Thread: New Educators Win Teaching Awards, Then Shown the Door by Their Union

"Last in/first out" doesn't necessarily make much sense. "Last-in, first-out is a flawed union policy that punishes too many effective young educators, and in typical union-fashion fails to incentivize productivity or competence."

New Educators Win Teaching Awards, Then Shown the Door by Their Union - Townhall.com Staff

Were all of the new teachers fired better than the teachers who weren't?

Why are you asking if you read the link?

All seven recipients of New Teacher of the Year have been pink-slipped.

Here's the school district list so you can check the names:
School Board to recognize New Teachers of the Year during May 10 meeting | Clark County School District

This is why they were laid off:

Due to a recent arbitration decision , the CCEA will continue its misguided last-in, first-out policy. The school district will only lay off those teachers who have received suspensions or multiple unsatisfactory notifications before laying off the newest teachers.

This is comon even where there are not unions, so there is kind of a misrepresentation going on here.

Originally Posted by Boo Radley

This is why they were laid off:

Due to a recent arbitration decision , the CCEA will continue its misguided last-in, first-out policy. The school district will only lay off those teachers who have received suspensions or multiple unsatisfactory notifications before laying off the newest teachers.

This is comon even where there are not unions, so there is kind of a misrepresentation going on here.

This is not even remotely true. Where unions are not present people are let go for many reasons and all aspects are looked at. In some cases lazy older employees whose salaries are twice as much, but half as effective as new employees are let go first. In all cases though, there is a drive to keep the best employees and let the worst performing/highest paid employees go. Unions remove that from the equation, it's a shame too because new teachers typically the hardest working teachers in the district.

Originally Posted by Comfort Food

This is not even remotely true. Where unions are not present people are let go for many reasons and all aspects are looked at. In some cases lazy older employees whose salaries are twice as much, but half as effective as new employees are let go first. In all cases though, there is a drive to keep the best employees and let the worst performing/highest paid employees go. Unions remove that from the equation, it's a shame too because new teachers typically the hardest working teachers in the district.

Yes, some places do discard older workers. But, that doesn't make what I said untrue. Again, where I work we ahve no union, but laid offs went to those who were newest. Happened that way when I worked at the hospital as well. I'm sorry you don't know better.

Originally Posted by nota bene

Why are you asking if you read the link?]

The link says that teachers won awards for being the best new teachers. The link does not say that the teachers were better than any teachers who stayed on because of seniority. You can be Rookie of the Year and still not be as good as any veterans.

But that's just one problem with the story in the OP. Another problem is that while it argues against seniority based firings, it does not prove that non-seniority based firings would not come without negative consequences. It also says that seniority based firings don't "incentivize" productivity or competence. However, considering that the district fired ineffective teachers first before going to seniority, I think they already have incentives covered.

Originally Posted by nota bene

"Last in/first out" doesn't necessarily make much sense. "Last-in, first-out is a flawed union policy that punishes too many effective young educators, and in typical union-fashion fails to incentivize productivity or competence."

New Educators Win Teaching Awards, Then Shown the Door by Their Union - Townhall.com Staff

I'm not in a union and I don't always agree with their policies. However, the other side of "last in/first out" are schools laying off experienced teachers because their salaries are higher. The issue is not at black and white and some would like us to believe. Some combination of senority and quality should be considered when laying teachers off. Also, schools should not be put in the position of laying off teachers unless the student population has dropped.

Also, many schools follow this policy and it has nothing to do with the union.

Originally Posted by Comfort Food

This is not even remotely true. Where unions are not present people are let go for many reasons and all aspects are looked at. In some cases lazy older employees whose salaries are twice as much, but half as effective as new employees are let go first. In all cases though, there is a drive to keep the best employees and let the worst performing/highest paid employees go. Unions remove that from the equation, it's a shame too because new teachers typically the hardest working teachers in the district.

Many schools have last in/first out policies for lay offs and this has nothing to do with the union. Every place I have taught has this policy and I'm not now nor I have I ever been in a teachers' union. Yes, some older employees are lazy as are some new ones. Your statemnet that older teachers don't work hard is incorrect in my experience. It may seem that they don't work as hard but that is because they have learned to be efficient with their time. Also, older teachers find themselves in leadership position and mentoring younger teachers. These things all take time.

many new teachers were fired in my area when conservatives cut education by $300 million dollars. this was done to fill a budget shortfall.

recently, the state government has found half a billion dollars that was misplaced due to a software error. they aren't hiring the teachers back, however. they are instead considering sending everyone in the state forty to fifty bucks. meanwhile, state leaders are on television talking about how we need to do more for education and are complaining about failing schools. unreal.