GothamSchools — daily independent reporting on NYC public schools

learning to teach

You Want To Lay ME Off?

As a teacher, I check in with the blogosphere and major news networks only after 5 p.m., so during the day I get my updates through the rumorsphere. On Wednesday, I heard about Mayor Bloomberg’s proposed raise-cuts from Ms. AlmostRetired. She seemed downcast, and she came to me because I am one of the few young teachers at the school. Her bad news (not receiving the raise) could possibly be good news to me (the revenue saved might save my job). “You might like this, Mr. Arp,” she said. “The raise I thought I was going to get next year might be your paycheck.” She said it with warmth, and I appreciated her thoughtfulness.

Because, you see, I have been Mr. MaybeFired all year. Our teacher’s lounge has been ablaze with budget talks. At our monthly faculty meetings, our principal warns us again and again that our school will be facing serious setbacks and that not all teachers will be coming back next year. All eyes on me, of course.

To the uninitiated, it works like this: In accordance with current union policy, widespread layoffs would be implemented by seniority. The first hired, as they say (again and again), will be the first fired. This leads to some interesting conversations. I remember Ms. AlmostRetired holding her head in her hands at lunch time, crying “Why won’t they buy me out? I’m ready to go! Buy me out!”

“Why should you be laid off?” She asks me. “When I’m dying to get out of here and you want to stay. And you’re cheap!” To an extent, this seems like a fine argument. Young teachers are the cheapest teachers, and there must be quite a few teachers in Ms. AlmostRetired’s position: willing to leave if provided with the means to retire. But I have had difficulty gauging the price of retirement against the cost of a beginning teacher. Besides, I do not find this argument personally compelling. I would not want to keep my job because I am inexpensive.

I would want to keep my job because I know that in order to become a teacher, I need to teach. If there has been one consistent lesson that I have learned in my first two years, it is this: experience makes the teacher. To deny me years of experience and then to ask me to come back to the profession later in life seems to be, simply, a raw deal. Please remember, Powers that Be, that I have no intention of remaining unemployed. I will take the layoff and gain experience in some other field, and it will be a tough sell to discard that experience to return to teaching.

Of course, I am not really thinking of myself, but of the other young, beginning teachers for whom I have been writing my posts over the past few months. My personal mantra (“keep at it, keep at it, keep at it”) does not harmonize with sweeping layoffs. I say this not as a threat but as a basic observation: If young teachers are laid off, they will find other things to do. Teachers who have given two or three vibrant, flawed, energetic, stumbling years to the profession cannot, and must not, be counted on to return when the economy brightens.

There are many good reasons to lay me off before any other teacher in my school, but I need only name one: I am the worst teacher in my school. Regardless of my energy, my enthusiasm and my good will, I cannot fake 20 years of experience. But to take away my chance to become a veteran, and the chance of every other young teacher in the city, is to sell our future in order to save the present moment. It seems to me like an obviously wrong-headed decision, or an obviously wrong-headed policy.

  • http://www.bronxteach.com Ruben

    Well put, cutting off the next generation of teachers before they’re given the chance to grow as teachers is very short-sighted. Luckily it looks like we’re safe for now…

  • Vote NO

    You should be praying that LIFO is never CHANGED! It saved your job! Apparently the layoff scenario resulting from LIFO would cause so much havoc that it caused the mayor to reconsider layoffs, as a way to cut costs.

    The IRONY is that having such a “poison pill” as LIFO based layoffs, saved every teacher’s job. You will appreciate it even more, if you decide to remain with the DOE, and gain seniority.

    This can only serve to make teaching in NYC a more desirable occupation for well educated candidates. People who are looking for a good, stable profession in an economy where so many worker’s employment is tenuous in a good economy, let alone one with 10% unemployment.

    With LIFO’s draconion effect on schools if implemented, I wouldn’t worry about NYC teacher layoffs next year either.

  • Vote NO

    sorry..”draconian”

  • Teacher

    Given the opportunity principals will take advantage and choose who they feel should be layed off. Seniority MUST stay intact. I respect you are a new teacher but you have no idea the games the doe plays with teachers.

    If seniority were gone, whats to stop principals from laying off senior teachers first… because they are more expensive, and those teachers have already invested so many years of their life in the system. Where would they go? You must respect that. The city and doe are just looking to save money. They dont care about you, your union does!

  • Green Hornet

    CW: Seniority is not “union policy”. The Union does not make “policy” the chancellor (or mayor) does. Seniority is in the “collective bargaining agreement”. That is an agreement between two parties bargained over decades by better people than you and me. Seniority is also in State Law. The opposite of seniority is a pretty bad idea. Who would make that decision some second rate principal that was unable to hack it on wall street or a classroom. How bouts we subject the sanitation department to no seniority — the more bags you lift you keep the job. Perhaps the Fire Department the more fires you put out you stay — the list goes on. I am glad that there are no layoffs but if they need be seniority is the only answer. By the way, how do you know folks will not come back after a layoff — the last time a layoff happened was in the 70′s – are you an expert on the subject.

  • Gary

    What i don’t understand is why is everyone complaining about the mayor taking away a 2% raise that doesn’t exist. Since the teacher’s contract expired, the old contract stays in effect until there is a new contract. salaries atay at the levels they are in the old contract. There is no 2% raise to take away. it does not exist. If the mayor wants to get brownie points for taking away a non-existant raise, let him. i don’t see what all the fuss is about.

  • CWT

    Green Hornet – an agreement is between two parties… so in definition the union does have a hand in setting policy, not just the chancellor. It’s a compromise, like a marriage.

    As for those second rate principals who couldn’t cut it in the classroom – I find that offensive to those principals who actually have served well in the classroom and have moved into admin positions as a growth opportunity. Those individuals are qualified to make decisions on teacher quality. Please refrain from making gross generalizations. Use the word “some” or “many”.

    And CW – I don’t think you are the worst teacher. A teacher biding their time until they can cash out is much worse. I think it takes courage and intelligence to realize that you are not the best teacher, you need experience to get better, and that you are willing to admit that to others. That shows signs of a great teacher. It’s those teachers who think they need no help, are perfect because of their years, and need no professional development to help them improve their craft that are the worst teachers. Teaching is about learning, and teachers shouldn’t be exempt from this requirement.

  • CA Teacher (Former NYC)

    If a system is setup where principal’s own job is based on the school’s performance (and I’m not saying NYC is there yet), if it was, what incentive does a principal have to fire his/her best performers? Furthermore, why should a teacher get paid more just because they have been teaching longer? Do I pay my hair dresser or lawyer based on their years or their capabilities? Years often convey experience, but years in themselves mean to what student achievement?

  • bookworm

    Eloquently put. I agree that consistent practice is the only way to get better. I didn’t feel like I hit my stride as a teacher until about my 5th year. When I switched to Literacy, it took about three years to feel confident. I am in year 13 now, and still find things that I will add, leave out, do differently or totally scrap every year and still look to my more experienced peers for ideas. If we look at the seventies and the layoffs there, I think something like only 15% of those laid off actually came back to the profession. The others, as you said, “found something else to do”.

    By the way, I am an ATR, and if BloomKlein have their way, I will be laid off before you.

Tips, questions, feedback?

Contact us at .

Follow GothamSchools

RSS

Chalk It Up

Recent Comments

17 comments so far today

Our Twitter Updates

Archives

May 2012
M T W T F S S
« Apr  
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031