If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WTVR)   Congratulations, you are Teacher of the Year. You're fired   (wtvr.com) divider line 170
    More: Asinine, You're Fired, school systems  
•       •       •

21060 clicks; posted to Main » on 14 Jun 2012 at 2:13 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



170 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-06-14 12:08:30 PM  
The layoffs were done based on seniority.
Seniority?
not merit and then seniority?
why kind of farked up system bases these decision only on seniority?
bwhahahaha

/oh wait, I saw this happen while I was in school in chicago
/one of the biggest problems with unions
 
2012-06-14 12:13:16 PM  
That's okay, I was told we don't need any more teachers.
 
2012-06-14 12:17:14 PM  
I hope she can get a better job in a less sucky system. Is there a meritocracy somewhere with a vacancy?
 
2012-06-14 12:21:04 PM  

namatad: one of the biggest problems with unions


I'd say it's the biggest problem with unions.
 
2012-06-14 12:56:54 PM  

namatad: why kind of farked up system bases these decision only on seniority?


The kind where the most senior are the highest paid (not that different inside or outside of union workforces). You need to cut $1M. You can either lose 15 workers making $65K or 30 making $33K. The effect to your bottom line is the same, except one way stretches your workforce too thin.
 
2012-06-14 01:10:29 PM  

Sybarite: That's okay, I was told we don't need any more teachers.


That's because you're bad at math. Because you had a bad teacher.
 
2012-06-14 01:12:50 PM  

Gecko Gingrich: namatad: why kind of farked up system bases these decision only on seniority?

The kind where the most senior are the highest paid (not that different inside or outside of union workforces). You need to cut $1M. You can either lose 15 workers making $65K or 30 making $33K. The effect to your bottom line is the same, except one way stretches your workforce too thin.


$33K? Way too much for a teacher. We should make them ask their students for food on a daily basis.
 
2012-06-14 01:14:43 PM  

Gecko Gingrich: The kind where the most senior are the highest paid (not that different inside or outside of union workforces). You need to cut $1M. You can either lose 15 workers making $65K or 30 making $33K. The effect to your bottom line is the same, except one way stretches your workforce too thin.


Your point is the exact opposite of what's being talked about. The workers with the highest seniority are the ones being retained, not laid off. In an union environment, that's all that matters.
 
2012-06-14 01:26:20 PM  
Someone I know just tweeted the terrible news that her state spends the least on education. So I looked up her state's performance. They're doing great, and spend money more efficiently than any other state. Not surprisingly, it is also the state in which teachers' unions are legal but have the least influence. (Five states ban collective bargaining for teachers.)
 
2012-06-14 01:28:57 PM  
In spite of the recent economic downturn we are still by far the wealthiest nation in the world. We can easily afford teachers (and health care). We just don't want to.
 
2012-06-14 01:30:03 PM  

revrendjim: In spite of the recent economic downturn we are still by far the wealthiest nation in the world. We can easily afford teachers (and health care). We just don't want to.


Which is why we have neither teachers nor health care. It's better this way.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-06-14 01:36:16 PM  

9beers: Gecko Gingrich: The kind where the most senior are the highest paid (not that different inside or outside of union workforces). You need to cut $1M. You can either lose 15 workers making $65K or 30 making $33K. The effect to your bottom line is the same, except one way stretches your workforce too thin.

Your point is the exact opposite of what's being talked about. The workers with the highest seniority are the ones being retained, not laid off. In an union environment, that's all that matters.


Precisely. In a non union environment your job security goes down as you get older and more experienced. Which is why people are much better off with unions than without them.
 
2012-06-14 01:54:28 PM  

9beers: Gecko Gingrich: The kind where the most senior are the highest paid (not that different inside or outside of union workforces). You need to cut $1M. You can either lose 15 workers making $65K or 30 making $33K. The effect to your bottom line is the same, except one way stretches your workforce too thin.

Your point is the exact opposite of what's being talked about. The workers with the highest seniority are the ones being retained, not laid off. In an union environment, that's all that matters.


so lets contrast that with Jamie Dimon and his situation. He lost OVER $2 billion dollars of his investor's money. But he's not being fired for his incompetence. In fact, he's being rewarded rather nicely - to the tune of something over $200 million or so in stock options and the like. If we are to assume that ability is the sole variable in determining how someone is compensated (or retained as an employee) then....why are we not seeing massive purges of high ranking CEOs and corporate officers like Jamie Dimon? where's the outrage over such a system that rewards an elite few for massive greed and incompetence?
 
