropriate.

 

[JGS]

His salary could be used to pay or hire better and more qualified teachers.

No one is sure how good of a teacher he is. That's the problem. He's in exile because they haven't charged him with anything.

If you:

1. Can't trust him around kids (Totally understandable btw)
2. Can't fire him for an invalid reason (Totally understandable btw)
3. Want to avoid legal turmoil from the teachers and the students' parents (Totally understandable btw)

Then you keep him working.

The silly thing about the case is that they can't figure out that part of it. Make him flat out work 40 hrs a week. As has been mentioned, make him a teacher's assistant, a janitor, and actual secretary. One way or another, make him aware that he actually has a job. If I were fired based on an accusation only, I would sue their faces off. Not so much of I'm told to work

 

[Dreams-Visions]

While you can blame DOE, you also must recognize the immense about of political power and pressure that the teacher's unions bring. They funnel a lot of the money right back into politics and exerting their power to get politicians elected, who then owe them, and approve ridiculous things "for the children."

It's a totally corrupt system to begin with - and is made worse when the politicians that the unions support are actually in power/control.

ehhh...corruption is such an easy escape. the reality is that effective education itself is a moving, flowing target. effectiveness relies on a plethora of variables that go beyond simply controlling a classroom and lecturing. Prior academic experiences/learning, home situation and condition, quality of materials, size of classrooms, required curricula, subjects, etc. are ALL part of the puzzle as well. If a teacher's class is underperforming, is it because the teacher is bad, or because of some combination of the above?

If you take a teacher from a different school...say, a private school in the suburbs where the kids expect only A's and B's...and you put that same teacher in a failing school with struggling, under-qualified students, will that teacher get better results? How about visa-versa? Therein lies just a fragment of the complications that come with trying to accurately critique teacher quality and ability. And considering most K-12 schools don't have the resources to hire someone to observe (or review recordings) of teachers daily efforts, the ability to accurately assess teacher's is nigh impossible. and thus, the need for a strong Union.

One of my friends who was teacher used to tell me about all the kids in Detroit that would come into his 10th grade English class. He knew (and told them and their parents) in the first week that their kids could not pass his class. Some things can't be microwaved; education is one of them. If a kid comes into his class with a 6th grade reading level because they got passed along, the scores in his class will be low regardless of how good a teacher he is. Regardless of how much after-school time he volunteers. You can't make up years of a lack of good education in a couple of months...and while he should be encouraged to do his best and required to learn ways to engage those kids where they are, his job should not be threatened because he inherited bad situations. Without strong Unions, his career would be in jeopardy by deciding to use his Bachelor's and dual Masters skillset to teach in urban schools as he did. And if that's the case, how do you get a teacher to take on the job at all? So now you have only the worst teachers accepting urban jobs, creating even more problems.

There are no simple answers here because there are no simple problems here. While there are always going to be a couple of situations that go beyond reasonable help and protection, such is sometimes the nature of contracts. You don't want to see what happens to a school system that doesn't have reasonable protections for teachers...and anyone proposing "simple" solutions or suggesting this is a "simple" problem are either ignorant or stupid. Either way, they're dangerous. Yes, in some cases there is abuse of the system. That's neither exclusive to nor unique to teachers. But to suggest wholesale destruction of their support infrastructure is to suggest educational devastation in many school systems across the country not to dissimilar to a tactical nuclear warhead.

 

[Gaborn]

Not really. It's just a hearing. No extraordinary lengths required, just a preponderance of the evidence.

Yeah. Just a hearing:

 

[crazygambit]

Tenure is much more necessary at the collegiate level than at the HS level. However, I really don't see why tenure needs to be defined as "can't be fired, ever, for any reason." How about "can't be fired without reasonable cause?" I think sitting on your ass not teaching for a decade counts as reasonable cause.

Just another example of the excesses that's causing such a large backlash against unions nationally. You either concede a little, or lose everything.

But he's not allowed to teach. I mean really, all he got was one complaint with no evidence whatsoever then he was put in the rubber room and not allowed to teach anymore. And now you're saying that that alone is reasonable cause to fire him?

