I sure did.

This guy prevented bad teachers from being fired. I know call the lawyers bla bla. But if he is the problem why LA school districts are failing he needs to have some leighway and let the administrators do the write ups and terminations. Yes some is political. Welcome to work. Most though needs to be documented and finished.

Walmart does this all the time to keep prices low.

The American Teachers Association needs to go back to it's roots to advance the career just like the state bar does with lawyers. Does the bar protect bad unethical lawyers? No they take away their bar license. The American Teachers Association needs to be de-certifying the bad apples and helping them succeed. Helping as in getting training needed and setting up licenses for professional teachers. Not protecting them.

The article mentioned he was a head of the union who prevented the firings of several teachers.

It was a political ploy

And which side does society stand on? Polls show they are agaisn't the teachers for failing our children.

It is why they call it work. You may have a passion to help kids but in the end only your results matter no different than any other job out there.

Mod parent up.

I mentioned this already and as someone who worked at a school district I can vouch. If they get rid of tenure and go to what regular folks have a 3 write up and you are out this wouldn't happen.

My exwife and I worked at school districts. Trust me if administrators want a 1 and 1 they get a stiff rebuke email from the union rep threatening job termination without the union there! What the hell?

Do I get this at my job? No. I am employed at will. So you are stumpy. It is in good taste and for fear of liability that we have an HR representative due the threatening and a humiliating letter 3 times in a row and then a box and boot out the door after time# 3.

Yes some may want to mod me down after reading the last paragraph or think I am being a dick, but I am just the messenger here. Remember at work it is always about the customer. Not you. Kids and parents are the customers.

This is what it is like everywhere and if principals had more authority our schools would be better. Yes I will concede teachers put up with a lot of crap and have big responsibilities. I understand that.

But understand the lack of firing people make them do batshit stuff like claiming "... not dressing appropriately " in their teaching certificate or making up stuff in science fairs. It is standard procedures in the teaching world when someone is tenured or the union rep says "NO! You may not put down such and such in this write up ... etc" so this is a way around it.

I have seen this at 2 different school districts.

Stop right there.

Yes, a boss has a right to complain if you do not perform your job a. what b, when and c. how it is done to his or her specifications. Do not like then go get another job. Dealing with a classroom full of children is part of the job and yes a teacher needs to worry about kissing ass because it is part of the job. The teacher agreed to it right?

This is no different than any other position out there. Doesn't matter if you feel the job sucks, easy, hard, whatever. You agree agree and a boss watches over to make sure things are moving smoothly. If not then the boss can't do the job and the customer looses. In this case the students and parents.

It is up to the teacher not the principal to discipline kids. Ask anyone in the teaching profession. If the principal has to do your job then you suck as a teacher and can't manage your classroom. It is part of the job description.

The courts typically back the schools. My exwife was a teacher and took education law class.

The problem is it costs money to prove you are innocent. Schools included spent as much money paying off bad parents and lawyers as budgets for freaking books in a given year! How is that for fair?

All to prove that the judge says, well gee the school has a right to create a learning environment based on such and such in 1934 bla bla. NEXT ... oh the lawyer bill will be $380,000 etc.

Sigh do not bring politics in this.

As someone who has worked in the school district I can tell you administrators need to make up good reasons to get rid of bad teachers and this is one of them and yes lawsuits prevent both administrators and staff from doing their jobs.

If the teacher said you can use this as a weapon. Then yes that would be very bad and inappropriate. If it is used to teach expansion of gas in a chemical reaction then that is a different matter.

I guess we will find out. Administrators have a reputation of being clueless. More likely they are puppets of the lawyers of school districts and need to do things like this to get rid of a few tenured bad apples.

Lets turn the tables?

Do you and I have the right to piss off management and our bosses? What makes them so special? Do we need to be mindlessly obedient at work? Yes. Do not like the door is right there etc!

Yes this sucks in life, however it is setup that way for a reason. Shit needs to get done and bosses need to discipline and control their employees to make sure things are running smoothly. If not then their jobs are on the line. Sucks worse for them than it does for us if you think about it?

There are bad employees everywhere and teachers are not any different. If a teacher can not work with staff or perform their expectations to raise the test scores and teach they need to leave. Here is another table turning. Would you want your kids to be taught by an incompetent teacher? I think not and they take our money as tax payers.

I looked at this as the administrator was fine combing and looking for a reason to fire him/her.

It is hard to fire tenured teachers and many have resorted to doing things like complaining on their credential to professional boards as an example to find something to fire them etc.

Get rid of tenure and the problem goes away and they do not have to make up excuses. My exwife was a teacher and you wouldn't believe the crap they tried to pull to make her quit. Of course she is very opinion oriented which didn't help and caused the situation.

imitation weapons ... again fear of a lawsuit from a disgruntled ambulance parent.

Anything that can use force can be a weapon. Ban pencils next!

Then Chemistry labs.

Now this. Sigh.

Lets burn the lawyers offices down. Everyone is so freaking terrified of a lawsuit that nothing happens. We have to give everyone a medal for participating, not discipline kids who tell teachers to go f**ck themselves, can't teach controversial subjects requiring critical thinking skills, can't flunk them, etc.

We are not doing them any favors when they get out in the real world afraid to take risks or wonder why their boss fired them instead of giving a raise for participation?

Many loyalists who came to your country came from the south believe it or not.

  Massachusetts was not friendly to the crown because its earlier inhabitants were puritans and pilgrims who escaped the church of England from persecution. They hated the crown and were in Amsterdam and there. Maryland was catholic so it was in support of separation but not protestant like the rest of the colonies. Many in Pennsylvania too came from similar backgrounds of religious freedom and were happy to call to arms when redcoats came into their lands.

The southern colonies were filled with loyalists compared to the north and those who dealt trade and intermarried supported the separation only when the British came in and jailed relatives in the northern colonies.

The live free or die motto and government get off my back was a Yankees thing from the north. The south adopted it later during the civil war but they are a different country today with different values than the north even if not in name. But, yes the south did have an interest to rejoin the crown believe it or not and something early Canadians would have approved to curb American expansionism I would guess. Of course this point only Alaska was under contention and it was a very tiny sliver of land. British Columbia separated from Oregon quite successfully and things were well out west.

Ignorant voters will fire anyone who is a member of the water board/district if it discovered they allowed piss to enter their facets.

Unlike the corrupt state and federal governments the local ones actually listen to their constituents.

I guess it varies on whether the north was too weak to allow southern states to nullify laws or the south felt that had to nullify them because the federal government was too strong.

What is odd is the south today is solid republican and conservative and prides themselves on states rights. Oddly, they favored a strong government to enforce slavery on northern states who voted against them. Too many slaves went on the underground railroad to the northern states. But they nullified laws in a schizophrenic way claiming the constitution doesn't say no etc.

The confederation we were taught was to unite the Canadian maritime providences which were independently run with upper Canada and to make sure Quebec was under control.

But yes the south sent delegations to the UK in 1865 to join the crown again. So who knows where these solid republican states would have ended up in your neck of the woods if they won? Would they have joined Canada and made sure you guys wouldn't have healthcare :-) ? Or remained a separate common wealth? Who knows. I wish I had a time machine and could change history for fun.