2012-06-14 02:02:37 PM  

Weaver95: so lets contrast that with Jamie Dimon and his situation. He lost OVER $2 billion dollars of his investor's money. But he's not being fired for his incompetence. In fact, he's being rewarded rather nicely - to the tune of something over $200 million or so in stock options and the like. If we are to assume that ability is the sole variable in determining how someone is compensated (or retained as an employee) then....why are we not seeing massive purges of high ranking CEOs and corporate officers like Jamie Dimon? where's the outrage over such a system that rewards an elite few for massive greed and incompetence?


Employees fark up all the time without being terminated for it. If Chase wanted to fire him, they would, and there wouldn't be a union there protecting him.
 
2012-06-14 02:11:12 PM  

Weaver95: 9beers: Gecko Gingrich: The kind where the most senior are the highest paid (not that different inside or outside of union workforces). You need to cut $1M. You can either lose 15 workers making $65K or 30 making $33K. The effect to your bottom line is the same, except one way stretches your workforce too thin.

Your point is the exact opposite of what's being talked about. The workers with the highest seniority are the ones being retained, not laid off. In an union environment, that's all that matters.

so lets contrast that with Jamie Dimon and his situation. He lost OVER $2 billion dollars of his investor's money. But he's not being fired for his incompetence. In fact, he's being rewarded rather nicely - to the tune of something over $200 million or so in stock options and the like. If we are to assume that ability is the sole variable in determining how someone is compensated (or retained as an employee) then....why are we not seeing massive purges of high ranking CEOs and corporate officers like Jamie Dimon? where's the outrage over such a system that rewards an elite few for massive greed and incompetence?


Ability != Success
 
2012-06-14 02:15:30 PM  
ibankcoin.com

YOU'RE FIRED!
 
2012-06-14 02:16:23 PM  
To be fair....after winning TOY honors, there wasn't much more she could do. Might to to shoot for the stars in a new field now.

/Yes, I'm trolling...How about we star cutting principal's pays...100k to do nothing is kind of silly
 
2012-06-14 02:17:41 PM  

bdub77: That's because you're bad at math.


Um..."Thats" and "your". Farking, hell people!
 
2012-06-14 02:18:28 PM  

vpb: 9beers: Gecko Gingrich: The kind where the most senior are the highest paid (not that different inside or outside of union workforces). You need to cut $1M. You can either lose 15 workers making $65K or 30 making $33K. The effect to your bottom line is the same, except one way stretches your workforce too thin.

Your point is the exact opposite of what's being talked about. The workers with the highest seniority are the ones being retained, not laid off. In an union environment, that's all that matters.

Precisely. In a non union environment your job security goes down as you get older and more experienced. Which is why people are much better off with unions than without them.


In a mythical world where people with seniority work just as hard as those who don't, you might have a point. But we all know that those with seniority tend to slack off and not work as hard.

When my kids were in school, it was so easy to spot the sand bagging teachers just occupying space till retirement... and there is nothing that can be done about them.
 
2012-06-14 02:18:36 PM  
Union shops are not the only ones who make decisions based on seniority, but they often have the strictest rules about it.
 
2012-06-14 02:20:15 PM  
no longer a meme, it's a campaign Party plank.

i.qkme.me
 
2012-06-14 02:22:02 PM  
img.photobucket.com
 
2012-06-14 02:22:12 PM  

Wangiss: Someone I know just tweeted the terrible news that her state spends the least on education. So I looked up her state's performance. They're doing great, and spend money more efficiently than any other state. Not surprisingly, it is also the state in which teachers' unions are legal but have the least influence. (Five states ban collective bargaining for teachers.)


Name the state, shiatwaffle.
 
2012-06-14 02:22:40 PM  

Gecko Gingrich: namatad: why kind of farked up system bases these decision only on seniority?

The kind where the most senior are the highest paid (not that different inside or outside of union workforces). You need to cut $1M. You can either lose 15 workers making $65K or 30 making $33K. The effect to your bottom line is the same, except one way stretches your workforce too thin.


I thought they were laying of the newest (lower paid) workers, not the other way around. Meaning those with greater seniority kept their jobs.
 
