dmarc117 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090622/ap_on_...us_rubber_rooms NEW YORK – Hundreds of New York City public school teachers accused of offenses ranging from insubordination to sexual misconduct are being paid their full salaries to sit around all day playing Scrabble, surfing the Internet or just staring at the wall, if that's what they want to do. Because their union contract makes it extremely difficult to fire them, the teachers have been banished by the school system to its "rubber rooms" — off-campus office space where they wait months, even years, for their disciplinary hearings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 (edited) http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090622/ap_on_...us_rubber_rooms Read something about this the other day only I think it was in LA. Some guy who has been accused of sexual harassment / molestation numerous times is still picking up his full salary almost a decade after he was "fired". There are hundreds of these. Edited June 23, 2009 by Ursa Majoris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skippy Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 There are some problems to a Union but one thing that strikes me is the word accused. Accused should not ever make anyone lose a job. I work within a school district and plenty of people have been accused. I know for sure of at least two times that the accused was cleared by all sorts of evidence up to and including the accuser admitting that they were mad at a teacher or coach so they made up a story. I was pretty close to one of the situations and there is no fixing the problem once your name is called. The gym teacher that I am talking about was 100% cleared but has since left the district because it took months to clear her and people just never treated her the same way afterward. When accused you are a front page report. When cleared of any and all wrong doing you are mixed in a paragraph that is often way to overlooked. Now please don't take this as me sticking up for anyone that did anything wrong. If there is evidence to say so then they should be sheet canned in record speed. That is the way it works in my school district and we are a very strong union. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 There are some problems to a Union but one thing that strikes me is the word accused. Accused should not ever make anyone lose a job. I work within a school district and plenty of people have been accused. I know for sure of at least two times that the accused was cleared by all sorts of evidence up to and including the accuser admitting that they were mad at a teacher or coach so they made up a story. I was pretty close to one of the situations and there is no fixing the problem once your name is called. The gym teacher that I am talking about was 100% cleared but has since left the district because it took months to clear her and people just never treated her the same way afterward. When accused you are a front page report. When cleared of any and all wrong doing you are mixed in a paragraph that is often way to overlooked. Now please don't take this as me sticking up for anyone that did anything wrong. If there is evidence to say so then they should be sheet canned in record speed. That is the way it works in my school district and we are a very strong union. Everyone knows I can't stand the damned unions, but Skippy makes a good point. My wife is a teacher, and she has told me several stories of teachers being falsely accused. She also notes that if you are a female of a particular color you can pretty much do anything but molest a kid and keep your job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted June 23, 2009 Author Share Posted June 23, 2009 Everyone knows I can't stand the damned unions, but Skippy makes a good point. My wife is a teacher, and she has told me several stories of teachers being falsely accused. She also notes that if you are a female of a particular color you can pretty much do anything but molest a kid and keep your job. hear the both of you......arent cops usually put on unpaid admin leave if they are accused of wrongdoing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 (edited) Everyone knows I can't stand the damned unions, but Skippy makes a good point. My wife is a teacher, and she has told me several stories of teachers being falsely accused. She also notes that if you are a female of a particular color you can pretty much do anything but molest a kid and keep your job. In many areas public schools have become a public works program first, and an institution of learning second. While I'd rather have unions (in general) than not, they have become part of what is wrong with public eduction, at least here in California. A teacher's seniority shouldn't matter more than the quality of education provided to students. Somehow, somewhere, we got off track. That said, I've opted to send my kids to public school when they start kindergarten. My wife and I, and our parents before us, are all products of California public schools and we turned out fine. However, we did opt for a non-union charter school. As far as I'm concerned the unionized district schools are a second tier system for families that are too poor, ignorant, or unmotivated to realize that the quality of eduction being provided is substandard. Edited June 23, 2009 by yo mama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowboutthemCowboys Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 Everyone knows I can't stand the damned unions, but Skippy makes a good point. My wife is a teacher, and she has told me several stories of teachers being falsely accused. She also notes that if you are a female of a particular color you can pretty much do anything but molest a kid and keep your job. green? