It does NOT take 2 years nor is it next to impossible to get
rid of an EXCEPTIONAL teacher on a continuing contract.
I know.
You can do what they say and it still does not matter.
Teachers have no rights to defend themselves against
slander, lies, and undocumented accusations. You are
whatever they say you are.
I have taught for 20 years (16 at the same school) and these
unethical practices are used to cover the butts of inept
administrators and students suffer the most, let's not forget
about them.
It disgusts me what some people will do to ruin the career of
an honest, hard working, experienced, veteran of ANYTHING.
They have to surround themselves with ineptness, so they
don't look as bad as they truly are.
Sadly, that is the state of education today and I have no
reason to believe it will get any better. I fear it will be much
worse and the impact it will have on society in the future
could be extremely damaging to our nation.
But I am a believer and ALWAYS have hope for my future.
On 7/11/14, PsyGuy wrote:
> This was a 4 month temporary position, not a annual
contract as
> governed by the TEC/TAC. Getting rid of a teacher ona
continuing
> contract is near impossible it takes a minimum of 2 years
to do so.
> Even on a probationary or term contract, teachers have
one of the
> strongest contract rights in the state. You can not be
called in on
> December 2nd in the middle of the term and have your
principal
> fire you, as could easily happen at say USAA or any other
> organization or company. Your pretty much guaranteed
that
> employment for a year (assuming nothing criminal).
>
> If your boss tells you to change a grade, change the grade.
If you
> worked at a bank and your supervisor told you to do
something
> why anyone would think they could say no to their
superior and
> keep their job baffles me.
>
> People are terminated for poor cultural fit int he workplace
all the
> time, and this idea that teachers get to be little rulers of
their
> classroom feeds that misperception. You work for the
district they
> tell you what to do, and you do it. Thats how "work" and
> professionals handle themselves. You dont have to agree
with it or
> like it, you just have to comply.
>
> Yes there are supervisors who are major jerks EVERY
industry and
> profession has them, grow a thicker skin, be on time, keep
the
> kids and the parents happy and collect your paycheck, its
called a
> job, for a reason.
>
> On 7/11/14, anon wrote:
>> On 7/10/14, mini wrote:
>>> I will be naming people and places . They hurt me from
>> having
>>> a job and making a living. I meant no ill will to anyone.
>>> Yet, I was a target on a 4 month contract???
>>> Why hurt my career? What did I do to you? Because for
13
>> years
>>> I had great evaluations. I took a 4 month short contract
>> job.
>>> And I have been destroyed. I will name the district,
school
>>> and person that has done this to me. Just to warn other
>> people
>>> what can happen to you. Because it is so unfair my
career
>>> should end because of some 's petty hatred.
>>
>>
>> Sadly, this goes on all over the United States. Just one
>> person, a principal, can literally destroy your life over
>> literally nothing. And here these dolts in the
privatization
>> movement, and even more than a few teachers, claim it
is
>> "impossible" to get rid of a teacher. It isn't. Something as
>> minor as refusing the change a grade under a principal's
>> direction in order to appease an angry parent is enough
to
>> destroy a teacher's career.
>>
>> Even now, people think a teacher who was forced out or
>> "dismissed" "deserved" it, despite the reality that more
often
>> than not, a school district administrator is the one at
fault.
>> Unfortunately, school districts can and do rig it to help
>> their useless and insane principals and other
administrators
>> in order to keep the "good old boy network" intact.
>>
>> What's worse is school districts insist on having those
>> screening out questions that are designed weed you out
of
>> contention for a job. The question goes something like if
you
>> have ever been non-renewed, forced to resign, resigned
in lieu
>> of a dismissal, or been dismissed, and, if "yes," you have
to
>> give a date and a "detailed" explanation. As if anybody
on
>> the HR screening staff is even going to look beyond the
"yes."
>> Those questions need to be made against the law
because it is
>> a form of blackballing. Besides, school districts already
>> have the ability to look up licenses for license sanctions
and
>> background checks for criminal issues. Just something
as
>> stupid as a personality conflict with a stupid principal or
a
>> district violating FMLA or some other kind of issue
having
>> nothing to do with teaching or public safety should not
be
>> disqualifying. Those questions were put in years ago
when it
>> was unusual for a teacher to be forced out because
principals
>> simply didn't do it for reasons of classroom and school
>> morale. Only those teachers who really did deserve to be
>> forced out actually were. Now it's just any old reason at
all
>> to cover principals' butts or save money on salaries and
>> pensions.
>>
>> School districts don't even have to have a principal give
you
>> a lousy reference. All they have to do is label you a "do
not
>> rehire," and that is typically all it takes to ruin a
>> teacher's job search. School districts have been sued
over
>> that designation of former employees.
Posts on this thread, including this one