2012-06-14 02:23:16 PM  
Ha! I figured some unlettered rabble would post the more common version!
 
2012-06-14 02:24:19 PM  
Next time don't work so hard. You're making your colleauges look bad.
 
2012-06-14 02:24:57 PM  

9beers: Weaver95: so lets contrast that with Jamie Dimon and his situation. He lost OVER $2 billion dollars of his investor's money. But he's not being fired for his incompetence. In fact, he's being rewarded rather nicely - to the tune of something over $200 million or so in stock options and the like. If we are to assume that ability is the sole variable in determining how someone is compensated (or retained as an employee) then....why are we not seeing massive purges of high ranking CEOs and corporate officers like Jamie Dimon? where's the outrage over such a system that rewards an elite few for massive greed and incompetence?

Employees fark up all the time without being terminated for it. If Chase wanted to fire him, they would, and there wouldn't be a union there protecting him.


And they call *me* naive.
 
2012-06-14 02:25:04 PM  
Wow, it's like the school district is run by Sci FI... They announce how popular Eureka is, how proud they are of the show, and then announce that they are canceling it like 2 days later.

That's ok though, as someone pointed out earlier Mitt the Great just informed us that Wisconsin has demonstrated that we don't need teachers, firefighters or police officers, and if Mitt says it, it's GOT to be true.

amirite?
 
2012-06-14 02:25:25 PM  

Wangiss: Someone I know just tweeted the terrible news that her state spends the least on education. So I looked up her state's performance. They're doing great, and spend money more efficiently than any other state. Not surprisingly, it is also the state in which teachers' unions are legal but have the least influence. (Five states ban collective bargaining for teachers.)


But we don't want to let facts get in the way of a good union bash circle jerk. Yes, California is in the bottom on spending, and still ranks in the top 3rd on performance. The union doesn't overreach and is sensible about what it offers its members.

Seniority hiring/firing systems remove politics from the equation and work better than subjective valuations on merit. For all the conservative talking point repeaters who claim it's impossible to fire bad teachers it is not.

Your tax breaks at work.
 
2012-06-14 02:26:04 PM  
All in all, she's just another brick in the wall.

/now she will be leaving those kids alone.
 
2012-06-14 02:26:43 PM  
What a great way to save money: cut down the number of people educating children. I mean, really, who wants an educated population? What possible use could there be for citizens to be able to read, write, do math, get a glipse of world history, understand how their country works (political, judicial, etc.), learn about the scientific method, and the myriad other things taught in school? I'm sure those children will learn just as well in classes of 35+ as they would have in a class of 25 or so...class size has no effect on learning, right?

/why do Americans appear to value education, and teachers, as little as they do?
//serious question
 
2012-06-14 02:27:33 PM  
At first I thought this was like John Taylor Gatto's story.

The education system gets away with stuff like this because results are not connected to survival.... and that is because of the political system. Voters should end the careers of the clowns who enable decisions like this. If they don't, it's sadly their loss.
 
2012-06-14 02:28:59 PM  
I'm more worried about a link off that page: the mugshot list. It says William Williams III was arrested on March 20 on the charge "possession of pig iron." Is "possession of pig iron" a serious crime in Virginia?

http://wtvr.com/2012/03/08/mug-shots-from-virginia-arrest/
 
2012-06-14 02:29:54 PM  

Because People in power are Stupid: Gecko Gingrich: namatad: why kind of farked up system bases these decision only on seniority?

The kind where the most senior are the highest paid (not that different inside or outside of union workforces). You need to cut $1M. You can either lose 15 workers making $65K or 30 making $33K. The effect to your bottom line is the same, except one way stretches your workforce too thin.

$33K? Way too much for a teacher. We should make them ask their students for food on a daily basis.


Apple on the desk, man. That's how they used to do it.
 
2012-06-14 02:31:11 PM  

BeesNuts: And they call *me* naive.


So you're saying that Chase doesn't have the power to fire one of their employees?
 
2012-06-14 02:31:16 PM  
Yeah, not having enough tax revenue to pay teachers is pretty asinine of this district, subby. How could they have been so careless?
 
2012-06-14 02:32:15 PM  
Are we really that short sighted as a country that our first reaction to budget balancing is to cut teachers? Has it always been this way, and I am just now old enough to see/understand it?
 
