I haven’t been able to get a copy of the press release yet, but I have it on good authority that District 150 has declared an impasse in their negotiations with the Peoria Federation of Teachers and plans to implement changes to the teachers’ contract beginning December 18. More details to follow.
UPDATE: The Journal Star has their article up now. Of note, the union is not threatening to strike yet, but it remains a possibility. Also, this:
Both sides also possess dissenting views on several core items, including salary, class size, tuition reimbursement and a longer school day, according to a statement issued Thursday by the school district. […]
On Dec. 18, the last day of school before the holiday break, the district plans to implement its proposal that includes no pay cuts but salary freezes, would limit reimbursement to teachers for taking additional college courses as well as which courses they could take, and essentially gives the district the ability to determine how many teachers they would employ.
I see the school district is back on the “longer school day is better” bandwagon. Huh. It was only last year that the district argued for shorter school days. Does that mean they’re admitting they were wrong to reduce the school day last year? It looks that way to me.
Boy Frustrated, you seem to completely miss my point. Define “need”, is it because of choices made which drive household expenses?
Single moms? Employed them for years. Each and every one of them were the most resilient and resourceful folks I’ve ever met. I’ve employed homeless, men, addicts, princesses, single moms, etc. So, don’t presume what I do or don’t know.
If you are not aware of the contradiction in the statement “Keeping their children home is not beneficial to the family” then you are a sad representation of what ails the american home of this generation.
Ok, Ed, I’ll probably regret jumping back in this, but…
Sometimes, a parent needs to work during the day in order to meet the bills that a family accrues. Things like utilities, rent, food, and gas. Those aren’t wants, they are needs. Sometime it takes 2 parents to make those bills, especially if they are both working minimum wage jobs. Add in children and the costs go up. It may be that one or both parents have been laid off and they are now working jobs that pay substantially lower than their previous jobs. In today’s economy, that is entirely probable.
Also consider that they may not have reliable child care during the schools year, as the summer sitter may be a high school/college student and not available during the regular school day. Yes, the parent may have made arrangements for half days but those are known about when the school year begins.
Sometimes a family has to make decisions that are best for their family that make absolutely no sense to anyone else. That does not give you the right to demean or demoralize their choices. Please be respectful of their choices as you would expect them to be of yours.
Don’t teachers have children? Aren’t most teachers women? Aren’t some teachers single parents? When we ask teachers to change their work demands such as longer days, extra assignments, transfers, etc., aren’t those affecting their families/quality of family life as well. Aren’t we asking teachers to sacrifice time with their own children to mold other people’s children when we ask them to extend their time in the building? The argument that other jobs stink and require people to neglect some of their family responsibilities especially in a poor economy so every job/career must stink and require parents to neglect their kids? That is the argument that I am hearing from some–is that the argument you really want to make? I have friends who went into teaching so that they could be there for their kids more even if it meant making less money. Some have parents or spouses that need them as caretakers. What impact on society does the “Well, I have to work this amount of time and miss out on my family so everyone else should have to as well!”
Ed – whether a family is working to meet their basic “needs” or as you seem to be supposing, to meet their “wants” — the financial obligation is there. It is no good for a person to lose their job and not be able to meet their obligations, even if the cause of those obligations is excessive materialism.
But really Ed, do you believe there are that many families in District 150 that are “living large”? Do you have children that currently attend any of the schools? Most of the parents I have met at my children’s school are very middle class or below.
Jdarcy–You have made some very good points–those often ignored by most. I maintain that most think of teachers as they were 100 years ago–single women whose sole role in life was to teach. Teachers today are parents, also. They not only have to think about other people’s children, they have to think about the needs of their own families. So many parents expect teachers to be available at all times of the day and night to answer their phone calls, etc., to stay after school for parent-teacher conferences that meet the parents’ work schedules, etc. Administrators assign tasks to teachers that require hours of work outside of the classroom. I know that Manual principals expect teachers to turn in their lesson plans via e-mail by Sunday evening so that the lesson plans can be graded by their fellow teachers at Monday morning collaboration. None of you would believe the meticulous lesson plans (following set guidelines) that are expected of these teachers. As a single teacher myself, I realized that I could never have done as much work as I did at night if I had been married with children. At the high school level, most teachers are required to take on extra-curricular assignments that take up many, many hours of extra time. When I was the faculty advisor for the newspaper, I simply had no time left for me. This strike, if it happens, will inconvenience parents, and no one is suggesting that it won’t require sacrifice on the part of parents–and teachers will appreciate the sacrifice the parents make for this effort. However, all parents have to have contingency plans for when their children are sick, etc. Jdarcy is correct–many women and men do choose teaching because their are family-oriented (which is also a quality that makes them good teachers); they do choose teaching because of the time off in the summers, etc., because of the quality of life that time offers to their families. I can already hear all the arguments about how parents with 9 to 5 jobs, etc., want family time, too. I am going to need considerable convincing to believe that most other jobs require the kinds of after hours’ demands made on teachers. I’ve had friends who weren’t teachers–I wasn’t aware of these demands on their lives. Teachers are consistently expected to show up to all sorts of activities in the evenings and on weekends besides doing the work required of them as teachers. Teachers are truly considered to be public servants.
