Are teaching jobs in NJ safe from recession cuz NJEA (Trenton: crime, schools)

[NJ Chutzpah]

Are teaching jobs in NJ safe in this recession because of the NJEA, or not?

Anyone hear of teachers getting the ax

[JerseyG]

I would guess if a teacher has tenure they would be pretty safe under any circumstances?

Property taxes fund schools in NJ so I would "think" (not sure) that teaching jobs would be pretty safe - especially with the tens of billions of dollars supposedly being borrowed a la stimulus package and earmarked for education.

I don't believe the NJEA has much to do with anything other than holding the state of NJ taxpayers and politicians hostage in any economic environment.

[bababua]

Safe is a relative term. I am sure if you are doing a great job in a position that deal directly with the children you are relatively safe. A lot safer then say someone working in a bank. The trick is getting a teaching job.

[NJ Chutzpah]

okay, how do you get a teaching job, and how do you get tenure?

Just curious, I am not in the education field, and would never think of it

teaching in NJ is a white collar crime by the way, at least in some towns here

[hrjersey]

You will probably not see much in the way of teacher cut backs since education is always at the forefront but Tenure does not mean recession proof. Budgets still get voted on so the possibility exists. I work in a large Abbott District and last year the distract laid off all Social Workers who had been there less then 7 or 8 years (I forgot the cutoff). Unfortunately because of the contract, it didn't matter how good you were, everyone got axed.

Again, not bullet proof but I have to admit I feel very lucky to be a classroom teacher right now, not only because I love my job, because I HAVE a job.

[bababua]

Counselors are not directly responsible for teachers. Thats why you can get rid of them.

[elflord1973]

Originally Posted by hrjersey

Workers who had been there less then 7 or 8 years (I forgot the cutoff). Unfortunately because of the contract, it didn't matter how good you were, everyone got axed.

Everyone, or everyone who had been working less than 7-8 years ? It seems as though the system primarily rewards people for spending time at the job, regardless of performance.

[jerseyj]

Originally Posted by hrjersey

You will probably not see much in the way of teacher cut backs since education is always at the forefront but Tenure does not mean recession proof. Budgets still get voted on so the possibility exists. I work in a large Abbott District and last year the distract laid off all Social Workers who had been there less then 7 or 8 years (I forgot the cutoff). Unfortunately because of the contract, it didn't matter how good you were, everyone got axed.

Again, not bullet proof but I have to admit I feel very lucky to be a classroom teacher right now, not only because I love my job, because I HAVE a job.

hr- Axing Social Workers from an Abbott district makes no sense to me. The Abbott designation implies that there are fundamental problems with the district.
I know Social Workers in the Trenton district (Abbott), their case loads are large and the problems these kids have are complex and pervasive.
I am glad you love and have a job, but does this not mean that you will "inherit" the job that these Social Workers should be doing? Will this impede your ability to do the teaching job you were hired to do?

I guess my question is.....Why can't we designate Abbott money for the positions that should help ameliorate some of the problems that these Abbott district kids have?

[zhelder]

Teachers in NJ are granted tenure after three years and one day of employment in the same district. Teachers who are not tenured can be pretty much terminated for any reason. Tenured teachers must be dismissed for cause and after due process.

When budgets are tight, districts can engage in something called a "Reduction in Force" (RIF). Certain positions can be eliminated, such as social workers. Although from a legal standpoint school social workers are considered teachers, the problem is their certification will not allow them to go into the classroom (unless they have teaching certification as well), so it's easier for them to lose their jobs during a RIFing. Classroom teachers who are tenured must be allowed to be placed in a position covered under their certification based on seniority. What this means is teachers with less seniority could be bumped out of jobs, if more senior members of staff could assume their positions under their certifications.

Seniority does not apply to non-tenured teachers. Non-tenured teachers can be called back (or NOT called back) based on the whim of the district. Even if their positions open back up, the district can replace them with new teachers if they want.

My district attempted to RIF all non-tenured teachers, several custodians, and several security guards a couple of years ago, but at the last minute, they got the funding they wanted. Most people were called back.

[hrjersey]

Originally Posted by elflord1973

Everyone, or everyone who had been working less than 7-8 years ? It seems as though the system primarily rewards people for spending time at the job, regardless of performance.

Exactly! That's what tenure does. I won't say too much. I have 16 years in management so tenure is bewildering. I love what I do, it doesn't mean I agree with the system.

zhelder explained exactly how this can happen.

JerseyJ - I'm as dismayed as you. I can not explain why the district did what they did. And in a way we do have to try to handle student issues which a social worker is better able to do, but in reality it just means the kids are the ones that lose out.