Superintendent fires every high school teacher - Central Falls, Rhode Island

[proud2BlibKansan]

Central Falls to fire every high school teacher

The Providence Journal / Glenn Osmundson

CENTRAL FALLS –– The teachers didn’t blink.

Under threat of losing their jobs if they didn’t go along with extra work for not a lot of extra pay, the Central Falls Teachers’ Union refused Friday morning to accept a reform plan for one of the worst-performing high schools in the state.

The superintendent didn’t blink either.

After learning of the union’s position, School Supt. Frances Gallo notified the state that she was switching to an alternative she was hoping to avoid: firing the entire staff at Central Falls High School. In total, about 100 teachers, administrators and assistants will lose their jobs.

Gallo blamed the union’s “callous disregard” for the situation, saying union leaders “knew full well what would happen” if they rejected the six conditions Gallo said were crucial to improving the school. The conditions are adding 25 minutes to the school day, providing tutoring on a rotating schedule before and after school, eating lunch with students once a week, submitting to more rigorous evaluations, attending weekly after-school planning sessions with other teachers and participating in two weeks of training in the summer.

The high school’s 74 teachers will receive letters during school vacation advising them to attend a Feb. 22 meeting where each will be handed a termination notice that takes effect for the 2010-’11 school year, Gallo said.

more . . . http://www.projo.com/education/content/central_falls_teachers.1_02-13-10_A8HEI7Q_v61.3a65218.html

Update: Students stand up for Central Falls school chief

PROVIDENCE, R.I. -- A student-run group called Young Voices rallied in front of the Rhode Island Department of Education at noontime on Wednesday to support Central Falls Supt. Frances Gallo, who plans on firing all of the city's high school teachers as part of a state-ordered reform initiative.

According to Karen Feldman, one of the co-directors of Young Voices, Central Falls youth said that teachers have been telling their students that they might lose their houses if they are fired. According to Young Voices, students have said that their teachers are using the classroom as a bully pulpit to express their outrage with Gallo's decision.

Young Voices, which includes students in most of the state's urban districts, held a press conference for several reasons: to support Gallo's efforts to reform the high school; to correct some misinformation about the teacher firings and to represent the concenrs of Central Falls' students.

more . . . http://newsblog.projo.com/2010/02/providence-youth-group-stands.html

[Catshrink]

1. If she gets away with this, it sets a precedent

and we're all "screwn." Districts will be able to unilaterally modify contracts. Arizona has a new provision that allows them to change salaries at any time. The only thing the new teachers' contracts will do is prevent us from quitting -- we can be fired or have our salaries changed even with a contract. So what's the point? We really are at-will employees now. But what would I expect from a RW legislature hellbent on privatizing education?

[proud2BlibKansan]

5. I can't imagine that she would get away with it

First thing that came to my mind was who will replace these teachers?

[noamnety]

8. That would be the least of their problems.

Rhode Island has one of the very best pay scales in the nation for teachers, and within that, central falls teachers seem to be above average in their pay scale. I suspect they'd have a lot of applicants.

[proud2BlibKansan]

11. Teach for America has probably already contacted this supt

[tonysam]

20. Teachers are a dime a dozen everywhere in the country

That's why administrators treat them like shit.

But what will happen when the supply of suckers dries up, and students decide to major in anything else but education?

[Catshrink]

25. We'll just have computers teach children

turn kids into borg.

[radical noodle]

134. With prison guards

to keep them in line.
:crazy:

[tonysam]

16. It reminds me of Reagan and the air traffic controllers.

There is NOBODY out there of an organizational bent standing up for teachers besides the lame unions.

[Catshrink]

26. Exactly...and that thought is what keeps teachers from striking.

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. 
[link:www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules.html|Click
here] to review the message board rules.

[frazzled]

2. Friday should be interesting

That's all I'm going to say. Because I don't want to get in the middle of a fight between teachers on the one hand and the students/administrators on the other. All I can say is, good luck to everyone involved.

[proud2BlibKansan]

13. I would be using up my sick leave

Let them go ahead and replace me now. Why wait till the end of the year?

[bobburgster]

3. What a nightmare for the teachers

I can't imagine being give all those new duties and additional work hours without any compensation at all. That's what negotiating is all about. Maybe part of this district's problem is it is not willing to pay properly for a good teaching staff.

By the way, I think it is totally inappropriate for teachers to involve their students in the school politics in any way.

[proud2BlibKansan]

4. I wonder who represents them

What union is this?

Pretty messed up.

[noamnety]

7. It's the Rhode Island Federation of Teachers

(and health professionals).

[Kittycat]

6. It's the one of the worst performing schools in the state, and they refused to reform.

I have no doubt there are a lot of circumstances involved with how they reached the level of failure they're at, but there I don't doubt the teachers are a component of that - whether by their shortcomings, or in need of more support solutions given the issues with the children they're tasked to work with. However, the mere fact that they're threatening and using their influence in the classroom reveals that. Further, I'm sure there are some teachers that supported the reforms, but their voice wasn't represented through their union - so they're out of luck, and that's too bad. But I don't see what's being asked of them as that much more. In the corporate world, we worked well in to evenings without any extra pay, the teachers were offered some added compensation.

Further, at the end of the day - we are talking about educating children. I won't disagree that teachers are underpaid for that enormous responsibility, but they knew going in that it wasn't a way to get rich (or in many cases, even make a decent living). If these teachers are unwilling or unable to help educate these children, whose needs aren't being met in the current or even traditional setting - then the school district needs to find teachers that are qualified to do so.

[proud2BlibKansan]

10. They were asked to work more hours for no additional pay

I don't blame them in the least. Teachers already work many additional hours at home grading papers and doing other work without pay.

I also want to know what the students were asked to do. What were their parents asked to do to help increase achievement. Why are teachers the only stakeholders being asked to give more?

[frazzled]

It doesn't say no additional pay ... and the students will have to stay for tutoring

It's hard for those of us who have never had a union job to understand fully what a contract means, since most of us have been asked to work evenings and weekends and at home for many years, and I'm not talking high-paying jobs. My daughter, for instance, works for a software company that laid off 1/3 of its staff last fall. She, fortunately, wasn't laid off, but she's doing the work of several people now. This weekend she was asked to spend the entire two days at the office finishing a project that was on deadline. She earns about what an entry-level teacher does, and works 52 weeks of the year (minus two weeks of vacation, which she's never been able to take). My husband is a teacher, though at the college level. He spends tons of time preparing lectures and grading papers at home (I'd say at least 25 hours per week) in addition to lecturing and attending committee meetings and advising students and organizing symposia. Then he gets up at 5 am each morning to write for several hours, to keep up his publications. It's almost eight o'clock right now, and he's at a hiring committee meeting that started at four (and probably won't be finished until 9 or 10 pm). And it's his birthday.

I'm not trying to to belittle the hard-won labor rights that teachers have won over the years, and I more than anyone respect teachers. But I've also been around schools enough and on the principal's building advisory committee to know how rigidly those hours and contract provisions can sometimes be adhered to. I had a first-grade teacher years ago who refused to cooperate with the district audiologist assigned to my daughter's case, because it was "too much trouble" to deal with a hearing-impaired child. It can be frustrating to those of us on the outside at times.

These are tough times, and lots of people are having to put in extra hours for no pay (there apparently was a small pay increase involved with the extra time here ... just not what they wanted). The students are being asked to stay for longer days and after school for tutoring. It's a shame the district can't hire tutors to do that. They have to do hours of homework at home, too. I'm sure parents are being asked to help, too. But this is a school where 96% of the children are at or below the poverty level. That must be a really hard place to work, and I'm sure the teachers are demoralized. And I'm sure the parents are probably not capable of helping their kids all that much even if they want to. And I'm sure the kids are really beaten down, too. That's why we need to try something to help schools like this. The kids in the second article linked above sound like they are really wanting to put in the extra effort needed, and are behind the new proposals. That means a lot to me.

Lastly, this is an EDUCATION forum, not a LABOR forum. Let's talk about ideas for helping struggling, impoverished schools if we have better ideas. And we can take the complaints about contracts and pay structure to the Labor Forum.