since everyone seems to be missing the point, i’ll clarify:
to those who think ““Keeping their children home is not beneficial to the family” i say don’t procreate.
it’s that simple.
Ed, I did get it–the statement that you quote is an absurdity. It’s possible the poster misspoke–didn’t mean to imply that children are a detriment to family life.
Sometimes sendign children to school so that parents can go to work is the best option a parent has.
It’s funny how you can rake me over the coals since you don’t know me or my situation. Funny how that sounds like how everyone treated bamcdaniel when she was trying to make a decision that is best for her family. Guess we shouldn’t really consider how a strike would affect anyone except the teachers.
ed – I understand your point and agree completely.
Mama, I do understand–teachers all made the same argument about the district’s desire to cut 45 minutes out of the day and then its final decision to institute Wacky Wednesday’s loss of time. There is no question a strike would negatively affect many people. However, I don’t think the teachers have much of a choice in this case–the decisions that 150 wants to make without union consent will be detrimental to teachers and to students. The results of their decisions will be permanent–a strike will be a temporary, one-time inconvenience.
Once again, Sharon, you say you understand, but you choose to only side with the teachers. A strike, to you, may only be temporary for some people, but for some parents who have nowhere to send their children during a strike and have to stay at homethe repercussions could be catastrophic. Losing a job in this economy is not temporary. Many employers will tell employees that if they don’t show up for work there is a line of potential employees willing to have that one job.
I guess, once again, it’s all about the teachers and not about the students. Funny, I thought the district was supposed to be in the business of educating students. While they don’t always do a very good job, a strike would pre-empt any strides being made. Don’t forget that everyone keeps saying this isn’t about money, but the more I hear the arguments, the more I keep hearing the ring of cha-ching. Seems to me the teachers would agree to the increase in class size, transfers, etc. if there was a price tag attached to it.
We only need to see one side though cause any others are simply irrelevant.
Mama, I understand your frustration (whether you are able to believe it or not). I know you won’t share my own beliefs, but I believe this situation is extremely important. What part of the reasons for strike do you see as related to money? We all know that this district is in no position right now to be offering raises (except perhaps to administrators). You are so wrong about teachers agreeing to class size and transfers under any conditions. Miserable working conditions are the deciding factors in whether or not young people with other options choose or reject teaching as a career. I cannot deny that I am on the teachers’ side in this one–someone has to be. Schools are about educating children. However, the teachers who carry out that task have some rights and needs, also–they aren’t volunteers. It is not the teachers’ job to make life comfortable for parents–it is just to educate their children. It is the administration and board’s responsibility to provide a safe learning environment for children–their proposals will not do that. There is a factor that you are ignoring–the decision is in the hands of District 150 administrators. They have a problem though. They have closed schools and are closing a high school. The end result is that they will have no choice but to increase class sizes and to transfer many teachers (with no attention to be paid on whether or not the teachers are as qualified for their “new” jobs–teachers, like doctors, do have specialties). The administration is making the teachers the scapegoats on this one–poor planning and financial management have put the district in this position. Please consider putting some, if not all, of the blame on the administrators. They could call off the need for a strike right now.
“Please consider putting some, if not all, of the blame on the administrators. They could call off the need for a strike right now.”
hahahaahahahhahahahahahahhahha…oh, Sharon, you slay me.
@mama. i don’t detect a judgment on you in the side conversation above. if you feel there is one, maybe some of the points are hitting home. too often, “adults” have children and don’t put the kids first in every aspect of their lives. To many, this is what parenting is about; 100% sacrifice. Do life situations hit hard, sure, but why should one’s life be subject to the turbulence of society when some pre-planning would help smooth the waves?