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 hear the both of you......arent cops usually put on unpaid admin leave if they are accused of wrongdoing? yeah, it seems like it would be a lot more efficient to put them on unpaid leave pending a hearing, and then reinstated with back wages if they are vidicated. then the district has incentive to be careful about who they suspend, and scumbag teachers don't get rewarded with a months-long paid vacation for their shenanigans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 (edited) yeah, it seems like it would be a lot more efficient to put them on unpaid leave pending a hearing, and then reinstated with back wages if they are vidicated. then the district has incentive to be careful about who they suspend, and scumbag teachers don't get rewarded with a months-long paid vacation for their shenanigans. That actually sounds like a very good idea. Edited June 23, 2009 by yo mama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 In many areas public schools have become a public works program first, and an institution of learning second. While I'd rather have unions (in general) than not, they have become part of what is wrong with public eduction, at least here in California. A teacher's seniority shouldn't matter more than the quality of education provided to students. Somehow, somewhere, we got off track. That said, I've opted to send my kids to public school when they start kindergarten. My wife and I, and our parents before us, are all products of California public schools and we turned out fine. However, we did opt for a non-union charter school. As far as I'm concerned the unionized district schools are a second tier system for families that are too poor, ignorant, or unmotivated to realize that the quality of eduction being provided is substandard. Nobody in my family has gone to a private school unless you start counting college. My wife is a school teacher. My mother was a school teacher though she quit when she had me. My kid go to public schools for now. They will definitely stay in public schools through middle school. I have been toying around with the idea of sending them to private school when they reach high school, but I haven't made up my mind on that one yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 yeah, it seems like it would be a lot more efficient to put them on unpaid leave pending a hearing, and then reinstated with back wages if they are vidicated. then the district has incentive to be careful about who they suspend, and scumbag teachers don't get rewarded with a months-long paid vacation for their shenanigans. That makes a lot of sense, though I'd like to add that the parent of any student bringing false charges against a teacher should have to pay the cost associated with the substitute teacher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 Nobody in my family has gone to a private school unless you start counting college. My wife is a school teacher. My mother was a school teacher though she quit when she had me. My kid go to public schools for now. They will definitely stay in public schools through middle school. I have been toying around with the idea of sending them to private school when they reach high school, but I haven't made up my mind on that one yet. That's exactly how I feel. I don't seen the point in gold-plating the elementary school experience and inadvertently creating an expectation of affluence by segregating my children away from the "poor" kids. However, I have seen the difference a good college prep high school experience makes in the "college readiness" of student. So we might pony up for private high school. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 the parent of any student bringing false charges against a teacher should have to pay the cost associated with the substitute teacher. So if two law-abiding parents happen to have a child with some serious mental problems/issues....and this child makes false accusations about a teacher's conduct...the parents should be forced to incur the financial burden of their child's wrongful accusations? And if it does indeed take several years for due process to run its course (as it apparently does in NY), then the parent's should be forced to pay the cost of several years worth of substitute teacher's salary/benefits? Doesn't seem right, or fair. How about stiffer penalties for the child, and mandatory counseling for the child? perhaps garnish their future wages? Or perhaps force them to work in some volunteer capacity to make the schools a better place? I think if the penalties were spelled out, and students knew beforehand the true ramifications of their actions, they'd be more likely to the think twice before wrongly accusing a teacher of something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 That's exactly how I feel. I don't seen the point in gold-plating the elementary school experience and inadvertently creating an expectation of affluence by segregating my children away from the "poor" kids. However, I have seen the difference a good college prep high school experience makes in the "college readiness" of student. So we might pony up for private high school. Well we have slightly different reasons. I'm not all that worried about which high school my kids go to for college admissions. As I said, my wife is a teacher at a local high school. Last fall she volunteered to chaperon a dance, and volunteered me as well. Well, let's just say it was an eye opener. On the one hand they only played about 5 songs the whole night that you could do a proper slow dance too. The majority of the music was hip-hop. You had about 90% of the kids in a huge group "dancing" and about 10% standing around talking. I noticed one girl go and get a chair and take it into the mob on the middle of the dance floor. I immediately go into the mob, fearing she was about to go WWF on someone. Boy was I shocked. The chair wasn't for hitting another student. It was for another student to sit in while she gave him a lap dance. She looked at me like I was crazy when I told her to stop. After the dance, they found two used condoms and a bloody tampon on the floor. That would be the reason I'm considering sending my kids to private school for high school. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 So if two law-abiding parents happen to have a child with some serious mental problems/issues....and this child makes false accusations about a teacher's conduct...the parents should be forced to incur the financial burden of their child's wrongful accusations? And if it does indeed take several years for due process to run its course (as it apparently does in NY), then the parent's should be forced to pay the cost of several years worth of substitute teacher's salary/benefits? Doesn't seem right, or fair. How about stiffer penalties for the child, and mandatory counseling for the child? perhaps garnish their future wages? Or perhaps force them to work in some volunteer capacity to make the schools a better place? I think if the penalties were spelled out, and students knew beforehand the true ramifications of their actions, they'd be more likely to the think twice before wrongly accusing a teacher of something. So it's not right for the kids parents to pay for the substitute, but it's OK for you and me, and everyone else to pay for it? Talk about not right. I'd actually agree with your penalties for the kids if I thought they would ever be enforced. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 (edited) That would be the reason I'm considering sending my kids to private school for high school. Don't delude yourself, Perch. The main difference between public school and private school in that regard is the quality of the drugs and the hood ornaments of the cars the kids have sex in the back seat of. Edited June 23, 2009 by yo mama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Country Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 What about the majority of "He said/she said" situations that I would think many of these cases are? Where it is possible something happened, but no way to prove it. In a sense, punishing students and their parents as Perch suggests would keep many legitimate victims from coming forward for fear they could not prove the accusations. So, would you compromise and say in cases that were "inconclusive", the parents would not be on the hook? Guess I just see a lot of issues with charging parents for the childs accusations, though I am behind the principle of it and the intent to reduce the number of false accusations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 hear the both of you......arent cops usually put on unpaid admin leave if they are accused of wrongdoing? I thought it was paid admin leave? Surely must be paid. That's SOP after any shooting involving a cop around here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 I thought it was paid admin leave? Surely must be paid. That's SOP after any shooting involving a cop around here. I dunno. for most PD's, it's paid leave any time they shoot someone. I guess the thought being, the cop needs time to decompress, and the department needs time to investigate the circumstances. if they are sent home because of misconduct though, I believe it's usually unpaid leave, pending a hearing or whatever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 Why not hire more arbitrators? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cunning Runt Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 ... it seems like it would be a lot more efficient to put them on unpaid leave pending a hearing, and then reinstated with back wages if they are vidicated... I dunno. People have bills. They have to eat. This seems to follow the "guilty until proven innocent" line of thought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skippy Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 yeah, it seems like it would be a lot more efficient to put them on unpaid leave pending a hearing, and then reinstated with back wages if they are vidicated. then the district has incentive to be careful about who they suspend, and scumbag teachers don't get rewarded with a months-long paid vacation for their shenanigans. There just is not an easy answer here. If the person did nothing wrong then why should they have to suffer with no pay while the district, court system does their job? I can tell you that around here if there is no doubt in the districts mind that you are guilty, you will be terminated quickly. You will lose all sorts of matching contributions to your pension as well. When they suspend you with pay they are just making sure they get all the facts. For the most part someone that is accused is moved into some sort of admin job temporarily so that they can still earn their pay without the district just giving out free money. If you don't get moved to that temporary job away from children, then you are pretty much looking like you are fooked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocknrobn26 Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 I dunno. People have bills. They have to eat. This seems to follow the "guilty until proven innocent" line of thought. There just is not an easy answer here. If the person did nothing wrong then why should they have to suffer with no pay while the district, court system does their job? Both good points. As I recall, if the person is let's say caught in the act, the burden of proof switches to the offender. It would be unconscionable to freeze someone's income based solely on an accusation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
borge007 Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 Both good points. As I recall, if the person is let's say caught in the act, the burden of proof switches to the offender. It would be unconscionable to freeze someone's income based solely on an accusation. +1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 +1 +2. Unpaid leave would bankrupt most people quickly. The issue in this thread isn't the paid leave so much as the years and years of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.