08/08/2004: "Insipid Editorial"

There's an editorial in today's Philadelphia Inquirer that supports the school district administration in their quest to end seniority and other union regulations regarding teacher assignment.

Most folks who work in Philadelphia's public schools have a love hate relationship with the PFT. There's no question that their idea of pedagogy emerges from the fifties (1850s perhaps), that they, like many unions, protect their most senior members at the expense of the newest teachers, and that they rarely seem to actually care about children.

But along with the School Reform Commission's proposal to end seniority came a number of other draconian measures, most of which seem designed to punish teachers rather than reward them.

1. Big cuts in health care- the only issue that should matter to PFT members.

2. No guaranteed raises

3. A number of punitive clauses
*no pay for prep coverage- no one likes to admit that they can't get subs in Philly. What happens is teachers are forced into covering classes or into accepting four or five students into their room; the only thing that makes this okay is that you get paid for it. No more.
*no leaving the building during prep time

My question for the SRC- who do they expect to come and teach in Philly? There are only so many true believers who will take lesser pay and crappy health care out of some sort of moral commitment. The baby boom generation is rapidly retiring. If you treat people badly, put them in terrible working conditions, and then don't pay them, what do you think will happen?

Furthermore, many people in the district would willingly give up seniority/transfer in exchange for better health care and generous salary increases. But to get screwed for both? The only thing that keeps folks going in the poorly managed and broke down schools is the thought that someday they'll at least make it to a school close to home.

One final note- the magnet schools already are sucking up the young talent. Look at the staff at Masterman or Central and you'll see some young folks who could not possibly have transferred. Then inquire as to why these principals have their own private site selection. You'll get a technically correct, highly politicized answer that ignores the truth.

August 2004
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
8	9	10	11	12	13	14
15	16	17	18	19	20	21
22	23	24	25	26	27	28
29	30	31

Reflections of a Former Teacher

08/08/2004: "Insipid Editorial"