by Brian
The cherry trees are blooming, so it must be pink slip season. For many years my district was spared the trauma of using the Reduction in Force (RIF) language in our Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA). But last year's state budget disaster forced us into implementing it, and we gave notices of non-renewal to 16 teachers. Thankfully they were all eventually hired back, as we weathered the cuts with attrition and federal back-fill dollars. This year as the budget crisis continues we may not be so lucky.
I teach math, so I like rules that are consistent. You need rules to make a RIF list. Almost universally they are based on seniority. But how do you calculate seniority?
Last year as we prepared our seniority list we found that the rules for calculating seniority actually vary quite a bit, even between neighboring districts. Some let all provisional teachers go first. All teachers new to a district have provisional status. If they are just beginning their teaching career, they are provisional for two years. If they have some experience from another state, but this is their first job in Washington, they have two years of provisional status. If they have done two years of provisional status in another school district in Washington, then they only have one year of provisional status. So if this is your first year in your school district regardless of your experience you should read your CBA.
If you move to Washington from another state, you get to use your seniority in public school teaching for your salary placement. But maybe not for your placement on the RIF list. No matter how much experience you have, or how good a teacher you are, if you move to a district that lets provisional status go first, you'll be out the door with the guy just out of college. Is that fair?
And about that out of state experience: some districts will recognize it after your provisional year(s), and some won't. If you teach for ten years in Vancouver, Washington and move to another district in Washington, you'll get to claim those ten years after your provisional year. But if your wife was teaching in Portland, Oregon for those ten years, and she gets a job in the same district as you, she will probably lose her ten years. She'll start all over again, just like a 22 year-old fresh out of college. Is that fair?
There is always much wailing and gnashing of teeth when some bright young star gets laid off, while a 57 year-old slacker gets to keep his job. I admit, that's hard to take.
And I hear my young colleagues say they want some benefit for having shown a 'commitment' to the district for teaching here for three or four years. But I have to say that after 26 years in this district, I don't think three or four is a commitment. I've seen too many leave after four years to buy that.
There was a recent article in the Wall Street Journal about how government officials and parents want to change the rules for how layoffs are implemented. Well, we would all like to see the best teachers kept and the worst ones gone, but I cannot agree that using the unfortunate crisis of a reduction in force to do that is fair.
What we need is an ongoing evaluation/professional growth system in place that will make good teachers better, and weed out the bad ones. A budget crisis is not the way to do it.
It’s a challenging issue. I think its a question of what does it mean to be a continuing teacher? Couple this with an antiquated evaluation system and we have the system we live with today.
I believe both need to be revamped drastically.
I couldn’t agree more, Brian; As frustrating as it is to watch good teachers get RIFfed and bad teachers stick around, RIFfing and firing are two different things. One is the sad result of bad economic times, the other is the sad result of poor hiring, poor professional development, burnout, or a combination of the three.
By the way, is God aware that you’re using his image without paying royalties?
I’m a huge supporter of evaluating teachers and getting rid of ineffective teachers. Some districts are really good at that, while others – like mine – are not.
How do the tough districts do it? I have seen it happen. One year an experienced teacher was hired from a private school. Within the first week, after his students had spent nearly every day doing nothing, the principal went in after school, closed the door, and said something to him that made him come into my room complaining, defensive, up in arms.
By spring, he was on a plan – a plan he didn’t meet.
The district gave non-continuing contracts to every new hire, and his contract wasn’t renewed. He called the union. He fought back. He threatened legal action, but after a year, he was gone.
In my building, we have teachers who are worse than he was, and they are allowed to shut their doors, waste their students’ time and keep their jobs while others are fired, or have to work harder to make up for their incompetency. It drives me nuts.
I don’t even think it needs to come down to some big state-created assessment of student skills. The problem can be solved by an administrator who’s willing to walk the halls, look in classrooms, and have the uncomfortable conversations.