Why shouldn't he make the most of such an atrocious system?

 

[Gaborn]

But he's not allowed to teach. I mean really, all he got was one complaint with no evidence whatsoever then he was put in the rubber room and not allowed to teach anymore. And now you're saying that that alone is reasonable cause to fire him?

Why shouldn't he make the most of such an atrocious system?

You're overstating your case here. They did not present ENOUGH witnesses, that's different than saying that there are none. Again, in NYC EVERYTHING has to be documented exactly correctly in these situations.

 

[Vilix]

His salary could be used to pay or hire better and more qualified teachers.

hey, Hey, HEY!! Don't let me hear you talking like that around these parts again. This is Blue country, scab!

 

[NullPointer]

I won't fault the men, rather fault the system.

 

[tokkun]

Yeah. Just a hearing:

The number of steps in the process is not relevant. If the case was held up by some sort of bureaucratic red tape or legal manoeuvring, I might be tempted to agree with you. However the part that failed here was that they did not have sufficient proof to determine that the incident ever happened. That is not an issue of red tape, it's a basic issue of justice. It doesn't matter how simple and streamlined you make the process, if there is not proof, they shouldn't be fired.

 

[Freshmaker]

If that is the case then let me propose a 4th option: Require teachers in limbo to be night janitors, that keeps them away from kids and it actually puts them to a productive use that sticking them behind a desk does not do. I'm sorry, 10 years at full salary for doing nothing is unacceptable. If they can't teach and they still want to be employed give them something substantive but still harmless to kids.

Current night janitors don't need jobs?

 

[Puddles]

Do you think people hate creative rich people or people with vision who made a fortune by creating companies like Apple, Microsoft or Google?

Or do you think people hate rich people who are using a financial system like a gambling table and the states have to pay their bill, if they screw up? People gambling on resources like food are maybe not hated because they are rich, but because they are parasites we should get rid of.

.

Going to use this as a template rebuttal in the future if you don't mind. Perfectly worded.

 

[Gaborn]

The number of steps in the process is not relevant. If the case was held up by some sort of bureaucratic red tape or legal manoeuvring, I might be tempted to agree with you. However the part that failed here was that they did not have sufficient proof to determine that the incident ever happened. That is not an issue of red tape, it's a basic issue of justice. It doesn't matter how simple and streamlined you make the process, if there is not proof, they shouldn't be fired.

But again, look at what the steps require. You have to document everything, every interaction, every warning, every communication at all. It's hard to know what "sufficient" proof means in any case. I'm sure there have been other cases where students complained just to get a teacher in trouble but there must be something more in this case if NYC is willing to pay this guy a million dollars (and counting!) and not let him near kids. This is not just some false allegation that should never have been brought up in the first place, clearly they believe there is substantially more here. There should be a way to break this impasse like in any normal job.

Freshmaker - It's like when a team brings in a high priced free agent at a position where you already have a good player. The good player did well for you but the other guy is getting PAID to play.

 

[xbhaskarx]

Cue people turning this into a tirade against teachers in general

Not teachers, teachers unions.

 

[Dude Abides]

But again, look at what the steps require. You have to document everything, every interaction, every warning, every communication at all. It's hard to know what "sufficient" proof means in any case. I'm sure there have been other cases where students complained just to get a teacher in trouble but there must be something more in this case if NYC is willing to pay this guy a million dollars (and counting!) and not let him near kids. This is not just some false allegation that should never have been brought up in the first place, clearly they believe there is substantially more here. There should be a way to break this impasse like in any normal job.

Freshmaker - It's like when a team brings in a high priced free agent at a position where you already have a good player. The good player did well for you but the other guy is getting PAID to play.

Yes, you have to document everything if you want to fire someone for it. If you want to can someone, you have to actually provide....evidence! Sounds crazy, I know. Damn unions and their bullshit! That actually has nothing to do with the burden of proof at a hearing.

Also, your chart deals with unsatisfactory ratings, not discipline for alleged misconduct, which this would have been. It's so hard to keep your facts straight and understand what you're talking about when you're grinding that ideological axe, isn't it?