[Hannah Bell]

32. yes, it *did* say no additional pay, if you read the article. the only thing they promised to pay

for was a summer training.

[frazzled]

51. I read the article and don't see that there at all

and you responded to nothing in the post whatsoever, fixating instead solely on extra dollars. Your response only reinforced the idea that money is more important than trying to help this failing school. You mentioned nothing about education, which is the topic of this forum. If you are a teacher, and are not interested in education (as opposed to salary disputes), then maybe you're in the wrong profession.

I re-read the article, could find no mention that the only pay was for summer training only, and to double check searched it for the terms "summer," "training," and "pay." Still nothing. You'll have to provide the quote.

My statement, however, was accurate, from a related article from the same paper, which quotes James Parisi, a field representative of the Rhode Island Federation of Teachers and Allied Health Professionals:

Parisi said the union balked because the district wasn’t willing to pay teachers enough for the additional time and work.

http://www.projo.com/ri/centralfalls/content/central_falls_teachers_02-10-10_INHDDCD_v28.3b40f6e.html

I wrote a long post about how hard people are required to work, day in and day out, for NO EXTRA PAY. I wish they could get paid more when they have to work weekends and nights. I wish I could get paid more when a publisher is late in sending me a 200-page book proof they need corrected, scanned, and sent back to get to the printer, and I have to work 24-hours straight through the night (from 6am when I find it in my inbox to 6am the next morning) to turn it around for them so THEY won't incur an extra fee. Life is tough ... but most of us do these things because that's how life and work are.

[proud2BlibKansan]

53. "Union officials say they, too, want to improve the high school but are unwilling to sign off

on the six conditions, especially without receiving additional pay."

[noamnety]

114. Has the union identified a potential source for the additional pay they're demanding?

When we have budget shortfalls, the teacher's association usually pours over the budget to find where we can cut some money. Sometimes we can find it in contingency funds, sometimes we recognize it just isn't there.

If they are demanding extra money, they should have identified the source by now, or submitted a few proposals. (Maybe prioritize literacy over football and cut a sports team?)

[ihatecharters]

141. Education forum or labor forum

How can you separate the two? You can't. Expecting people to work without compensation is wrong from a labor standpoint AND it effects the quality of education.

[Reg 758488]

137. $200,000 superintendent?

How is it that the district is paying for a superintendent for
a district of one high school? Each school has a principal and
assistant principals, so why not tie together five districts?
That would probably save more than a million dollars to buy
teachers for the students. Oh, ya, let's save the CEOs and
fire the little guys. 

[noamnety]

9. There've been a few threads on this.

Most of the teachers there are step 10 - meaning they make a minimum of 70k a year, plus addons to their salary, few thousand here or there for extra longevity, advanced degrees, club advisors, etc. With the addons, the average salary overall for the entire teaching staff is 70-78k according to the superintendent - in a city where the median income is 22k.

[proud2BlibKansan]

12. So?

Good for them. Teachers should earn good salaries. I can't imagine anyone (especially a teacher) thinking that these teachers are overpaid. The cost of living is also pretty high in Rhode Island.

It also should be obvious that many factors besides teaching impact test scores. Yet the teachers are the only group being held accountable. That is wrong on many different levels.

[noamnety]

14. Oh, I totally agree there are many factors besides test scores impacting grades.

I was only responding to the supposition that the teachers must not be "willing to pay properly."

I didn't say that they are "overpaid." But I don't think they are underpaid. If the median income in their city is 22k, I'm guessing the cost of living in that city isn't extreme - even if RI (the state) has a high cost of living. The average value of a home in central falls is 55k (compared to 207k for the state).

Note: I don't know what the heck happened in that city - looking closer, house values in the state are worth 2/3 of what they were 2 years ago.
House values in Central Falls are worth about 1/5 of what they were 2 years ago.

[proud2BlibKansan]

15. They were asked to work more hours for no additional pay

I would refuse to do that myself.

This time next year when achievement has not improved, this supt (and the community) will see the mistake she made. Sadly for the kids and the teachers that will be too late.

[noamnety]

17. Eh, my entire staff did that one year.

Because of budget issues, the entire staff was laid off to part time (we each had one class cut, with corresponding pay).

The school board announced it just like that, with the list of classes that were cut. Done deal. No warning to us at all. The staff met the next day without administration, and decided we didn't have the ability to control the budget, but we did have the ability to control the students' educational experience. We had a vote amongst ourselves and unanimously decided to continue to teach a full load, each doing one class for free.

It wasn't anything requested of us. We had to demand permission to do it, because we needed to ensure they could still be for credit classes, not some informal "after school" clubs.

After we voted, we had the county school finance guy come in and meet with us. He actually broke down and cried during the meeting. I think he spends his days counting dollars and is sometimes removed from the more human elements.

I suspect we saved both the school and our jobs by making that sacrifice, but at the time we weren't thinking about that. I was thinking "I can't cut that class, that's the one John needs so he can graduate." For me, it wasn't a decision for the generic good of all students. It was all on the one kid who I knew was on the verge of dropping out, a kid who had been kicked out of a few teachers for threatening behavior and I was the only one willing to take him on for the extra hours each day. I was worried that cut would make the difference between him making it or not.

[proud2BlibKansan]

18. Good for you

No way would I ever do it.

Our kids deserve well paid teachers. I would wonder about the quality of teachers who think so little of themselves as professionals that they willingly go along with this. It's also a slam to those of us who DO stand up for fair compensation and demand to be treated as professionals.

[tonysam]

21. Kids need professional teachers, not these cheapo bimbos

who have "careers" of only two or three years and then tossed out like dirty Kleenex.

[FBaggins]

22. No way you would ever do it?

There's a whole lot of people out there who are happy to just have a job. They've been taking on more work and/or less pay and turnover is lower than it has been in decades - because few are comfortable that they know where they would go if they left the company they are at.

Yet you wouldn't make a sacrifice like what is asked here? Some of the ideas look like they may help... and there's no question that these kids need it. You're really comfortable saying that there's no way you would do it?

I have no idea what these teachers make or whether the cited cost-of-living statistics are true... but if they are, then these teachers are VERY well paid.

How many teachers do you know that make more than three times the median income for their county? How many make more in a year than the average home in their community costs?

[Catshrink]

27. Is that who you want teaching children? Someone not dedicated but happy to have a job?

If so, you're saying that teachers are just babysitters. Do my job for a week and see if your opinion changes.

[FBaggins]

28. I've taught for significantly longer than a week... thanks.

And no... I don't think of teachers as "babysitters" (though more than one teacher here may not realize how little impact they seem to think teachers have).

I'm just saying that "I wouldn't work any harder than I do now or for one penny less" is a tough position to sell in this economy. It's certainly not one that garners a great deal of sympathy from the people you want to pay your salary.

And "it's everyone's fault but mine" is also a tough sell when results are abysmal and you're the only one drawing a salary to specifically work on those results.

[noamnety]

29. Wow, I didn't read that in his post at all.

I had a completely different reading, that the teachers should be dedicated enough to their students to be willing to sacrifice to help their kids succeed - and that it looked to him like some of the proposed ideas might make a difference. And on top of that, I read that the teachers should be grateful that they are in such a fortunate position to have a job like that - one that's personally gratifying - and have compensation for it that a lot of people can only dream of getting.

I certainly didn't read anything there saying the teachers should have their priority on being happy they have a job rather than dedication to the kids. If anything, maybe there was an implication that these teachers could use a bit more of each of those attributes.

[Kittycat]

45. Well, I would argue that the teachers (as expressed through their Union) aren't dedicated.

If they're unwilling or incapable of doing what is reasonably necessary to help these kids, who are failing under their care - then I would say that they aren't qualified to be helping these kids to begin with. So then again, nothing wrong with the SI dumping them, and replacing them with people who are qualified to help bring these kids up to par.

[proud2BlibKansan]

52. So teachers should do more work for no pay to prove they are dedicated?

Okay. Who's next? Air traffic controllers?