2012-06-14 02:33:28 PM  

s2s2s2: bdub77: That's because you're bad at math.

Um..."Thats" and "your". Farking, hell people!


That's because you're a twit.
 
2012-06-14 02:34:20 PM  
Didn't read the article, didn't read the comments, didn't actually finish the Fark headline but UUUUNNNNIOOOONNNNNNNSSSSS!

No, but seriously, let's assume this is actually a union thing. (Something you might expect to be in the article if so, but it's local "journalism," so who the fark knows.)

Why would the union have such a rule written into their contracts? Is it because they're horrible, wicked people who just want to eat and/or rape our children, while growing fat off those sweet-ass elementary school teacher salaries?

No, it's because if you don't have that rule, here's how "negotiations" go.

Step 1: Hire a bunch of 22-year-old teachers you don't even need. (You can get them pretty cheap, since the union contract probably has time-of-service raises.)
Step 2: "Oh, no, we're overstaffed. I guess we need to fire a bunch of teachers."
Step 3: "Sorry, Agnes. It came down to a choice between you and this 22-year-old, and you had a grievance filed against you back in 1978, so technically his record is cleaner than yours. We're doing this meritocratically, you see."
Step 4: Renegotiate contract with new 22-year-old union rep. Generously concede to his demand for a froyo machine in the teacher's lounge.

I know, I know, they're all worse than Hitler no matter what. UUUUUNNNNIOOOONNNNNS!
 
2012-06-14 02:35:55 PM  
this state is delusional for thinking it can afford 100 billion for high speed rail. when the pension crisis really hits the government is going to have serious trouble paying for basic services. they need to raise taxes and fund those monsters a decade ago.
 
2012-06-14 02:38:22 PM  

vpb: Precisely. In a non union environment your job security goes down as you get older and more experienced. Which is why people are much better off with unions than without them.


Which people? The ONLY people "better off" are the elite, high paid teachers with seniority. There are a LOT more people worse off. The junior teachers with no job security. The hard working teachers. The students. The taxpayers. The people that have to deal with students after they graduate. Pretty much everyone else is worse off with the union system.
 
2012-06-14 02:38:52 PM  

Ozone_Ranger:
/why do Americans appear to value education, and teachers, as little as they do?
//serious question


Good question. I figure it's the kids don't care and after a while, the teachers give up
 
2012-06-14 02:39:13 PM  

Raw_fishFood: Are we really that short sighted as a country that our first reaction to budget balancing is to cut teachers? Has it always been this way, and I am just now old enough to see/understand it?


you have roads, medicaid (which mostly pays for poor kids and pregnant women), food stamps, police, fire, and teachers to pick from.
you choose.
 
2012-06-14 02:39:44 PM  

9beers: BeesNuts: And they call *me* naive.

So you're saying that Chase doesn't have the power to fire one of their employees?


I'm sure Chase's board of directors is made up of other CEOs whose BODs Dimon sits on, each voting on the other's pay and compensation. Unless the scandal is criminal enough to impact their individual reputations for being associated with him, they're "not gonna break the code" and start "backstabbing" each other in the boardroom.

I think that's what Bees was driving at.
 
2012-06-14 02:39:49 PM  

ciberido: I'm more worried about a link off that page: the mugshot list. It says William Williams III was arrested on March 20 on the charge "possession of pig iron." Is "possession of pig iron" a serious crime in Virginia?

http://wtvr.com/2012/03/08/mug-shots-from-virginia-arrest/


He was on the rock island line.
 
2012-06-14 02:40:09 PM  
If you have to do layoffs, why not fire the teachers with the MOST seniority? They are costing you the most, so you get the best bang for your buck that way.
 
2012-06-14 02:40:12 PM  
though you could legalize all drugs and save a mint, except people are retarded.
 
2012-06-14 02:40:18 PM  
At least one US state is finally doing something to prevent those shameful teacher-student hookups...
 
2012-06-14 02:41:37 PM  
Job security should come from good performance. The "teacher of the year" should pretty much be guaranteed another year on the job.
 
2012-06-14 02:43:02 PM  
Seniority?! That is colossally stupid. Why keep the old, lazy fuddyduddies around when you have younger, good, eager, teachers who are willing to work harder for less money?

Just ridiculous.
 
Displayed 50 of 170 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report