 

[tokkun]

But again, look at what the steps require. You have to document everything, every interaction, every warning, every communication at all. It's hard to know what "sufficient" proof means in any case.

In this specific case, they said there weren't sufficient witnesses. That sounds like a basic issue of evidence rather than a clerical problem.

I'm sure there have been other cases where students complained just to get a teacher in trouble but there must be something more in this case if NYC is willing to pay this guy a million dollars (and counting!) and not let him near kids. This is not just some false allegation that should never have been brought up in the first place, clearly they believe there is substantially more here. There should be a way to break this impasse like in any normal job.

You should give the This American Life episode on rubber rooms a listen. They certainly gave me the impression that the system is often used just to dispose of people the administration doesn't like, but who have not done anything unprofessional. I can't say how representative their coverage is, but it makes me wary to come to those type of conclusions.

You have to admit, the same argument could be made of anyone accused of a crime. "He must be guilty, or why would the DA be wasting money prosecuting him?" It's a dangerous line of thinking, in my opinion.

 

[JoeBoy101]

But politicans must be broken. It's the biggest obstacle to true education reform in this country, and they have outlived their usefulness, while entrenching protections and values that no other worker has.

Seriously, NCLB and the modifications Obama made to it making it even worse, are far more a detriment than teacher's unions are. Oh, they are a problem, but in the pantheon of issues harming education in this country, teacher's unions are probably barely breaking the top 10.

 

[Byakuya769]

Honestly, what are the pros of allowing tenure? Principals and superintendents can't be any more capricious than people I've worked for in the past.

 

[tokkun]

Honestly, what are the pros of allowing tenure? Principals and superintendents can't be any more capricious than people I've worked for in the past.

It depends on the level of education you're talking about. At the collegiate level, it's often argued that it is necessary to allow academics to pursue unpopular or controversial research.

In primary and secondary schools, I think the argument tends to be a more economic one. Teachers' salaries are currently set up in a way where entry-level teachers are paid poorly, but they tend to get frequent raises, making it more economically worthwhile as a longterm proposition.

Under this sort of payscale, the idea of at-will employment becomes very problematic, because administrators wishing to save money would just fire all the most senior people and keep cycling through underpaid recent graduates.

 

[Gaborn]

Yes, you have to document everything if you want to fire someone for it. If you want to can someone, you have to actually provide....evidence! Sounds crazy, I know. Damn unions and their bullshit!

Also, your chart deals with unsatisfactory ratings, not discipline for alleged misconduct, which this would have been. It's so hard to keep your facts straight and understand what you're talking about when you're grinding that ideological axe, isn't it?

You realize that people have little reason to talk to you when you get snippy, don't you?

and yes, I did realize that. Still, the point remains that there is a process that is too convoluted.

Also, you again are implying there is NO evidence. We'd have to know the details to determine the strength of NYC's case.

In this specific case, they said there weren't sufficient witnesses. That sounds like a basic issue of evidence rather than a clerical problem.

Depends on how many is not enough.

You should give the This American Life episode on rubber rooms a listen. They certainly gave me the impression that the system is often used just to dispose of people the administration doesn't like, but who have not done anything unprofessional. I can't say how representative their coverage is, but it makes me wary to come to those type of conclusions.

You should read the new yorker article on the subject

You have to admit, the same argument could be made of anyone accused of a crime. "He must be guilty, or why would the DA be wasting money prosecuting him?" It's a dangerous line of thinking, in my opinion.

We aren't talking about a crime though, where you are of course entitled to vast protections in the law (and SHOULD be). We're talking fundamentally about an employer/employee relationship and whether and in what circumstances an employer should be able to fire an employee they believe is incapable of fulfilling their duties without leaving them open to liability.

 

[Dreams-Visions]

It depends on the level of education you're talking about. At the collegiate level, it's often argued that it is necessary to allow academics to pursue unpopular or controversial research.

In primary and secondary schools, I think the argument tends to be a more economic one. Teachers' salaries are currently set up in a way where entry-level teachers are paid poorly, but they tend to get frequent raises, making it more economically worthwhile as a longterm proposition.