Oops. Been there, done that.

[FBaggins]

61. Just about everybody else does.

Yes. Dedicated people who have a calling work harder when there is great need.

This includes virtually every teacher I've ever met. Ever heard of a "work to the rule" strike? Ever know of one where the administrarion says "there isn't any difference between what you do now and what we pay you for" ??

[proud2BlibKansan]

63. That doesn't make it right

Let's apply that to the health care issue. Since 50 million Americans have no health insurance, let's take it away from everyone else.

Doesn't work too well, does it?

[FBaggins]

66. "doesn't work well" because it isn't a parallel example

The parallel would be - ten people work in an office and there are no raises this year (while everyone is putting I extra time to handle the work of two who
were laid off)... But one of the ten wants a big raise (more than double-time for the extra workload). He insists that it isn't "fair"

Fair or not, he is less likely to have a job next month. And if he IS still there? It will be the other nine who cry "unfair!"

[proud2BlibKansan]

70. No. The union negotiates for ALL the teachers. Not just one.

Bad analogy.

[FBaggins]

76. Is this just one school or all of them? n/t

[proud2BlibKansan]

84. Doesn't matter

They have a contract and I feel certain it says teachers will be paid for working extra hours. Ours does and we are the same union. We have had schools where teachers have been asked to work extra hours to help raise test scores and they are paid, as our contract stipulates. Not all of our teachers but just the ones at the schools with an extended day.

[FBaggins]

89. All of that is correct... except...

Except that federal law (good or bad) pretty handily trumps a contract (as we've seen in any number of states that have unilaterally changed these things to get more federal dollars).

If this were just any school that had someone in the county/state that wanted to improve things, they would be forced to negotiate. Instead, this is a school that has truly awful results. Yes, that doesn't mean that the teachers are all lousy (or even many of them)... it's most certainly one of the more challenging environments, but it does mean that now they are faced with fewer options.

Of the four listed, only two were deemed possible (do you agree that the other two are out?). The unions was basically given the option of picking one... and they chose neither.

Frankly the whole thing sucks, but we have to agree that some schools are truly awful and should be closed... and some teachers shouldn't be teaching. ANY process (particularly, heaven help us, any FEDERAL process) is going to lack the "nuance" necessary to come up with satisfactory solutions in every case. We're stuck with two choices... and the union wanted to create a third.

[noamnety]

98. Sanjay Gupta

Dedicated people who have a calling work harder when there is great need.

Remember in Haiti when the doctors en masse left their tent/operating room, and Sanjay cared for the patients by himself all night? That's an extreme example, but he didn't walk away saying "it's not in my contract."

On the other extreme, I also remember a couple of EMS workers recently who were on a coffee break when Eutisha Rennix collapsed with a seizure (and later died). They didn't render aid. They were on a break that they were entitled to in their contract. Why should they help someone if they weren't getting paid for it? That would be capitulation, exploitation of the masses.

I guess people all need to decide for themselves how far toward one extreme or the other we want to land.

[Hannah Bell]

112. No one was telling sanjay if he didn't stay he'd be fired. Sanjay freely chose to stay.

I enjoy gardening & will spend 8 hours doing it. I even work in my elderly neighbor's yard.

However, I would not enjoy it were someone cracking the whip & telling me when, how, & in what manner I should do it.

You keep confusing volunteerism with a contracted job.

[FBaggins]

123. And nobody told these teachers that either.

We have to recognize that the school's measured performance (whether that's valid or not) put them in to a category where there were only four legal options on what to do (and whether that law is a good idea or not is also irrelevant).

Three of the four options involved firing everyone at the school who has anything to do with educating the kids (from the principal on down). The decision was to pick the one and only option where the teachers (and not the principal) COULD keep their jobs. I can't imagine how any rational person wouldn't feel releaved that this decision was made. Instead, the union said "we won't accept that option unless you pay us more".

That's very different from "do as I say or be fired". If there had been another HS in the area the decision could have been to just close the school. No option of working harder (with or without sufficient compensation). If they wanted to (and if one was available) they could have turned it in to a charter (still firing everyone). No union neotiation or consent involved. No contract saves them.

They picked the one and only option where all the teachers could have kept their jobs and the union said "that's not good enough".

[tonysam]

121. Not "dedicated," my ass.

If they weren't, they wouldn't put up with the shit that is flinged at them by politicians, parents, and principals.

Try it for a day and see how long you could stand it.

[Hannah Bell]

33. "a whole lot of people happy to have a job" - the rationalization for lowering wages & taking away

benefits since the dawn of the industrial revolution.

a reactionary, right-wing meme.

[FBaggins]

35. Nope... just reality.

Sorry.

It's an interesting social experiment. Some people will look at anyone with a label similar to their own ("teacher") and assume "they're just like me... anything that calls their value in to question is an attack on me personally" and they lash out. This is particularly true in a union setting. Not that unions are a bad thing in general, but they definitely foster this emotion.

That's not reality. Teachers aren't all the same. Some are fantastic and some are sub-par. Most are under compensated... a handful are not.

[Hannah Bell]

38. not "reality," sorry. a reactionary, right-wing meme. "There are thousands of unemployed, so how

do you get off fighting to keep your wages, benefits, job?"

reactionary, & in the service of the ruling class.

[FBaggins]

43. When did it become "KEEP" your wages/benefits/job?

This was a debate between one side that wanted them to do additional work (that many teachers do without compensation) with modest compensation... and the other side that wanted three times as much or more?

That's not really fighting to keep your job. That's asking for a raise.

[Hannah Bell]

57. Uncompensated added hours = pay reduction. There was no compensation offered

for an additional 3-5 hours/week. Yes, many teachers do uncompensated work. I'm sure these teachers do too. They were being asked to do MANDATED uncompensated work, according to someone else's schedule, on the school grounds. Had they accepted the MANDATORY uncompensated work, they would have still continued to do whatever uncompensated work they were already doing -- grading papers, planning lessons, buying supplies, etc. -- ON THEIR OWN TIME.

The only compensation offered was $30/hr for a two-week summer training -- in addition to the 3-5/wk during the school year.

$30/hr was *already* the amount specified in their contract for workshops & trainings. However, the addition of two weeks of training meant working more than the 185 already-contracted days, & per contract, extra duties outside the standard contract get compensated & are subject to negotiation.

[FBaggins]

62. There WAS compensation offered.

It just wasn't what the union insisted upon. Was it objectively "fair" ? I don't think so but there's a lot of that going around right now. Just as importantly, however, is the fact that there were two sides to the negotiation (such as it was) and the other side was even more unreasonable. $90/hr is ridiculous given a) the current environment and b) the current performance of the school.

[proud2BlibKansan]

64. According to the union there was no compensation offered

You need to read the article again.

[FBaggins]

65. "according to the union"

But in lobby-speak that's the same thing as "not enough was offered"

any mention from the union as to what they demanded in return? Of course not... Because they're treating it as a bargaining opportunity... When it isn't.

[proud2BlibKansan]

71. Employees are being asked to work without pay and they don't have the right

to negotiate??

That isn't a very progressive point of view.

And yes I believe the union. I'd take their word over administration after years of dealing with both.

[FBaggins]

78. Who said they didn't have a right to negotiate?

And yes I believe the union.

Actually... you believe part of what the union said. Another representative made clear that they were offered more... just not enough "more".

Sure they can negotiate. You just have more leverage when there's something you can point to that says you're worth it. Your default assumption is that of course every teacher is always worth more than he is paid. That's not realistic.

[proud2BlibKansan]

85. It's not realistic to expect pay for extra hours?

[FBaggins]

86. If you're an hourly employee, no.

If you're a professional, then yes.

Which do you prefer to think of yourself as?


The time to ask for extra pay is 2-3 years down the road when your extra work shows results. you take credit for the turnaround and ask for appropriate compensation. The question at this point should only be "can the plan work?" and if not "what other changes need to be made?"

[Hannah Bell]

94. "Professionals" are allowed to absent themselves from work in downtimes

as well as work longer hours during uptimes.

Teachers *aren't*.

