Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm sure there's a lot of pressure on school principals to keep their schools safe in order to prevent not only cyberbullying (and the potential of violence and suicides), but also another Columbine or Sandy Hook Elementary incident from happening on their watches. Under this umbrella of public safety, principals absolutely have free reign to monitor what their students are doing on their own time. Just like the TSA going through your personal stuff to make sure the plane is safe, school principals are allowed to go online and access social media to make sure their schools are safe. Having evidence that something is happening at the school and not doing something about it could be construed as negligence by the principal.
Whether or not they should have that right is debatable, but the safety argument always seems to win in today's society. Ideally in addition to or instead of a suspension, the principals would communicate with the parents to ensure there is a learning experience for the child who has behaved inappropriately.
I would never accept a job like that, and further, it should be made illegal for any employer to do that (schools, too). That an employer can dare think it is any of their business what you do when you are not on the job is unfathomable to me. It defies all logic--I don't care what my boss does outside of work, all I care about it how good and appropriate of a boss he is AT work. Same goes for co-workers--if you're a party animal outside of work, that's your business, so long as you're a good co-worker at the job, that is the ONLY thing that matters. I don't care if you're the lead accountant and you visit the casinos every weekend or go to a nighclub and get plastered--so long as you are a straight-laced suit-wearing numbers-crunching person of integrity at WORK, that is what counts.
That's just common sense. If an employer doesn't have that, not only am I not going to work for him, the government should FORCE them to not busy-body themselves in an employee's personal life, if that's what it takes.
Common sense is also that employees still represent their companies when they are not on the job, and if they are behaving in ways that jeopardize the company, then the company is going to take action to stop it.
You should see some of the restrictions put on public school teachers. Not uncommon for districts to dictate conditions like what restaurants they are allowed to eat at for dinner (hint: it involves liquor licenses).
You should see some of the restrictions put on public school teachers. Not uncommon for districts to dictate conditions like what restaurants they are allowed to eat at for dinner (hint: it involves liquor licenses).
So your principal could tell you you can't eat at Red Lobster because they have a liquor license, or the principal could tell us we can't have our wedding reception at such and such place because they have a liquor license?
So your principal could tell you you can't eat at Red Lobster because they have a liquor license, or the principal could tell us we can't have our wedding reception at such and such place because they have a liquor license?
Oh, it gets worse than that. The school board can institute a contract requirement that requires you to be fired for entering an establishment with a liquor license, including Red Lobster or reception venues.
Shoot, they used to fire teachers just for getting married in the first place.
So your principal could tell you you can't eat at Red Lobster because they have a liquor license, or the principal could tell us we can't have our wedding reception at such and such place because they have a liquor license?
The language is embodied in the contract. And the answer is "Yes, he can".
In reality, a lot of that contract language has been taken out but there are still some areas that have it. One system in PA I interviewed for about 15 years ago still had it. I had student taught there and just for conversation sake I asked if it was still in the contract. It was. I think my question was one reason I wasn't offered the job (along with being incredibly expensive as a hire).
Private schools are notorious for having those contract terms.
I definitely believe you, but I have never heard of the liquor before and I have been employed in several different districts in several areas. Im giggling to myself right now, my daughter is getting married and if that clause was in her contract, we would be saving a ton of $$$$$$.Thanks for the info.
The language is embodied in the contract. And the answer is "Yes, he can".
In reality, a lot of that contract language has been taken out but there are still some areas that have it. One system in PA I interviewed for about 15 years ago still had it. I had student taught there and just for conversation sake I asked if it was still in the contract. It was. I think my question was one reason I wasn't offered the job (along with being incredibly expensive as a hire).
Private schools are notorious for having those contract terms.
We don't have anything in our contract but the union warned that teachers have been fired because a parent saw them drinking. We were told that if we wanted to go out and have a drink with dinner not to do it within a 25 mile radius of the city I teach in.
We don't have anything in our contract but the union warned that teachers have been fired because a parent saw them drinking. We were told that if we wanted to go out and have a drink with dinner not to do it within a 25 mile radius of the city I teach in.
That is part of what I was speaking of. Facebook posts shouldn't get a person fired, ESPECIALLY when that entails--oh my goodness!--a person actually took a vacation and did something other than go to a museum? And even worse--wow, they actually took PHOTOS of it and posted them for their friends to see? You mean they want to photograph their personal life and share it with others and actually not have that affect their job? Really? Oh the horrors! Why, we're supposed to NEVER EVER actually enjoy the offerings of the world on OUR OWN FREAKING TIME, because we're a teacher 24/7?