Under this sort of payscale, the idea of at-will employment becomes very problematic, because administrators wishing to save money would just fire all the most senior people and keep cycling through underpaid recent graduates.

and of course in these kinds of threads the anti crowd, nobody thinks about these basic issues or how they are impacted if their simplistic idea is implemented.

I'm telling you guys: wholesale destruction of teachers unions is the WRONG way to go. there are no quick-fixes for the advanced multi-variable calculus equation that is education.

 

[Cat Party]

In this specific case, they said there weren't sufficient witnesses. That sounds like a basic issue of evidence rather than a clerical problem.

What does "enough" or "sufficient" mean here?

 

[Gaborn]

What does "enough" or "sufficient" mean here?

It's also worth noting, from the New Yorker article that the people who decide these cases have a vested interest in not firing teachers:

Nor is it by any means certain that, as a result of that investment, New York taxpayers will have to stop paying Mohammed’s salary, eighty-five thousand dollars a year. Arbitrators have so far proved reluctant to dismiss teachers for incompetence. Siegel, who is serving his second one-year term as an arbitrator and is paid fourteen hundred dollars for each day he works on a hearing, estimates that he has heard “maybe fifteen” cases. “Most of my decisions are compromises, such as fines,” he said. “So it’s hard to tell who won or lost.” Has he ever terminated anyone solely for incompetence? “I don’t think so,” he said. In fact, in the past two years arbitrators have terminated only two teachers for incompetence alone, and only six others in cases where, according to the Department of Education, the main charge was incompetence.
Klein’s explanation is that “most arbitrators are not inclined to dismiss a teacher, because they have to get approved again every year by the union, and the union keeps a scorecard.” (Weingarten denies that the union keeps a scorecard.)

Also, incompetences is a catchall term, it doesn't just mean, well, bad teachers. Still, as long as the teachers union has the right to fire an arbitratror, and do so yearly... It should be a 5 year term for arbitrators.

 

[Dude Abides]

You realize that people have little reason to talk to you when you get snippy, don't you?

Well you let the Post lead you around by the nose in service of its agenda here, and that chart you got from Cato or Reason or wherever really has nothing to do with this case.

and yes, I did realize that. Still, the point remains that there is a process that is too convoluted.

Anything looks convoluted when it's presented in that ridiculous way. It makes "forwarding copies" a separate step, for christsakes. I could make my workday into a 50-page flow chart if I did it in that hackish way.

Also, you again are implying there is NO evidence. We'd have to know the details to determine the strength of NYC's case.

Not implying any such thing. We would have to know the details, but the lack of them did not deter you from jumping to the conclusions the Post wanted you to.

 

[tokkun]

You should read the new yorker article on the subject

This link doesn't work for me.

We aren't talking about a crime though, where you are of course entitled to vast protections in the law (and SHOULD be). We're talking fundamentally about an employer/employee relationship and whether and in what circumstances an employer should be able to fire an employee they believe is incapable of fulfilling their duties without leaving them open to liability.

I don't think that really bears on the point of making assumptions on a persons' guilt or innocence based on the amount of money the other party is spending.

 

[Gaborn]

This link doesn't work for me.

sorry, I cut off the end of it this should work

I don't think that really bears on the point of making assumptions on a persons' guilt or innocence based on the amount of money the other party is spending.

I don't think it should be as high a bar as it is (with loaded dice!) to fire teachers.

 

[tokkun]

What does "enough" or "sufficient" mean here?

I don't know. I assume it's based on standard spelled out in the employment contract and agreed on by both parties.

With the evidence we had, it's tough to make a real judgement about whether our personal definitions of sufficient align with those being used here.

 

[Dude Abides]

Also, incompetences is a catchall term, it doesn't just mean, well, bad teachers. Still, as long as the teachers union has the right to fire an arbitratror, and do so yearly... It should be a 5 year term for arbitrators.

Sigh. DOE has the same right to remove an arbitrator from the 7-member panel after one year. You shouldn't take Klein's (or Weingarten's) self-serving statements at face value.