[FBaggins]

119. Sure they are.

"Down times" are when there isn't work to be done (though I wonder how many professionals see that very often. I begin to suspect that the concept is fictional:) ). Teachers have this as well.

It's also not true that they can always "absent themselves" if that means what I assume it means (essentially a day off because there's nothing to do).

I've never known a professional position that means "some weeks we work more than 40 and some weeks we work less".

[Hannah Bell]

92. There was no compensation offered for anything but the two week added summer training.

It's not only the union who said so, it's the super who said so.

The only compensation offered was the *already contracted* payment of $30/hr for the training. $30 for trainings & other non-classroom add-ons is in the existing contract.

But since the training was two weeks long, & added *on top of* other trainings, etc., the result was to add two work weeks to the *already contracted* 185-day work year.

And the super was also asking for an additional 3-5 hours/week during the *school year* as well - with NO COMPENSATION.

In total, the super asked the teachers to work a MINIMUM of 170 MANDATORY additional hours, & take 2 weeks of summer break.

Thus the union's request for $90/hour for the summer training. To compensate for the other 100+ hours the super wanted, as well as the mandatory summer training.

[maryf]

136. So few people understand what "labor" means anymore...

How many people have died so folks can have a weekend off and a living wage...sadly many in the education field have forgotten too...Thanks for carrying the banner here!

[FBaggins]

139. Question for you Mary

Why does ANY amount of extra work (regardless of the need) mean that someone isn't getting a living wage?

It's been well discussed here that these teachers are by no means rich... but they're also well above a "living wage". And nothing in the plans that I've seen have anything to do with weekends.

[noamnety]

47. "in the service of the ruling class"

I viewed that differently. They are teachers - public servants.

They are "in the service" of the students and their families, who are making ends meet on a third of what the teachers make. That's not the ruling class.

[Hannah Bell]

58. It's the ruling class pushing school "reform."(i.e. deunionization & reduction of wages & benefits.)

Sorry you don't get it.

It's also the ruling class consigning those "just making ends meet" to that situation. Let the ruling class "sacrifice".

The state of RI funds about 45% of public education there, & the feds finance another chunk through title 1.

People "just barely making ends meet" aren't paying the freight on the other 40-50%, property owners are -- & if you look at who owns most of the property, you'll find most can afford it just fine.

The city has 18,000 people. It's only 1.2 miles squares & 78% of its housing stock is renter-occupied. About half the population is Latino. 64% speak a language other than english in their homes. Labor-force participation rate is slightly lower than the national average & average commute = 21 minutes.

It's a bedroom community of low-wage workers for the surrounding areas. It's upper-class absentee landlords who own the city.

Let them "sacrifice".

I repeat, a reactionary meme in service of the ruling class v. the working class.

[noamnety]

67. I imagine the teachers look a hell of a lot like the ruling class

from the perspective of the people struggling on poverty wages at a school where half the kids drop out, and half are struggling with ESL issues because they don't speak the language of the ruling class.

[Hannah Bell]

91. i imagine a 12-year-old's mother looks like the ruling class to him too.

what you fail to grasp is: THEY AREN'T.

Teachers' "high" wages aren't the cause of other people's low wages.

But gee, do you think the fact that 64% of the population of Central Falls speaks a language other than English at home could have anything to do with with the below-average test performance in the district?

[proud2BlibKansan]

55. No way

It doesn't have anything to do with how much the people in that county earn or the local unemployment rate. It's about being forced to work for no pay. No way would I do that.

[FBaggins]

69. Better than being forced to not work

and for no pay.

But maybe that's just me.



It's also not what is happening here. They're being asked for MORE work for inadequate additional pay. Given the fact that teachers all across the country do this as a matter of course and the fact that the school really REALLY needs significant sacrifice by all involved... I can't imagine trying to bargain for a raise that is even HIGHER than what they're paid for their existing work time.

[proud2BlibKansan]

72. So teachers should just roll over and agree to work for no pay??

And we wonder why they are beat up constantly.

Good grief.

[FBaggins]

73. You do realize...

...that if it appears that you can only debate a strawman, the assumption will be that you don't think you can win on the actual merits?

They aren't being asked to "work for no pay" - they aren't even being asked to work more for the same pay. They're being asked to work "more" for what they consider to be "not enough more" compensation. For them to claim it was "agree to work for no pay" goes beyond spin.

And yes... I think they should do it.

YOU likely do it all the time. Never had a kid who needed a few extra minutes before or after school? Never tutor a special kid who you thought needed it? Did you turn in a time card saying "I need $50 extra dollars this week" ?

I know I do... and most salaried professionals do. You claim teachers aren't treated as professionals and they should be? This IS how professionals operate. We aren't on the clock and we don't get overtime when something needs doing. It's the difference between salaried professionals and non-exempt hourly workers. Which do you want to be?

And we wonder why they are beat up constantly.

They were demanding $90/hr for their extra time... when their kids were failing and something needed to be done they were asking for a big raise. And we wonder why they can't get the sympathy teachers used to get? Good grief.

[Hannah Bell]

93. It's not spin. The only compensation offered was for the additional 2 weeks' summer training.

None was offered for the additional 3-5 hours/week they were asked to put in during the school year.

You have the facts wrong.

[Taitertots]

75. They are not being asked to work without pay

They are being asked to do their jobs correctly for the same pay as before.

When you stay after class to help a student do you submit a time card for extra pay? So you do already do work for no pay, like good teachers do. Why would you support teachers who are refusing extra help to the students who need it the most?

[Hannah Bell]

97. when you stay after class of your own free will, you don't ask for more pay. when you're required

to stay after class as part of your normal working day, you do.

volunteerism by choice = unpaid.
added *mandatory* hours outside the existing contract = paid.

get it?

[Taitertots]

103. When the school is among the worst in the state are they holding up their end of the contract

They are taking generous wages and the results are not there.

Having to stay after because the job wasn't done correctly = Unpaid

[Hannah Bell]

105. The school has 60% non-native english speakers & 30% poverty.

And apparently a high degree of transiency, since 75% of Central Falls = renters.

Which is not the fault of the teachers.

I think we should apply your "pay for performance" rule to our business class first.

But for the moment, there's nothing in the teachers' contract about their pay or hours being dependent on their students' achievement test performance.

[Taitertots]

107. They have just as much potential

Those children have just as much potential as any student anywhere else. I can't accept that we should accept lower student performance because they are impoverished. These generously compensated teachers need to be working harder or moving aside for people willing to work harder.

How many students need to be cheated out of a decent education before you think it violates the contact?

I'm filled with outrage at the bailout of the business class for causing the depression. It is financially hampering these schools paying more for teachers, and forcing so many children into poverty.

[Hannah Bell]

110. I totally agree they have as much potential as any other student. Completely, whole-heartedly,

without any reservations whatsoever. In fact, my belief in this is probably stronger than 90% of the population's.

What I disagree with you on is that this requires teachers to work cheap, or that requiring teachers to work added uncompensated hours is going to do *anything* to improve student performance, or that the super's actions have *anything* to do with "the children," or that reducing teachers' salaries will make the poor somehow "less poor".


The super firing the teachers makes $140K. Tell me when she reduces her own pay or increases her own mandatory hours -- in "solidarity" with the poor students in her school.

Tell me when she stops donating to private catholic schools, too.

[Taitertots]

135. If anything they deserve more

It is not asking them to "work cheap". They are well compensated and the results are not there.

I disagree: Tutoring students after school and increasing the school day will do something to improve student performance.

Teachers salaries are not being reduced. They are quite generous in their compensation for teachers.`

I would like to see the over paid administration forced to work more hours until the schools are returned to a reasonable state.

We need to come to the essential reality. This is a impoverished town and they may not have the excess money laying around to boast the pay for these teachers. The administration don't exactly have control of their funding. Getting generously paid teachers to stay after school to ensure the students get the education they deserve may be the most realistic option.

[noamnety]

24. There wasn't a single person in the community who reacted that way

by stating we must think so little of ourselves to be that dedicated to their kids.

Like I said, we couldn't control the budget - the money simply wasn't there. But we could control the impact it had on our kids.

