White Teachers will be the first to go:Minneapolis

Irwin20

Irwin20

Well-known member
 
I can see how white teachers might not like this. Black teachers in Minneapolis have historically be laid off at a much higher rate than whites so they have been pissed off for long time. Now all races of teachers can be mad.
 
ProV1 said:
I can see how white teachers might not like this. Black teachers in Minneapolis have historically be laid off at a much higher rate than whites so they have been pissed off for long time. Now all races of teachers can be mad.
Click to expand...
Is that because they are inferior as educators?
 
ProV1 said:
I can see how white teachers might not like this. Black teachers in Minneapolis have historically be laid off at a much higher rate than whites so they have been pissed off for long time. Now all races of teachers can be mad.
Click to expand...
Is this a fact or just an opinion? I really would like to know, I am not on either side, just curious.
 
ProV1 said:
I can see how white teachers might not like this. Black teachers in Minneapolis have historically be laid off at a much higher rate than whites so they have been pissed off for long time. Now all races of teachers can be mad.
Click to expand...
please provide link for this..... if the black teachers were laid off more then Whites, what was the reason? were black teacher with tenure and more experience laid off over white teachers?
 
ProV1 said:
I can see how white teachers might not like this. Black teachers in Minneapolis have historically be laid off at a much higher rate than whites so they have been pissed off for long time. Now all races of teachers can be mad.
Click to expand...
That Union has always been by seniority,
 
ProV1 said:
The article says nothing about performance being a factor. It is based on budget cuts/lay offs and seniority.
Click to expand...
isn't most lay offs with teachers done to teachers with LESS seniority? so just in case you don't understand , will they lay off a teacher with 2 years of experience at the school over the teacher with 15 years of experience? no matter what the color of the person is?
 
bigkat said:
isn't most lay offs with teachers done to teachers with LESS seniority? so just in case you don't understand , will they lay off a teacher with 2 years of experience at the school over the teacher with 15 years of experience? no matter what the color of the person is?
Click to expand...
Of course it is.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
JamesCW said:
Thanks for replying. Where did you see this information?
Click to expand...
minnesotareformer.com

Minneapolis' new teachers of color layoff protections: Three things to know - Minnesota Reformer

Minneapolis Public Schools is stepping into nearly uncharted territory — and potentially thorny legal ground — with its new policy aimed at protecting teachers of color from potential layoffs. The new teachers contract, reached last week after a 14-day strike, creates exemptions to...
minnesotareformer.com minnesotareformer.com
 
bigkat said:
isn't most lay offs with teachers done to teachers with LESS seniority? so just in case you don't understand , will they lay off a teacher with 2 years of experience at the school over the teacher with 15 years of experience? no matter what the color of the person is?
Click to expand...
No. They lay off the teacher who is part of the laid off program or school. They don't lay off white teachers from schools unaffected by cuts to a school that has more black teachers.
 
cabezadecaballo said:
That Union has always been by seniority,
Click to expand...
Seniority is a dumb way to make these decisions. It means nothing in terms of effectiveness. I would say job performance is most important and then having teachers that represent the demographics of the students they teach would be 2nd. Walking in another man’s shoes goes a long way in the ability to lead them.
 
ProV1 said:
Seniority is a dumb way to make these decisions. It means nothing in terms of effectiveness. I would say job performance is most important and then having teachers that represent the demographics of the students they teach would be 2nd. Walking in another man’s shoes goes a long way in the ability to lead them.
Click to expand...
Doing it by race is even dumber.
 
ProV1 said:
I can see how white teachers might not like this. Black teachers in Minneapolis have historically be laid off at a much higher rate than whites so they have been pissed off for long time. Now all races of teachers can be mad.
Click to expand...
It's racist so there's that...
 
of
ProV1 said:
Seniority is a dumb way to make these decisions. It means nothing in terms of effectiveness. I would say job performance is most important and then having teachers that represent the demographics of the students they teach would be 2nd. Walking in another man’s shoes goes a long way in the ability to lead them.
Click to expand...
course it is , but that is NOT the way liberal run unions work... is it?
 
ProV1 said:
Seniority is a dumb way to make these decisions. It means nothing in terms of effectiveness. I would say job performance is most important and then having teachers that represent the demographics of the students they teach would be 2nd. Walking in another man’s shoes goes a long way in the ability to lead them.
Click to expand...
So would it be OK for an all (or nearly) white district to lay off black teachers because of their demographics?
 
ProV1 said:
Wrong. Schools and programs where more blacks taught were eliminated or cut at higher rates. Look it up.
Click to expand...
Lrt me try to explain it in a way you might grasp it.

I will assume for many years whites were the predominant makeup of teachers, let's say 90%.

Then a hiring practices change 20 years ago begins to hire 50 % white teachers to 50% all other races.

Now when layoffs by seniority happen, more non white teachers as a percentage of the whole group will be laid off because of the last in first out policy. Over time this would have taken care of itself, but go ahead and speed it along with bad policy. What you will get is fewer white teachers intrested in going to the big cities to teach, so the more inferior and less motivated teachers who are protected by race will take over and test scores will plummet vs the suburbia and we will have further screwed the children. Oh the humanity!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ProV1 said:
Seniority is a dumb way to make these decisions. It means nothing in terms of effectiveness. I would say job performance is most important and then having teachers that represent the demographics of the students they teach would be 2nd. Walking in another man’s shoes goes a long way in the ability to lead them.
Click to expand...
You start out so well here, then completely ruin a good point.

Agreed, seniority means little to performance. Good point.

But, is a teacher who has been impacted by a system that sucks, really better to teach kids who are currently in the same type of system? Not only no, but hell no. Having a person that cares about developing the kids character, intellect and knowledge as a sum total is way more important than finding the kid from the hood that has a degree in education but lacks in other areas.

If we really want to put innercity kids back in chains, keep giving them more teachers who are inferior because they know they are protected by race. Not all teachers fit that category, but many do. Human nature is often to find the easier path, and protection by race creates an easier path.

To be clear, they are taking away a non racial system of seniority in favor of a racially biased system of race being the determinant factor as to who gets laid off. That's a great way to get over racism in America.
 
y2h said:
It's racist so there's that...
Click to expand...
I can not envision this policy standing the first test at a higher level court. Action taken against someone based on race is clearly racism. How these idiots miss such blatant racism and its evils it brings is beyond my ability to comprehend.
 
bigkat said:
BINGO!!!!!
Click to expand...
Dumb.
Hammerdrill said:
Doing it by race is even dumber.
Click to expand...
Or gender I suppose. I just know this from my managerial days, if I had put together a RIF list that was all woman, it would have been returned to me for a do over. Could that have been construed as sexist? Sure but it would have not been accepted as the company that I worked for had diversity goals. Did that cause a few headaches with HR? Yeah but I understood the value of not having an all male workforce.
 
bigkat said:
of

course it is , but that is NOT the way liberal run unions work... is it?
Click to expand...
Generally, I don't support unions anymore. They once served a valuable purpose, but employment laws and company policies have largely caught up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top