From the contract, p. 129 (my emphasis):

Arbitrators will be continued for additional one year terms, unless either party
discontinues the services of any of the panel arbitrators by notification to the other party
by May 15 that such arbitrators shall not be selected for an additional term. Arbitrators
not selected by the parties to serve an additional term will be notified jointly by the
parties;

 

[Gaborn]

Sigh. DOE has the same right to remove an arbitrator from the 7-member panel after one year. You shouldn't take Klein's (or Weingarten's) self-serving statements at face value.

Did I suggest they didn't? I assumed it worked both ways. The point is that the arbitrator should be independent and should have a longer tenure to make that independence stronger. Really, it should be an independent state appointed position like a judge or a magistrate specializing in education issues rather than controlled by the two sides in the dispute.

 

[adamsappel]

Freshmaker - It's like when a team brings in a high priced free agent at a position where you already have a good player. The good player did well for you but the other guy is getting PAID to play.

I'd rather my school hire actual janitors, than give disgraced typing teachers make-work.

 

[Gaborn]

I'd rather my school hire actual janitors, than give disgraced typing teachers make-work.

Perhaps, but if we have to keep a guy on at a salary like that and not allow them to teach they should be doing SOMETHING. Note that my preferred outcome would be to allow a parting of the ways after a period of time.

 

[cousins]

Why do people complain about educators and glorify people who can help them cheat taxes? Anyway, most teachers aren't scumbags.

 

[Gaborn]

Why do people complain about educators and glorify people who can help them cheat taxes? Anyway, most teachers aren't scumbags.

Absolutely no one has stated anything to contradict this. Those teachers that are scumbags should be fired, those that are not should be richly rewarded.

 

[iammeiam]

This old Post article says a little about the specifics of the case. It looks like only one of six accusers testified; I'd be interested in knowing what happened to the rest of the accusers.

 

[Gaborn]

This old Post article says a little about the specifics of the case. It looks like only one of six accusers testified; I'd be interested in knowing what happened to the rest of the accusers.

Because the Department of Education could not produce all the students as witnesses, he was found guilty in only one case. A girl testified that Rosenfeld stopped at her locker, where she was standing with a friend, and "said I love him because I talk to him so much."

A DOE hearing officer gave him a slap on the wrist -- a week off without pay -- for "conduct unbecoming a teacher." He was cleared to return to teaching.

So you're allowed to sexually harass ONE student and it would be ok?

 

[3rdman]

Accused in 2001 of making lewd comments and ogling eighth-grade girls’ butts at IS 347 in Queens, Rosenfeld was slapped with a week off without pay after the DOE failed to produce enough witnesses at a hearing.

Honestly, I'm not even mad. The union protection (at least in this case) worked as it should. He is innocent until proven guilty and instead of simply moving on they put him a rubber room to wear him down.

For shit sake, he was black-balled for a comment.

 

[Gaborn]

Honestly, I'm not even mad. The union protection (at least in this case) worked as it should. He is innocent until proven guilty and instead of simply moving on they put him a rubber room to wear him down.

For shit sake, he was black-balled for a comment.

Go sexually harass a woman at your work and see how YOUR boss reacts. HE WAS FOUND GUILTY ON ONE OF THE CASES. The other 5 didn't show up.

 

[Dude Abides]

Did I suggest they didn't? I assumed it worked both ways. The point is that the arbitrator should be independent and should have a longer tenure to make that independence stronger. Really, it should be an independent state appointed position like a judge or a magistrate specializing in education issues rather than controlled by the two sides in the dispute.

Please, man. You were talking about "loaded dice" and strongly implied that the arbitrator's are pro-teacher because they want to keep their gigs. Knowing that they have just as much incentive to rule in favor of the Commissioner takes all of the force out of that argument. Also, why do you want a new taxpayer-funded full-time position? These arbitrators are on an as-needed basis and typically make $1,500-2k a pop. Much cheaper than hiring some quasi-judge to to it full time.

 

[Gaborn]

Please, man. You were talking about "loaded dice" and strongly implied that the arbitrator's are pro-teacher because they want to keep their gigs. Knowing that they have just as much incentive to rule in favor of the Commissioner takes all of the force out of that argument. Also, why do you want a new taxpayer-funded full-time position? These arbitrators are on an as-needed basis and typically make $1,500-2k a pop. Much cheaper than hiring some quasi-judge to to it full time.