If anything, we make that decision because we thought so highly of ourselves as professionals. We thought our time with the students was making a critical difference in their lives - critical enough that we were willing to commit to 5 unpaid instructional hours a week plus the planning and grading time required.

If we thought little of ourselves, we wouldn't have bothered. Nobody wants to work all those hours for free if they think it's won't even matter.

I also spent a few of my vacations taking students cross country to do relief work. Also unpaid. Probably because I have no self-worth. :)
For me, the worth is knowing my kids know I'm absolutely not in it for the money. And that's good for them to see. It gives me some credibility when I tell them they should put effort into an assignment because of what they get out of it - not just "for a grade." I want them to be the kind of people who grow up wanting to help others in their community - even if they don't get anything back except gratitude. This week one of the girls who did relief work with us a few years ago called me up out of the blue. She needs a place to stay for two weeks next month. I never had her in any of my classes but she knows if she needs something, she can ask.

When I was younger, I derived more of a sense of worth at times from my salary, but over the years and especially since hooking up with veterans for peace, my views changed. My role models now tend to be people who forgo some luxuries in order to give back to their communities. I especially like doctors without borders, I don't view them as a slam to doctors in hospitals who might demand a salary 5 times larger. I tend to think they help give the profession a good name.

[tavalon]

30. I see codependency runs as deep within teachers as it does in nurses

Unfortunately, the students in that situation learn more than just about the selflessness of the teachers (a good lesson, IMO), they also learn that in a capitalist society, it's okay to exploit the lowly worker and that it's better to pick a job where you can be the bully rather than the bullied (a not very good lesson, IMO)

[Hannah Bell]

34. thank you for that.

[noamnety]

39. We weren't bullied. The money simply wasn't there.

Revenues in Michigan are down. There's not a thing in the world the administration can do about that. Our two main costs are the building, and the teacher salaries. There's not much else to cut.

So our choices were: make X amount of money and screw the kids, or make the same X amount of money and put the kids first. Either way we were getting the same salary, why not continue to do what we were already doing to help the kids? Is that a capitalist lesson? Or a socialist one?

[tavalon]

42. I think the kids will see it as both

We are a capitalist system so that part can't be discounted. Sure, your student may be grateful that his class hasn't been canceled, but he is likely to see the undercurrent of capitulation inherent to the decision.

[noamnety]

46. The kids in Central Falls will see that

because that is what is being presented to them. The lesson there has become one of money. It didn't need to be that way. I would be embarrassed to be one of the richest and most educated people in my community trying to present myself as a victim to people who I know are supporting themselves on a third of what I make, and who have a 50% chance of never completing high school. I don't think the lessons in that are what you think they are.

As for the lesson at our school ... as an outsider I understand that you aren't part of that culture and didn't see it unfold. So I can only tell you as someone who was there, how it was.

And you will instead bring to it the lessons you know from other experiences - that public service for its own sake is about capitulation, or maybe about not respecting oneself.

My kids, though ... what they learned was a different set of lessons. When we went across country and stayed at the YMCA in buras, working for free during our vacation for anyone who wanted help, I know that they arrived at that YMCA and realized - if there was any doubt - that this was not going to be a typical spring break trip (the sort that really IS about capitalism and consumption):



That army tent behind the left column is where we stayed, students, me, my husband sharing the one tent sleeping in sleeping bags in single mattresses thrown directly on the concrete floor. They had no tv. No vending machines. No video games. They were helping me scrub pots and pans at 2am. At the end of the week, they didn't want to leave. If you can figure why a 16 year old would want to spend their spring break in that way, if you can understand it in a way that doesn't frame it as them feeling like they capitulated because they could have avoided the work altogether, you'll be a step closer to understanding the larger issues at play here.

[tavalon]

59. You explained this in a better way and yeah, I can see them getting

the better lesson out of it. I'm used to my supervisors treating me and my fellow nurses with little respect so I certainly brought that to the table.

[Hannah Bell]

95. your volunteer experience has nothing to do with the "larger issues in play" in this case/

volunteerism is a choice, not a mandate, & not enforced with the threat of firing & contract-breaking.

[Hannah Bell]

31. "most" is from the news article, & it's meaningless. it could mean anything from 51 to 99%.

& the superintendent who's chosen to fire all her teachers is about as as trustworthy as michelle rhee saying she got rid of teachers for sex crimes.

[FBaggins]

41. "Most" may be "meaningless"

Well... not really... it's still a majority...

...but the reported average salary (72k-78k) adds to that.

The union was reportedly demanding $90/hr for the extra work.

[Hannah Bell]

96. The "reported average salary" was "reported" by the super. Kind of like how Michell Rhee "reported"

she fired "lots" of teachers for pedophilia.

The union was *not* asking $90/hr for the "extra work". It asked $90/hr for the two-week summer training, as a bargaining position, in the hope of arriving at a figure which would also compensate for the extra 100+ hours being required during the school year WITHOUT COMPENSATION.

[FBaggins]

23. Update from a local news channel

"Students rally for reform at Central Falls High School"

http://www2.turnto10.com/jar/news/local/education/article/students_to_rally_for_central_falls_hs_shakeup/31624/

It's interesting to note that although these were students... none of them were students from the school in question.

The reporter also mentioned that four other schools were performing below whatever line for "intervention" they were using. So this could be a test case to see if they can break the union.

[Hannah Bell]

36. yep. "young voices" from their website looks like astroturf student group

pushing the current national "reform" package. They're active all over the state, not just in central falls.


Youth Advocating for Issues

Our young people are powerful advocates for youth issues. They testify at State House hearings, meet with high-level government officials, sit on a variety of prominent Boards and Commissions, and influence the creation of policies at the State and local level.

[FBaggins]

37. Astroturf?

I assume that means "artificial" ?

This is very possible... I think they showed the "founder" or the group and she was almost certainly not a student.

[Hannah Bell]

40. It's foundation-funded, & "young voices" was, with the broad foundation, involved in

rhode island's "race to the top" app.

[radical noodle]

88. What foundation funds them?

I'm interested to know what foundation funds the "young voices." I'm betting on a right-wing "charity."

[noamnety]

117. Here is the list of organizations they are partnered with:

City of Providence, Mayor’s Office
DARE
Merck Family Fund
New Urban Arts
Providence Afterschool Alliance
Providence Educational Excellence Coalition
PrSYM
Providence Public Schools
Providence Police Dept.
RI Afterschool Plus Alliance
RI Dept. of Health
RI Foundation
Rhode Island KIDS COUNT
Surdna Foundation
Trimix
United Way of RI
Youth In Action
Youth Pride, Inc.

[radical noodle]

133. Thanks!

There are ultra right-wing foundations funding the promotion of certain anti-teacher aspects of Race to the Top and I wonder if they might be involved in this.

[FBaggins]

44. Additional update from this evening.

Lines drawn over mass firing at Central Falls High

http://www.projo.com/education/content/central_falls_schools_02-18-10_L1HG807_v14.398864d.html

[noamnety]

48. From the article - the superintendent only had 4 options.

Those were federally mandated options because it was a failing school.

1. Close the school. Not an option, it's the only high school in the community.

2. Hand it over to a charter for management. Not an option - charters didn't want it. And let's be honest, people would be even more pissed if the superintendent had aggressively pursued that option.

3. The transformation model. That's what Gallo opted for - lengthening the school day by 25 minutes, taking a different approach to teacher evaluations, and doing additional teacher training. "Gallo said Wednesday night that each teacher would have made an additional $3,400 per year if they had agreed to the transformation model.

4. Firing the entire staff. Rehiring up to half of them back. Gallo didn't have another option when the transformation model was rejected.

Those are the only options the federal government allowed. If there isn't extra money in the budget to hire additional teachers, and I am guessing there wasn't because most schools are barely scraping by, what do people here think the principal should have done? Which one of those 4 models is the most acceptable, out of 4 shitty choices?

[FBaggins]

49. The debate isnt over whether she had other options...

It's whether option #3 can be implemented without compensation that the teachers agree is acceptable.

