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.
When I was a sub in Florida we weren't employees, we were independent contractors.
It doesn't matter if they are contract employees, they still can't work more than 30 hours. Here's an article explaining it. The school districts in my area said it will also hurt bus drivers and maintenance workers. http://www.tennessean.com/article/20...ose-work-hours
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldhag1
Then that's what needs to happen. I can not see how an employer can demand proof of health insurance or they will rescind their offer of employment.
The problem is for classes that have long term subs. My daughter had an interim sub for a couple of months after her teacher had a major injury, my son had an interim for 4 months while his teacher was on maternity leave. Using multiple subs to each week to fill in for those long absences would have been a disruptive to the learning process.
When I was a sub in Florida we weren't employees, we were independent contractors.
Most states have specific regulations against that, substitute teachers must be employees. It has to do with being able to regulate their qualifications, conduct criminal background checks, and provide oversight of their actions. More and more states have been doing the same with coaches, for the same reasons. There are usually provisions that they are classified as temporary, at-will employees. Currently in most states, long term subs, such as for maternity leave, receive higher pay but still no benefits.
I don't know how they are going to address this, there were quite a few subs in my last district that worked over 140 days a year, and frankly, they were usually the better ones. This will change the way school systems manage subs. It will be a problem. Many districts have days already where they can't find enough subs to fill all the vacancies. Every district already has people subbing that they wish they didn't have to use, but they aren't awful enough that going without a sub is preferable. Those people are going to be working more and parents are going to be hearing more "We had this sub today and ....." stories.
The problem is for classes that have long term subs. My daughter had an interim sub for a couple of months after her teacher had a major injury, my son had an interim for 4 months while his teacher was on maternity leave. Using multiple subs to each week to fill in for those long absences would have been a disruptive to the learning process.
I agree with you - 100%. Schools may find themselves creating permanent sub pools, which will cost more, and will limit who the teacher can have, but at least a classroom won't have revolving subs. I'm a retired science teacher and did a long term job last year for a science teacher. I have no interest in working full-time but didn't mind a 5 week stint. The result was the kids got a teacher who could actually teach their content. This is less of an issue for elementary but middle and high school students will suffer academically.
Why shouldn't those workers have insurance? At the companies I've worked for all of the "part-timers" who worked at least 30 hours were eligible for benefits, including insurance. Why are people complaining because lower-paid workers have to be covered by health insurance? Geez, you would think extremist conservatives will not be happy until everyone here is living as if in a third world country with no health care. Well I'll counter your "outrage" with the fact that under the "old" insurance system, companies did not want to hire, and in fact got rid of, anyone over 50 because their health insurance premiums would spike. Pretty sure that the ACA is supposed to alleviate some of that type of discrimination. And btw, a single-payer national health system would have eliminated any issues like this, but oh yeah, the conservatives were against that also. The teacher's union is very powerful--maybe they should get involved, and maybe it is time for this country to start looking at the fact that one of the reasons this country is going downhill is because nobody wants to invest in education. They seem to be sooooo worried about "our children and grandchildren" having to pay our debts, as a reason to cut spending, and yet could care less if those same "children and grandchildren" are educated and can compete globally.
Perhaps the challenge of hiring substitute teachers in some areas is the compensation offered and/or the structure of temporary employment.
Substitute teacher compensation is determined at the district level in my state and there are more than 800 districts in the state. No two districts operate the same way.
It is my understanding that my state has historically limited the number of days of substitute teacher employment within a district to a maximum of 100 consecutive days which substantially preceded the ACA.
Districts often further limit the number of hours per day, again nothing to do with the ACA.
It is my understanding ACA looks at a 6 month period of consecutive employment by a constant employer.
While not the intent, the state law limiting continuous employment to a maximum of 100 days does not qualify for the 6 month ACA rule.
Substitute teacher compensation is a huge variable, within and across states. Some districts/ states give priority to retired teachers who have full pensions. Others seek those fresh out of school looking to build a resume. And some hire subs as independent contractors. It all depends......
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.