They also have an enormous backlog of cases, as I'm sure you're aware. People shouldn't spend over a year waiting for a hearing on these issues. They need to be more independent which is why I'd ideally like to see them controlled by the state if not the city and the DOE together, but more than that they need MORE of them. I would also as I said increase their term length before they could be challenged for replacement because, obviously, that would tend to contribute to their independence. But the big problem is they need MORE of them.

 

[JGS]

I don't have a problem with him being blackballed for a comment nor do I have a problem wth him not teaching unsupervised around kids - proven or unproven considering the possible evidence. That's the costs of being a teacher of children that are under your care.

However, that's not the same thing as firing while at the same time what they do to these kinds of teachers is currently not the same thing as really working.

 

[Gaborn]

I don't have a problem with him being blackballed for a comment nor do I have a problem wth him not teaching unsupervised around kids - proven or unproven considering the possible evidence. That's the costs of being a teacher of children that are under your care.

However, that's not the same thing as firing while at the same time what they do to these kinds of teachers is currently not the same thing as really working.

If you at your job had sexually harassed a co-worker would you still have your job? again, someone posted an older story that included the detail that there were 6 incidents, 5 people didn't show up, 1 did though and he was found guilty on that charge.

 

[Karakand]

Klein’s explanation is that “most arbitrators are not inclined to dismiss a teacher, because they have to get approved again every year by the union, and the union keeps a scorecard.”

I agree, the primary employer of an arbitrator exercises corrupting influence over the arbitration process because the system is just as much about economics as it is justice.

Clearly the solution is to eliminate the legal legitimacy of the arbitration process.

 

[Gaborn]

I agree, the primary employer of an arbitrator exercises corrupting influence over the arbitration process because the system is just as much about economics as it is justice.

Clearly the solution is to eliminate the legal legitimacy of the arbitration process.

no, the solution is to give the arbitrators greater independence.

 

[Dude Abides]

They also have an enormous backlog of cases, as I'm sure you're aware. People shouldn't spend over a year waiting for a hearing on these issues. They need to be more independent which is why I'd ideally like to see them controlled by the state if not the city and the DOE together, but more than that they need MORE of them. I would also as I said increase their term length before they could be challenged for replacement because, obviously, that would tend to contribute to their independence. But the big problem is they need MORE of them.

No, these arbitrators aren't doing this constantly. It's scheduling. Maybe more of them would help. Indendence isn't an issue because the incentives are balanced for both sides.

Anyhoo, this guy's "conduct unbecoming" was from a hearing officer (a DOE employee), not an arbitrator.

If you at your job had sexually harassed a co-worker would you still have your job? again, someone posted an older story that included the detail that there were 6 incidents, 5 people didn't show up, 1 did though and he was found guilty on that charge.

"You must love me because you talk about me so much" wouldn't be sexual harassment.

 

[Bluth]

Damn he's one ugly dude. If I was a student I might throw up just looking at him.

 

[jstevenson]

ehhh...corruption is such an easy escape. the reality is that effective education itself is a moving, flowing target. effectiveness relies on a plethora of variables that go beyond simply controlling a classroom and lecturing. Prior academic experiences/learning, home situation and condition, quality of materials, size of classrooms, required curricula, subjects, etc. are ALL part of the puzzle as well. If a teacher's class is underperforming, is it because the teacher is bad, or because of some combination of the above?

If you take a teacher from a different school...say, a private school in the suburbs where the kids expect only A's and B's...and you put that same teacher in a failing school with struggling, under-qualified students, will that teacher get better results? How about visa-versa? Therein lies just a fragment of the complications that come with trying to accurately critique teacher quality and ability. And considering most K-12 schools don't have the resources to hire someone to observe (or review recordings) of teachers daily efforts, the ability to accurately assess teacher's is nigh impossible. and thus, the need for a strong Union.