#4 makes for a tougher negotiating position.

[noamnety]

50. Fair enough.

If there's not enough extra money in the budget, though, to meet the union's demand - where does it come from?

[wcast]

54. Where are the statistics coming from

I've read every link. Nowhere do I see any information regarding the teacher's salary or the median income of the community. Maybe they are there and I'm missing it. But as one poster stated, this is an education forum, not labor, so let's look at the education component. Here are relevant statistics provided by the district that have not been addressed:

808 -- Number of students

74 -- Number of teachers

96% -- Students in poverty

47.7% -- Graduation rate

55% -- Proficient in reading

7% -- Proficient in math

96% of students in poverty!! Anyone who teaches in these situations knows how hard that is. What is the percentage of English as a second language students? I'll bet that is high also. Where do the majority of these students come from? Are they educated there k-12 or is it a more transient population? What shape are the buildings in, are the textbooks up to date, do all students have textbooks? These and many more questions need to be answered before judgment can be passed.

The problems with budgets, especially in poor areas, is that the majority of money raised is via property tax. An unfair system that continues to punish the poor while rewarding the rich. Disparity between rich and poor schools can be as much as $10,000 per student. Multiply that by 808. Many times schools like this have a hard time finding certified teachers, or there may be teachers teaching outside of there area of certification. And yes, money can be part of the answer.

I hear some of the same comments expressed on this post in my community. No matter what a teacher makes, it is too much. Why should I have health insurance? All teachers are rich. Well, how much is too much. Even if what is stated as their salaries is correct, $70,000 a year, how many people would volunteer to teach there when they could teach other places. If you did, how long would you last? Turnover rates in these types of high poverty schools are usually quite high. Teaching is a high stress occupation, regardless of our salary or benefits. Instead of begrudging me my salary and benefits, why aren't you asking why all Americans don't have health care coverage, or why do CEO's and white collar professionals make so much more that the guy on the line!!

If you want to be a teacher and teach in these schools, it's really simple, go to college for four years, pass the state test, be certified, and apply to work in one of these high poverty schools. They are all over the place, and are always looking for help.

[Hannah Bell]

56. 70,000 a year is the Step 10 salary. That's what they get if they stay in the district 10 years

or longer. It's the top of the salary scale. You can get up to 3,900 more for advanced degrees & 6000 if you get national certification.

First-year = $44K.

The long debate in GD was whether the superintendent's statement (highlighted in every article on the firings) that the teachers made an AVERAGE of $72-$78K was correct.

I don't believe it is.

Other posters here consider it gospel. After all, the superintendent who's firing the teachers said it was the case, so it MUST be true, right?

Of course.

Just like it MUST be true when Michelle Rhee said she fired lots of teachers for sex crimes.

[proud2BlibKansan]

60. No. High poverty schools are not always looking for help.

I am in a high poverty district. There is a hiring freeze which has been in place for over a year. And 300 teachers will be laid off at the end of this year.

[noamnety]

68. Here are the specifics straight from their actual contract:

2009-2010 step 10 pay is: 71,883

Here's the extra added on pay for education level (at the high school level it's a fairly safe bet that most will have at least a masters):

BA + 15 $ 800
BA + 30 $ 1,100
BA + 45 $1,450
BA + 60 $1,700
MA $2,800
MA +15 $3,050
MA +30 $3,250
MA +45 $3,450
CAGS $3,650
PH.D $3,900


There's another $6,000 for national certification (third highest compensation for that in the state, double what many districts give for that. I have no clue how many teachers there have that.)

Extra pay if your MA is in your field.

Extra pay for department chairs.

Up to $9,000 per year for coaching.

From $1600 to $2000 for being a club or class advisor.

And then longevity pay:

11 years of service $500
20 years of service $1,750
25 years of service $2,250
30 years of service $2,750
33 years of service $3,250

There was an article linked in another thread showing that their highest paid teacher was a gym teacher and coach, with the addons on top of the base salary, they were making over 95k (a few years ago).

Here's a link to the contract itself, that's where I pulled the numbers from. http://www.ntlongcber.com/cber/docs/_CF.htm

Next school year, their base pay for step 10, where most of the teachers are, jumps to $73,680. With a masters and 11 years of service which most would have, it comes to $76,980.

[Taitertots]

74. Rich teachers from failing school refuse to help students

Should be the headline.

If they numbers supplied by other posters are correct they are making over three times the mean income.

Fire them all and get some teachers who care more about the students than their already fat wallet.

[Catshrink]

77. Rich teachers

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Starry Messenger]

80. I know.

This whole thread I'm reading like this: o.O <----- my face

Let's sum up:

Teachers are not workers or labor, we are rich volunteers who are bleeding the coffers of red-blooded Americans with our effete laziness. We do so many things for free anyway that a little more won't hurt. Because nonunion corporate wage slaves volunteer THEIR time to fatten the coffers of a system that is set up to meet totally different goals than education we should feel lucky to have the privilege to do the same.

I'll go back to supervising the polishing of my yacht now. I think the help missed a spot. :crazy:

[FBaggins]

81. Make sure you pay him overtime for the additional work

It doesn't matter whether the original results are satisfactory or not.

[Starry Messenger]

82. Additional work should be compensated.

Otherwise that just leads to more and more demands for freebies. Are the principals, the supervisor etc. also making sacrifices or is it just the teachers? Low school ratings don't happen in a vacuum.

[FBaggins]

83. Really?

What other professionals work like that? If I hire someone to finish my basement and it rains on the second day ruining much of the materials... do I pay for them? The weather isn't HIS fault. I had a tankless water heater installed last year and it took them three times as long to finish as they expected when they gave me the estimate. I didn't have to pay extra.

This is the difference between professionals and hourly employees. Professionals are paid to do a particular job, not for how many hours it takes them to do it.

the principals, the supervisor etc. also making sacrifices or is it just the teachers?

The principal is fired either way. Some third party supposedly begins to assess teacher performance, so it's reasonable to assume that whoever supervises them now is making a "sacrifice".

Students are obviously spending more time at school (quite a bit more if being tutored) and (horrors) will have to eat lunch with over a dozen teachers every day. :)

Hopefully part of the plan involves greater parental involvement, but that may not provide much value if the community is as depressed as implied.

Low school ratings don't happen in a vacuum.

Of course not. There are an incredible number of factors involved (MOST that have little to do with teachers)... but they are the easiest target.

[Starry Messenger]

87. That makes no sense to me.

Those are contractors and subcontractors who work with a quote they provide to you (I'm assuming). That's a completely different process and system. This is a union negotiation. This is how they go. If the company store demands freebies (which are already given voluntarily by nearly all the teachers anyway) then it's going to be negotiated as a change to the contract.

http://www.projo.com/news/content/central_falls_update_02-11-10_5HHDMPV_v52.398afed.html


There are comments in the link there from teachers.

Just to clear up a misconception or two...the CFTU does not, and never has, opposed a longer school day, more hours for teacher meetings & tutoring, PD in the summer, nor eating with students (and believe me, our teachers do much more than simply eating lunch with their students on a daily basis...try clothing and feeding some of them or driving them to school!). We actually do all of that and more now. We simply want to negotiate these changes rather than have them dictated to us in a take-it-or-be-fired manner.
Less than a year and a half ago (Sept. 08) we ratified a new contract that was signed by the CFTU, Gallo, the CFSD Board of Trustees, AND the state Board of Regents, as well as Peter McWalters.
In the time since then, our HS has lifted its NECAP scores by 21 percentage points (reading) and 4% (math). We have a ways to go for sure, but with this kind of progress, do you REALLY think we should all be fired?
Let's be reasonable here!

[FBaggins]

116. Ok... I'll try again.

I tried to pick a simple example that related to a defined project. The same holds true for salaried professionals in other fields. You're paid to do a particular job... if the job requires more hours than you originally expected, you work more hours. If the project load increases 10% then you have to work that much harder, there isn't the automatic claim that your'e due more money. You can negotiate that later (as these teachers should).


This is a union negotiation.