Phooey on that bunch of nonsense.
Do people REALLY think that teachers have to be all hush-hush about what they're doing for fear of upsetting the parents? How would they like it if teachers were privy to all THEY were doing 24/7 and judged them on it? I have kids in school & I don't think that way about my kids' teachers. I don't for a minute think my kids' teachers would be less fit to sing pre-K songs to my 4 year old just because she did something on vacation other than go to a museum. Her personal life, even if she posts it on social media, is none of my business for me to judge her fitness as a teacher over. I'd say the parents need to butt out of things that are none of their business.
People do things when they're not at work that have nothing to do with whether or not they can actually do the job. People used to understand this, what in the world changed to make people suddenly want to nag someone's employer over what someone does outside of work I don't know, but that thinking must be expunged from our society. Heck, I remember working a day job as a temporary in a school--yes, in a school--doing office work filing paperwork and by night DJ'ing in a topless bar. That was a long time ago & I am not proud of my night job, but never once did it even begin to enter my mind that my night job made me unfit to do my day job, and not once did it even occur to me that someone could possibly make an issue of it. Never once did it occur to me that I'd better be careful that someone from my day job didn't find out because they might fire me. That thought never entered my mind. The only possible way it could've been relevant would've been if my being up late at night doing my night job caused me to not get enough sleep and it caused my concentration levels to drop and I became sloppy in my work. THEN it would've been their business, and even then, only to the extent that I was up too late doing WHATEVER and not getting enough sleep. The NATURE of what I was doing would've been completely irrelevant.
Maybe, just MAYBE, if you are a high-level $3 million a year executive at a top firm like Microsoft or Ford Motor Company etc there may be SOME validity to the "you represent your company even off-hours," but that should be like 0.03% at most. I could see it in churches, too, and this is because the whole point of a church is to forward a particular moral way of living, and it follows that anyone who works there supports that thinking & is there to help promote it; how can you if you live like the devil? Being a Christian isn't something you are at church to keep your job, it's supposed to be a fundamental part of everything about you.
Otherwise, this whole nonsense of thinking teachers and office workers and Wal Mart clerks should have to watch their off-work habits because they supposedly represent their employer 24/7 is just mentally insane thinking. It's wrong, and you need to be told that you're wrong if you advocate that sort of 24/7 accountability, and rather than people accepting and conforming to it, they ought to revolt and throw a stink fit every time. I think the teacher in the 2nd article is doing that, and good for her. It's encouraging, too, that most of the comments I read suggest people understand. So maybe there's hope yet.
That is part of what I was speaking of. Facebook posts shouldn't get a person fired, ESPECIALLY when that entails they--oh my goodness!--actually took a vacation and did something other than go to a museum? And even worse--wow, they actually took PHOTOS of it and posted them for their friends to see? Oh the horrors!
People REALLY think that teachers have to be all hush-hush about what they're doing for fear of upsetting the parents? I'd say the parents need to butt out of things that are none of their business.
People do things when they're not at work that have nothing to do with whether or not they can actually do the job. I have sense about this. I have kids at school & that school is only 1/2 a mile from our house, but I don't expect my kid's teachers to not actually do enjoyable things on their free time, and I understand their free time is THEIR TIME. They are my child's teacher when school is in session, in the classroom. That's it. The minute the bell rings and they go home, that's THEIR time. As long as they do a good job teaching my kids, that's ALL that is any of my business. They have the right to live however they please, and without having to be all secretive and hush-hush about it too.
People that have a problem understanding that are morons, frankly.
Here's the thing:
Teachers are some of the most visible public employees there are. Probably 99.999999999999% of citizens have had multi-year interactions with them, from age 5 or so up to 18.
In many areas, if not all, public school costs are the largest piece of an individual's property tax bill.
Add in that there is a very close to the surface dislike for public employees and then go back to my first sentence about visibility and that's why firings and discipline for off work behavior occur.
In my system it's a firing offense if a student accesses a teacher's FaceBook page. We lost one teacher a couple years ago from my school because of that. She had some inappropriate material on it, a student saw, showed their parent, parent took a screen shot and marched up to the school. Teacher was gone at the end of the week. No questions, no Association help.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
