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.
It still doesn't tell me what makes this a special situation that teachers have to endure that other types of employees don't. Similar situations can happen in any industry. Other workers have to rely on the courts for justice. Why should teachers have this extra level of protection that nobody else has?
46H you are forgetting about all the teachers that are let go prior to receiving tenure. What is the rate of termination of teachers in private schools without tenure?
why do you think that matters?
tenure is wonderful, it would be sweet if we all could have it. but given that most of us don't have it, why do teachers deserve it more than anyone else?
Freshflakes if any 60 year old teacher is terminated without a substantial file documenting their failures if tenure laws are removed the discrimination settlement will make for a nice retirement package.
I'm pretty sure even if a no tenure policy went through in NJ, the union would b*tch about it to the point that it would still be near impossible to fire a teacher.
Yet it goes back to the overall point -- why should teachers get an exception (and a pension) when everyone else in the the private work world has the ability to get fired?
I mean -- I'm a cool guy, shouldn't I get a pension?
IMO you have to look at the goals of the anti-union, pro-charter school crowd closely. Privatization to make a select few rich but with the public paying for it is the ultimate goal. "School choice" and pretending to care about inner city youth is the happy face they put on things. Think logically - when have any modern Republicans given a crap about inner cities or their inhabitants? Definitely ulterior motives working. As in one day you'll be forking it over so Christie's grandkids can go to Catholic school.
It still doesn't tell me what makes this a special situation that teachers have to endure that other types of employees don't. Similar situations can happen in any industry. Other workers have to rely on the courts for justice. Why should teachers have this extra level of protection that nobody else has?
I find it ironic that the teachers need protection from teachers that became administrators.
Of course if they had a performance evaluation to fall back on it would be more difficult to politically toy with a teacher's career.
Tenure removes the distinction between the talented teachers and slugs and in the best flavor of socialism, makes them all equal in regard to ability. They are simply widgets, whose only value is detemined by time on the job. "The children" are of course the protective shield they hold up to preserve their conscripted dues and sucker more money form the taxpayers as if there were an infinite linear relationship between a quality Edu and cash spent.
IMO you have to look at the goals of the anti-union, pro-charter school crowd closely. Privatization to make a select few rich but with the public paying for it is the ultimate goal. "School choice" and pretending to care about inner city youth is the happy face they put on things. Think logically - when have any modern Republicans given a crap about inner cities or their inhabitants? Definitely ulterior motives working. As in one day you'll be forking it over so Christie's grandkids can go to Catholic school.
i think you need to look at the goals of someone in a tenure discussion that keeps trying to deflect to privatization. its obvious such a person can not defend tenure because it can not be defended rationally.
IMO you have to look at the goals of the anti-union, pro-charter school crowd closely. Privatization to make a select few rich but with the public paying for it is the ultimate goal. "School choice" and pretending to care about inner city youth is the happy face they put on things. Think logically - when have any modern Republicans given a crap about inner cities or their inhabitants? Definitely ulterior motives working. As in one day you'll be forking it over so Christie's grandkids can go to Catholic school.
I can think of plenty of moderate Democrats in NJ who would flip if a black family moved next door to them
I find it ironic that the teachers need protection from teachers that became administrators.
Of course if they had a performance evaluation to fall back on it would be more difficult to politically toy with a teacher's career.
Tenure removes the distinction between the talented teachers and slugs and in the best flavor of socialism, makes them all equal in regard to ability. They are simply widgets, whose only value is detemined by time on the job. "The children" are of course the protective shield they hold up to preserve their conscripted dues and sucker more money form the taxpayers as if there were an infinite linear relationship between a quality Edu and cash spent.
Exactly -- it basically is socialism, in a way.
However, in theory, socialism is 'supposed' to be fair. Giving teachers tenure and turning a blind eye to their classroom tactics after the first 3 years of achievement is NOT FAIR to students, parents, taxpayers and the community at large. Sure, it's good for the teachers union but that's about it.
Same stuff goes for the police and other public workers as well. I personally hate how cops get a pension, but it gets more complicated when you spend most of your career in Camden and see more s*** go down, versus Basking Ridge where it's more of a pathetic police gig.
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.