Right. And a high percentage of unions represent hourly employees. There's no question that if you're asking an hourly employee for more hours... there are already rules for how they are paid.

This is how they go.

And that's the key. That IS how they go when there is a two-sided nehotiation. When both sides have something to offer (and some leverage). The teachers have no leverage in this case. In a normal negotiation they can't be fired, in this case they MUST (by law) be fired if the "start over" option is selected. They also lack the sympathy factor that teachers' unions usually enjoy (and deserve)... because they can't point to anything beneficial. The problems may not be entirely (or even primarily) their fault, but there isn't anything to take care of.

We have a ways to go for sure, but with this kind of progress, do you REALLY think we should all be fired?

No. I don't think you should be fired. I think you should accept the restructuring plan AND spend that 90 minutes per week actually coming up with MORE ways that can help these kids. THEN when things really turn around... THEN you ask for more money to compensate you for all of your efforts.

[Starry Messenger]

120. Well, that isn't how it works.

Sorry.

Besides, this was probably the desired outcome from the higher ups. They want to move in cheaper teachers. They would have found some other reason to make this move. If it hadn't been this arbitrary list of demands, they would have come up with something else.

[Hannah Bell]

100. it's reasonable to assume that whoever supervises them now is making a "sacrifice".

The super who fired them makes $140K + bennies. In addition, she has no *mandatory* hours.

I think, since she's only responsible for 7 schools & the students' families are poor, she should also take a pay cut.

[FBaggins]

115. "Whoever supervises them now" is the principal

And the principal is fired in either of these options.

[Hannah Bell]

99. The super who fired the teachers makes $140K + benefits.

I wonder if she's giving herself added mandatory hours?

[Starry Messenger]

104. Oh, good find.

Yeah, I somehow doubt that she is. I wonder what this whole thing is really about.

[Hannah Bell]

106. It's about this:

From the Providence Journal:

. . . . Under the proposal –– nestled in Governor Carcieri’s budget plan for the coming year –– charter schools would not be bound by prevailing wage, tenure and retirement-system clauses that govern other public schools.

A year ago, the legislature approved yet another new class of schools, known as mayoral academies, which unlike the state’s existing 11 charter schools did not require specific salary or tenure structures, or obligations that teachers contribute to the state retirement system.

The governor’s budget proposal, if approved by lawmakers, would extend that flexibility to all charter schools. (It would also add $2.8 million for existing schools and $1.5 million for new or expanding schools, including the first proposed mayoral academy, in Cumberland.)

“What I don’t understand,” Parisi said, “is how the governor could propose expanding charter schools when the public school districts are hurting as much as they are hurting.”

http://www.schoolsmatter.info/2009/04/rhode-island-reformers-out-to-axe.html


& the ruling-class assault on workers generally.

[Starry Messenger]

108. That's what I thought.

I just found this one too:

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/national/northeast/view/20100215ri_education_officials_to_push_charter_schools/srvc=home&position=recent

PROVIDENCE, R.I. — Rhode Island education officials are pushing an expansion of charter schools as a way to boost innovation and quality.

Education Commissioner Deborah Gist said her goal is to have excellent schools for all children, whether it’s a charter school or regular school.

Gist and other charter school supporters want to change a law that limits the number of state charter schools to 20 and says a maximum of 4 percent of the state’s students can attend them. That’s about 6,000 students.

And this:

http://newsblog.projo.com/2010/02/teach-for-america-comes-to-rho.html

U.S. Sen. Jack Reed, U.S. Rep. James R. Langevin, Gov. Carcieri and Education Commissioner Deborah A. Gist attended the press conference, held at the Rhode Island Foundation. The foundation was instrumental in raising $2.7 million locally to help support the Teach for America program and cover the salaries for four staff who will help and support the new teachers.

TFA teacher salaries are paid by the districts or schools where they work, and the recruits earn the same amount as other first-year teachers, about $35,000 a year.

They stick to the formula.

[Hannah Bell]

113. you can pretty much assume these days that *anything* to do with the public schools

is connected to union-busting, charters, vouchers, & private profits.

so it seems.

[FBaggins]

118. Close...

...but closer to say that Hannah Bell will SEE "charter schools" in almost any education thread. :)

I honestly don't mean that as offensive, but you appear to have charters on the brain. You know that old "to a man who has only a hammer, every problem looks like a nail." MANY of the threads I've seen that on it seems warranted... I don't think so in this case.

In this case, a charter school is one of the options the super is given under whatever law forces this decision. From all I've seen, she rejected it out of hand.

Vouchers and private profits don't seem to be related to this event... though I won't deny that they're a frequent issue.

Last is "union busting". As I've said here already... I think that's quite close (and fairly likely if the union can't come to a new position pretty quickly). I'd bet that a large number of teachers at that school don't find the plan to be nearly as offensive as the union negotiators tried to sell. Whether it's intended or not (I agree that it quite likely is), the end result could easily be strife within the union.

[FBaggins]

79. That's an exaggeration.

The teachers likely don't live in the neighborhoods they are serving. In some parts of the country, we subsidize housing for teachers/police/fire/etc because the county doesn't pay enough for people to live where they work (they're commuting in from cheaper cost-of-living areas).

This is the reverse scenario. They have to hire teachers from more expensive cost-of-living areas and convince them to work in a very tough situation. Most of them likely did not move to the area (and most locals are likely unqualified to teach).

It's reasonable to speculate that locals are less sympathetic to salary demands of people who earn far more than they do... compared to strikes I remember where many community residents were shocked to learn how little the people who educate our children were making. But it isn't reasonable to think of them as in any way "rich" compared to their actual cost of living. Their compensation is higher than I would have expected, but not more than I would like to see most teachers receive. It certainly isn't a "rich" level.

Fire them all and get some teachers who care more about the students than their already fat wallet.

I suspect that there are significant numbers of teachers at the school who would have been happy to accept the terms... but were forced to support a negotiating position that now puts their careers at risk. Maintaining that solidarity will be difficult.

[Hannah Bell]

101. The town of Central Falls is 1.2 miles square. 75% of its housing stock is renter-occupied,

& half its population is Latino. 65% of residents speak a language other than english in their homes.

I.e. Central Falls -- the town, at least -- has absentee owners. Who are its property tax payers. Who are probably substantially better off than the poor latinos they rent to.

Why should teachers take a pay cut for them? Why don't they cut their rents -- "in solidarity" with the poor people they rent to? Why don't they take a property tax hike?

Cause you know, where there are high numbers of poor + absentee landlords (esp near big cities) the owners are generally well-heeled slumlords.

Not to mention that the state of rhode island funds 45% of local school budgets, with title 1 funds contributing a significant federal amount in poor districts.

Again, cui bono?

The storyline some people are pushing -- the teachers are getting rich on the backs of the poor families in their district & should take a paycut -- is bullshit.

The ruling class is getting rich on the backs of all workers, & wants to get richer by eliminating middle-class public employees & their unions.

[FBaggins]

122. I was right there with you

for the first few sentences (it was largely my point in that reply)...

Then you got to "Why should teachers take a pay cut for them?"

Where does that come from? Ignoring the fact that nothing discussed here can be called a "pay cut"... who says it's "for them" ??? They're forced to work more or lose their jobs because the end RESULTS of their jobs (which isn't the same thing as "their fault") has been defined as unacceptable (different conversation whether THAT makes sense).

There's a defined issue here - sub par performance. It isn't an issue of teacher pay... the union is just trying to USE it as a way to enhance compensation. Saying "I want a raise and regardless of what you say I can think of places you should get it from" isn't productive. The choice is between working harder and longer and maybe saving this sinking ship... or being replaced by someone who will (or more likely, will try and fail). They want a third option of "I work harder and longer and you pay be MUCH more for it"

There was no door number three.

The storyline some people are pushing -- the teachers are getting rich on the backs of the poor families in their district & should take a pay cut -- is bullshit.

This is true (did you not what I was replying to? I was saying the same thing)... but it's a whole lot easier sell to the people they are serving. I don't think that 70-80k is in any way "rich"... but people making a third of that do... and it's their kids at the school.

