Coming from someone in your profession, your opinion on quality teachers means nothing.
Teachers Taking "Sick Days" - Anyone want to defend this one?
- Thread starter TeasePlease
- Start date
Just to clear, are you saying that based on our choice of profession our opinions,experiences, viewpoints and knowledge are meaningless and have no basis?
No you have not. You are starting to, but go back to page one and read again. You avoided a lot of my initial questions.
You took a parents complaint and then attacked her on her parenting. Saying she was not involved. Then changed her post from not having control over what teachers teach, to not knowing. Then said agreed that parents have no control. So her child does a project on Justin Bieber which was approved by the teacher and to which only the teacher has control over, so therefore, by process of elimination - TADA Justin Bieber is what History is about.
And I am not complaining about HAVING to do as a parent. I am complaining that teachers are so unprofessional and unreliable that it forces me to. I have no problem doing my job as a parent but I do not agree that our job is teachers quality control. I do not do the quality control for Walmart, Coke-cola, etc. Why should I be forced to because of unprofessional teachers. To which, BTW - I have no control over having them removed for that unprofessionalism.
If teacher weren't so money hungry and fraudulent, I would not have to pay extra. When people steal from the store, we all suffer. Same thing happening here.
I guess you would teacher students that when you don't like someone's thought out opinion, you can personally attack them. My FT profession????? Which is that again BTW?????
So because I am escort photographer part time, my opinion means nothing???? Really???? Interesting. Because it is a part time job, does that mean that only part of my opinion means nothing????? LOL
Clearly you are taking your ball and running away like a spoil whinny brat. You want to act like a child, I will teach you how to deal with one. You can go on time out now. When you can behave properly, I will talk to you again.
you forgot to mention summers off, christmas vacation, march break, five hour day,............
don't like native candians eh? are you joining in your racist friends game. you think racist taunts are ok?
That's the way it worked in most every job I had, but I was lucky enough not to get sick much. And in those days, everyone expected one bug after another would sweep through the entire staff because no one was gonna stay home unless they were desperate. When I got to manage such stuff, I had to order good people to take the day or be fired. Not exactly a smart management choice to force. Needless to say, as in most such workplaces, all sorts of informal sick-leave practices evolved. If it wasn't the 'infirmary cot' behind the crates at the back of the shop it was the guy booking in and disappearing home before morning break.
You really want your kid's teacher coming to school with some undiagnosed respiratory ailment and giving classes all day? Or spending it in the Teacher's Room?
The underlying facts of the story are that banking the sick days cuts absenteeism. Absenteeism, especially on little or no notice is expensive, replacements are less productive, and bringing infections to the workplace is exponentially harmful. When workers 'manage' time off for illness, it's easier on the organization, and they'll do that if they don't lose pay. But workers who manage not take time off to be sick think they're 'penalized' when they compare themselves to the ones who stayed home. So you 'bonus' them for attendance in order not to have them booking off too. The easiest way to do that is banking sick days, managers can predict to the penny their wages cost to the year end will be days worked+sick days permiited.
So here we are. Back when it started, banking gave managers something they wanted, but there were unintended consequences. Now we're going after something different that we want, and again—Who could have guessed !—there are unintended consequences
Of course we could demand a Doctor's note for every sick day, but besides the problem of crooked Docs writing easy notes, who would pay for all that white-coat time? OHIP?
TANSTAAFL One way or another, we pay.
are you so drug addled you don't what your handle stands for or are you too busy putting down women and races of people you deem inferior?
Not according to this bunch. Those same 'less productive' substitutes are better than the current staff. They are the replacements many are promoting to be hired.
In US dollars, in 2010, starting elementary school teacher average salary was $34,443, which puts it slightly less than US teachers who average starting at $37,603. I don't know what the cost of living differential is between Ontario and the US, but from what my frequent trips show me, living and eating expenses seem to be about 20-25% higher, at least in Ontario. If you feel that $34k annually is a good salary, why aren't you a teacher? Granted, after 15 years that number tops $54k, but that is hardly big money. If your opinion of teachers is that they are overpaid, then it is unlikely your experiences with them are going to be less than excellent. I've noticed that the preconceptions I bring into any encounter, tend to have a drastic effect on that encounter.
