What do you think of the seniority system?

[RandomAnthony]

Ok, I'm in a bad mood this morning because some solid teachers I know are getting laid off in Milwaukee because they haven't been in the system as long as some teachers:

http://www.jsonline.com/news/educatio...

Now, I understand rewarding people for longevity if that longevity has been accompanied by competence, but (and I don't know if this is a problem in other industries, but it is in education) there are a lot of bad teachers out there who will have a job next year only because they, well, lasted.

I'm not for the heartless firing of older workers. And I think some of the administrators are at fault for giving bad teachers decent evaluations. But I'm not a fan of layoffs in particular being assigned solely based on seniority.

I hope this makes sense. What do you think?

[[deleted user]]

My guess is that this is all laid out in the agreement with the teachers union, and there is very little that any one can do. There needs to be a point system that incorporates both longevity and competency, because keeping someone based on longevity will probably not get you the best educators.

[janine]

RandomAnthony wrote: "Ok, I'm in a bad mood this morning because some solid teachers I know are getting laid, off in Milwaukee, because they haven't been in the system as long as some teachers"

[Félix]

What a difference a comma makes.

[RandomAnthony]

janine wrote: "RandomAnthony wrote: "Ok, I'm in a bad mood this morning because some solid teachers I know are getting laid, off in Milwaukee, because they haven't been in the system as long as some teachers""

Have we corrupted Janine as well?:)

[Félix]

It seems.

[Kevin]

this is a tough one and i may sound like i am being age discriminatory but i really am not. the school i volunteer in has several teachers who taught when i was in junior high school. seriously. i am 45. they have enough time in to retire but still keep plugging away. from what i have seen there seems to be more energy and fresh ideas in the younger teachers. that is not to say there are not some terrific teachers who have a lot of seniority but this is just a general observation. we see the same thing at the automobile manufacturing plants in our town. i know one guy who worked 50 yrs at Chrysler while watching numerous younger guys with young families. this guy has his house and cars totally paid for and his children married and moved away long ago. how 'bout stepping aside for the next generation? as for teachers, i wish there was a way to establish who is the most effective (not test scores, i know..) and try to keep them around.

[Kevin]

[sneakily shaking head up and down:]

[[deleted user]]

That was what I was trying to get at with a system that does give credit for seniority, but also take into account the effectiveness of the teacher. As with all walks of life, there are teachers who are just waiting to be able to retire. There needs to be a big incentive out there for them to be effective teachers through out their careers. There are those teachers who retire that have more to offer than some that are just hired. It is such a hard line to draw, because if you go to standardized testing, obviously what will be tested is what will be taught, but that doesn't mean they are an effective teacher. Some teachers excite kids about learning, but they may not be able to do that if they have to stick to teaching what may be on a standardized test. The school boards do not have an easy job right now, with dwindling money available and the pressures to keep all programs going for the kids. They may sometimes get it wrong, but I give them credit for putting themselves in a very unenviable position.

[[deleted user]]

Barb (Lady of the Glass Box) wrote: "I think seniority gives too many people license to do a shitty job, and not be accountable for it. This applies to pretty much any unionized industry, but is especially harmful with teachers.
I..."

I agree Barb, unions did have a place and time, but their effectiveness has dwindled to the point of ineffectiveness now.

[Sally, la reina]

I believe that in CO legislation was recently passed to remove the seniority system. Which upsets me, cause now I'll never get tenure. However this way it may be easier for me to get a job.

[Jackie "the Librarian"]

I don't like the seniority system, and unions have their problems, but I also don't want there to be no protection for people with many years in, either.

I can see a corporation laying off old-timers and replacing them with new hires, even part-timers (don't have to pay them any benefits, you know) just to not have to pay the higher salary of someone who's been on the job for years.

So yes, there's probably not a simple solution. Both seniority and skill should be taken into account, which is more complicated, takes more time, and more thoughtfulness of those in administration.

[Kevin]

agreed totally jackie. no easy or cookie cutter way to solve

[Phil]

My brother-in-law is at the tail end of a career spent installing flooring.   For the first ten or twelve years of that career, he worked out of a union shop.   After hearing of his experience there, I think his union was not at all well run and, if it is indicative of other unions, they need a major revamp.

The biggest issue he had was that seniority was the only factor considered for being sent on a job.   There was no attention to quality of work, and he knew several old-timers who routinely did sub-standard work because they knew there would be no repercussions for them.

As a believer in personal responsibility, and as a man who took pride in his work, he was disgusted by the seniority system and decided to open his own business to escape it.

When union seniority matters more than the outcome for the customer, something is seriously wrong.   Those involved with such unions should pull their heads out of their asses and demand change, before their reputations are ruined and their employment opportunities vanish.