[Reg 758488]

138. dumbdumbdumb to believe that

Rich teachers? You gotta be kidding! You must be talking about
the average teacher's salary that was printed in the original
article. If you believe that I have beach front property in
Colorado you may be interested in. Check the biography of the
guy who wrote that article.  I wouldn't trust him for nuthin'.

[FBaggins]

140. So... are you saying that

the salary posted in "the original article" (don't know the source or the amount) IS "rich" in your opinion?

Can you tell us what that amount way and how much you think they do make?

[noamnety]

90. As several posters noted, being "rich" is relative.

I ran some numbers through the global rich list.

[Hannah Bell]

102. Ok, please cut your pay in solidarity with latin american peasants. i'm sure they'll see the bene-

fits immediately.

74% of central falls' housing stock is renter-occupied. The US average is around 35%.

How about if the slumlords drop their rents in solidarity with their poor tenants? How about if they increase their prop taxes?

How about if the superintendent takes a cut in her $140K + benefits? Or how about she adds some mandatory hours to her own schedule, eh?

Because if she's the super of this district with poor performance. she needs to do much more too, eh?

[noamnety]

109. I doubt the superintendent has any control over landlords in her city.

She does have control over how the schools are run.

You and I already agree in another thread that we think superintendent's salaries tend to run too high. I would agree she needs to take a cut as well.

Generally when people with privilege are in a position where they can do with less in order to help those who need help the most, I think that's the moral thing to do. I assume these teachers could scrape by on their salary plus the extra thousands they were offered in additional pay, since they were already getting by on their original salaries.

I mentioned in this thread that our teachers took the pay cut the one year, and all voted to teach the one class for free. What I didn't mention - the superintendent at the time looked at his pay - he had enough years in with another district to draw retirement pay. He decided he could get by on that, and worked for free for the year. Our principal took a pay cut with us (same percentage) but still worked full time.

That's what makes a community, people pulling together and making sacrifices to do what's best for everyone else, instead of only looking out for their own self-interests. If we want to raise our students to have those ethics, if we think that's part of being a good citizen, how do we best instill that in them? Through a civics course? Or by modeling that behavior?

[Hannah Bell]

111. If she cut her salary in half, that would fund another teacher. Why doesn't she do it?

Doesn't she CARE??????

In a "community," one member doesn't enforce her will by fiat, nor by firing the rest of the "community".

I would sign on to your "do what's best for everyone else" if indeed there were mutuality in this "community," -- but it's not the case. The "community" is larger than the teachers & their students.

The winners, in this case, are the money men - though they're invisible to you, apparently. The losers are the teachers & their students both.

[noamnety]

125. I assume she doesn't cut her pay because of greed.

Isn't that how most of the world works? If they can live in luxury with less - they won't. If they can live in luxury for the same pay - but want a raise ... well, you know. As for money men, there are money men always behind every issue of poverty. If you thought I didn't understand that, you were mistaken.

When I am faced with a personal decision, I try not to let resentment toward those people alter my own sense of right and wrong.

We disagree on whether the teachers had to become losers or whether they are being oppressed. I'm looking at salaries of the families in town, and it's clear they are in the group that qualifies as "the poor get poorer." And I look at the current teacher salaries, what their salary increases are from one year to the next. If they are already making over 70k because they are at step 10, their annual raise is almost 2k. If they are below step 10, their salary increase next year would range from $2800 to $9500. I put people making that kind of money and up into the category of "the rich get richer."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2114619

[wcast]

124. As I read through this thread I realized this is all about money

Post after post talking about how much teachers are paid. How it's too much. How teachers should be altruistic and work for free, that they are public servants. Even some that seem to say it's unions that are the problem. However, i posted earlier about specifics in the educational setting in that school system. Why aren't we discussing that?! I live in PA. There are many high poverty schools here, many of which have been taken over by the state with little change. The problem is always the same. No one wants to spend the money to make them successful. We already know what works. Small classrooms, certified teachers, up to date textbooks and technology, a community and a parental support system that are behind the school.

Philadelphia has between 30 to 40% of it's staff that are either uncertified or working outside of their area of certification. Believe me, finding a teaching job in PA in Philly, Pittsburgh, Duquesne, Wilkinsburg, is not that difficult. Buildings are crumbling, their funding disparity is over $10,000 per student based on my small school. Compare to wealthy suburbs outside of Pittsburgh or Philly and it grows to over $15,000 or more.

So back to the issue at hand. It's not about how much the teacher's are paid, it should be about why the students are failing. If these same teachers were working in a suburban school, would anyone question what their salary is? Of course not!! Teachers working in suburbs outside of Philly and Pittsburgh regularly top out over $100,000. I never hear their community upset. Why is that?! It's because these districts are rich and they want the best for their students. But teach in a poor district, and you should work for free.

Want to change things, change how schools are funded. Property taxes are set to favor the rich. The funding disparity exists solely for that reason. No one wants to change it as the rich want their money going to their district and their kids, not somewhere else. When republican Mike Fisher ran against Ed Rendell, one of his campaign commercials were about "do you want to send your tax money to Philadelphia schools?" There was another woman running for office talking about Section 8 housing. But no one really wants to change things, huh? Just another excuse to scream about those rich teachers.

[tonysam]

126. +1,000

And I think there is some misplaced jealousy towards teachers because they are public employees. However, if people only knew just how bad the occupation is, especially due to workplace harassment and corruption by administrators, who have all the power while the teacher has none, they'd be thankful they are not in this field.

If I had to do it over again, I would have NEVER gotten a teaching degree knowing how absolutely rotten public school districts can be. The rottenness isn't the students or the parents--it's with the administrators who can make or break your career.

It's pretty tough to be 55 years old and with no career possibilities after my career was stolen from me.

[noamnety]

127. I think the reason the thread is focused on money

is that the teachers are leaving/being fired because of money. They made it about the money.

If the teachers had instead said "we won't do these things because we don't believe they will be effective" we'd be having a different discussion right now. But the article didn't go into details about what the extra training was for, and I am guessing that was integral to new programs they wanted to implement. And the union didn't make that the issue.

I do have other threads I initiated about property taxes as school funding contributing to cycles of inequitable education. And on a related note, this recent thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7734519

Generally the response on DU is similar to Rendell's position: the rich should be able to augment the budgets of their own schools if they want, and because they do that, they should be allowed to exclude poor students from those schools. The DU consensus appears to be that impoverished students should be held prisoner in shitty underfunded schools; if you let them leave it isn't fair to the other impoverished students left behind in those schools. I've hit a wall of frustration in trying to sway anyone's opinion on that - even people who opted to send their own kids to private schools when the public schools failed them, or picked their residency based on being in a good school district, believe that poor people should be stuck in the shitty schools. It's kind of like how antichoicers think abortion should be illegal and inaccessible for others (but if they need one that's for exceptional reasons and totally different).

[Hannah Bell]

128. no one believes poor students should be stuck in shitty schools. no one.

that's a bunch of bullshit.

[noamnety]

129. Well, let me rephrase that.

If the only school in their neighborhood happens to be a shitty one and there is no actual plan to change that, they believe the poor people should be stuck in the shitty schools if the only other option is to let them go to better schools that actually exist.*

*The poor people should embrace that because in our hearts we oppose poverty and think the problems in their schools and neighborhoods should hypothetically be fixed, and we have a lot of theories about how that could change, and it's not our fault none of those theories will actually be enacted into law. Anyway, while we work to resolve poverty in inner cities for a few more generations, they should be stuck in the shitty schools. It's not fair to them, but it's better than the alternative - letting them into the good schools if their parents can't afford to move there.

[Hannah Bell]

130. that's a bunch of bullshit too.

[noamnety]

131. No, I'm serious.

There are a lot of people on DU that look at these two choices:

1. Force inner city kids in a bad school to stay in their bad school
2. Allow inner city kids in a bad school to attend a better school in a nearby suburb

and prefer option 1. Some describe option 2 as unjust.

[mzteris]

132. i'll pick door #3, Monty...

Provide a better school for the inner city kids IN the inner city.