Guess, what? Educating a person is an expensive process. If taxes were raised so you didn't have to pay for fees, books and supplies, then everyone would be screaming about that. You get out of anything, what you put into it. Whether or not most kids are problem students is not the issue. It only takes one problem student to disrupt a classroom and chances are, that student is going to have disruptive parents if any disciplinary action is taken.
RESPONSIBILITY is a big word. Typically, that word is reserved for the people at the top of the pecking order. If a new bridge collapses, does the blame get thrown on the guy who did nothing more than shovel dirt where he was told to shovel, or on the engineers that designed the bridge? In the education system, teachers are the very lowest rung on the ladder. They have to answer to school administrators, school boards, politicians, the general public and the parents. In most cases they are limited in the scope of their lessons, those are determined by the districts. They are also limited on how much extra work they can assign. Every group wants to place some limits on them, and then expects them to be shining, perfect examples who are inspiring the next generation towards greatness.
You don't have the power to fire teachers, and they don't have the power to fire you, or your child, or any child. Your child might be an outstanding student, and you might be the world's greatest parent, but not every student in the class is outstanding and not every parent is a good parent, but the teacher puts up with all of them.
There are certainly bad teachers out there, and I would even be willing to agree that the majority fall into that category, although the 80% number I've seen quoted seems much higher than what I have seen. Lumping all of them into that category is hardly fair. After all, if the mindset is that all teachers are bad, then eventually, that is what you will have.
The OP however, was just about whether or not the teachers should be taking their sick days. For most of us, we go into a job with certain expectations, whether that is backed by a union contract or just a verbal agreement, we expect what is due. If the teacher's contract gives them a set number of days to use each year, and it is a use or lose issue, why should they be expected to lose those days? Effectively, this reduces their benefits, which is part of the overall package. Do you often reduce your agreed upon compensation, because it's more convenient for the customer? My rule has always been, the rates go up if things have to be shifted around for the customer convenience.
There are several options that might be considered. Any business that offers sick days, or personal days knows the majority will use those days to extend weekends. One thing I've seen done is to not allow these days to be taken to extend a holiday weekend. They can be used, but the employee loses the holiday pay. Another option is to differentiate between scheduled time off and unscheduled time off. Pay a higher rate for scheduled time off, and there will be less unplanned absences, allowing more control over substitute teachers. A third possibility is to pay the sick days depending upon the day of the week. Pay slightly more for midweek, reducing the demand for Friday and Monday.
don't label me mr high and mighty racist- the days of your kind telling me what to do are over. you may intimidate some kids at school- but not me. racist
My question to you is - How is the contract worded? Does it refer to "Sick Days", "Days Off" or "Fuck the Dog Days"? I'm pretty sure we're talking about Sick Days.
I don't think anyone would argue the fact that teachers are entitled to take sick days if they are indeed sick. The inference from the article is that teachers are taking days off simply because they are "available", not because they are sick. They are taking days because they feel entitled to them. Really? Entitled to having access to sick days, or using sick days?
I also have difficulty with the "work taken home", "unpaid prep time", "unpaid extracurriculars". Welcome to life as a professional. If you want to be clock puncher, be a clock puncher. You can't claim to be a professional when it suits you, but behave in a contradictory manner.
While I don't agree with your assessment of all teachers or of this situation, I have respected the way you have (mostly) stated your opinions and your experiences. However, I must question your judgement in leaving this issue to someone who has contributed nothing of value. If not for his long time membership here, I would assume his age to be at best early teens. Insults and libelous statements are hardly the ingredients for an intelligent discussion or debate of the issues.
I look forward to thoughtful responses.
Having never read the contract in question, I can't answer that question. In my experience, paid time off is typically split into two categories, scheduled and unscheduled. What they are called doesn't matter, unless some sort of official proof is required for a sick day. I've frequently heard them called "mental health" days, for when people are too fed up with work to deal with it. Unless the teacher's contract requires certification of illness, then whether they are suffering from explosive diarrhea or a minor headache doesn't matter. This is true in every other job, why shouldn't it be true for teachers?
Just for the record, I'm not a teacher and I'm not married to a teacher. I have no vested interest in the subject. I would never last as a teacher, I have a tendency to speak my mind and that would surely scar impressionable young minds.