One of my friends who was teacher used to tell me about all the kids in Detroit that would come into his 10th grade English class. He knew (and told them and their parents) in the first week that their kids could not pass his class. Some things can't be microwaved; education is one of them. If a kid comes into his class with a 6th grade reading level because they got passed along, the scores in his class will be low regardless of how good a teacher he is. Regardless of how much after-school time he volunteers. You can't make up years of a lack of good education in a couple of months...and while he should be encouraged to do his best and required to learn ways to engage those kids where they are, his job should not be threatened because he inherited bad situations. Without strong Unions, his career would be in jeopardy by deciding to use his Bachelor's and dual Masters skillset to teach in urban schools as he did. And if that's the case, how do you get a teacher to take on the job at all? So now you have only the worst teachers accepting urban jobs, creating even more problems.

There are no simple answers here because there are no simple problems here. While there are always going to be a couple of situations that go beyond reasonable help and protection, such is sometimes the nature of contracts. You don't want to see what happens to a school system that doesn't have reasonable protections for teachers...and anyone proposing "simple" solutions or suggesting this is a "simple" problem are either ignorant or stupid. Either way, they're dangerous. Yes, in some cases there is abuse of the system. That's neither exclusive to nor unique to teachers. But to suggest wholesale destruction of their support infrastructure is to suggest educational devastation in many school systems across the country not to dissimilar to a tactical nuclear warhead.

The support structure is so entrenched and so powerful, that you need a warhead to take out its grip.

That said, I concur with your statement in general. Besides reducing the power of the teacher's unions, I think more control needs to be returned to the local level, the DoE needs to go entirely. The parents and businesses in each school district need to have some modicrum of control, and the principals of the schools need to have much more power to fire and hire teachers.

I also think the government needs to change the way it funds schools. Certain areas / students (ie low-income / minority / at-risk / ESL ) need to be funded at higher levels than affluent white areas. Find ways to encourage schools to attract those students by doing well with the resources, and use less resources on the more affluent areas (where parents / businesses will likely help make up some of that difference, as they are more invested).

It's an systematic issue, and you're probably right, the teachers unions doesn't need a nuke dropped, the entire current structure of education in the United States does.

 

[Karakand]

no, the solution is to give the arbitrators greater independence.

So we should make them like a real court. I agree.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

This link doesn't work for me.



I don't think that really bears on the point of making assumptions on a persons' guilt or innocence based on the amount of money the other party is spending.

Jerry Sandusky is still technically innocent until proven guilty. Do you disagree with Penn State's decision to terminate their head coach for not breaking all ties with him after the first (or second) round of allegations surfaced? At a certain point when an employee becomes a complete liability to your institution's credibility, reputation, and ability to foster a healthy environment for kids, you should have some leverage to terminate their employment.

 

[Gaborn]

No, these arbitrators aren't doing this constantly. It's scheduling. Maybe more of them would help. Indendence isn't an issue because the incentives are balanced for both sides.

I don't know that that is true. The DOE doesn't "get" anything from winning or losing a case. Their job is to represent students, true, but their interest is fairness. The UFT has a vested interest in protecting their teachers with a maximum of zealotry. NYC has the system it does afterall because the teacher's union is so strong.

Anyhoo, this guy's "conduct unbecoming" was from a hearing officer (a DOE employee), not an arbitrator.

That is a good point.

"You must love me because you talk about me so much" wouldn't be sexual harassment.

By itself no, but he apparently said a variety of other things.

 

[JGS]

If you at your job had sexually harassed a co-worker would you still have your job? again, someone posted an older story that included the detail that there were 6 incidents, 5 people didn't show up, 1 did though and he was found guilty on that charge.

That's based on the current HR standards though. I agree that the teacher, unless they do this for all inappropriate conduct from a teacher, has enough on him to warrant firing IF that was a part of the guidelines.

As it stands, it's not. He's innocent per their guidelines. They just wisely realized that there was sufficient evidence to keep him away from children. That's the smartest thing this procedure acknowledges. That doesn't mean they shouldn't try to get rid of him by just making him work. He would not be doing this if his life weren't much easier now than it was 10 years ago. His workload should be at least what it was when he was suspended and being paid less.

Right now, they can't give him a performance evaluation at all because they don't require him to do anything.