It’s about funding emergency situations well before they occur, it’s about planning years in advance for life eventualities, it’s about making sure the kids are secure so when the parent releases the child into society, whether it be at 3, 5, 10, 16, or 18 – that child is equipped. Rhetorical questions like do you have six months of expenses in the bank, do you have an emergency fund, are you going to help fund any part of your childs transition to adulthood – those issues require planning.
A LARGE part of the discipline problems folks keep bringing up are borne in the home, not in the school building. It is extremely fair to inspect this, shine light on it and hold parents accountable.
E-gads, people! Why isn’t the question, “what will we do with our children if there is a strike?” a valid and acceptable question to ask without being blamed for lacking parental accountability? mama was simply making the point that the impact of any strike is not entirely upon the teachers…D150 families are involved, whether they like it or not.
@dangling participle, if I read your post right, you’re basically saying that it’s acceptable for parents to lose their jobs to stay home and care for their children during a strike. Really? Thanks for the lecture about financial planning. FYI, I AM a responsible parent, have planned well, am very present in my son’s life (yes, I miss work to care for him when needed), and am still wondering what I’ll do with my 2nd grade son if a strike does happen. Will we opt cross the picket line? Will he go to work with me or my husband? Will one of us stay home? For how long? Trust me, from a parent’s perspective, this is a frustrating situation. I want my son in school learning…not because I’m too lazy to take care of him or am not accountable…but because that’s where he’s supposed to be. I think the majority of parents I know feel the same way.
What I think is missing in this discussion is the very reasonable thought that while the focus is on the teacher’s union and the administration, there are very real impacts to D150 families, too. I have not heard mama or anyone else here say that they see school as babysitting. I think that’s a rather insulting comment at any rate, at least in the context of this thread/discussion.
I totally understand that most of the readers here are more interested in blaming either the union or the administration for this problem. I simply do not think it’s fair to denigrate parents at the same time. They certainly didn’t ask to be put in this situation!
JCFriberg, I just want to know how parents feel about overcrowded classrooms. Are they willing to fight that issue with the teachers? Some of the other issues might be perceived as just teacher issues but overcrowded classrooms will affect students. As it is right now, 98 of 248 high school English and social studies classes have more than 25 students. In fact, 35 classes have 29 or more. If the district is currently violating the contractual class size of 25, what do you think they will do when there are no restrictions? Those are just the class sizes that I FOIAd so far. Others regularly report overcrowded classes at the primary and middle school level. Do parents believe that the district will adhere to recommended class sizes if the union loses this battle? The district’s desire to eliminate teaching positions will result in overcrowded classrooms. How much control does the district have over special ed class size?
Sharon, I’m not saying that some parents might want to fight alongside teachers…that might well be the case. I hope it is, in some respects. What I was saying is that D150 families are affected with the logistical aspects of a potential strike in a way that was (in my opinion) being condescended to by other posters. I was not speaking to the actual teaching/administration issues pertaining to the strike, just the more operational aspects of being an accountable parent in this situation.
JFFriberg–Of course, I agree. I think this whole discussion started because Ed, I believe, was playing off the poster’s statement that, “Keeping their children home is not beneficial to the family.” She definitely didn’t mean that children are detrimental to family life. Ed’s interpretation of what she meant was not what she meant, of course. Teachers are not insensitive to the inconvenience of a strike on parents. Without parental and public support teachers are at a great disadvantage in this fight. I just hope that the public will see the importance of the issues at stake in this struggle between the two sides in District 150. Unfortunately, I know that many want to break the union to end tenure, etc. I’m not at all certain the result will bring the benefits they anticipate.
Dangling P = “A LARGE part of the discipline problems folks keep bringing up are borne in the home, not in the school building. It is extremely fair to inspect this, shine light on it and hold parents accountable.”
Could not agree more!!! BUT . . . being a good parent and working are not mutually exclusive, in fact, I think they go hand and hand. Typically people that understand their responsibilities in life and work to provide for themselves and their families, manage also to do a good job raising their kids.
Working parents (particularly moms) are all about planning and so they have every scheduled holiday and vacation day from school covered with care providers and/or save their allotted vacation days to cover this period. I don’t buy for a minute that it is a parent’s responsibility to burn vacation or sick days or possibly lose their employment by not going to work in order for another group of workers to gain better wage, benefits, or working conditions.
frustrated, dangling p;
i’m largely with you.
except for this:
“I don’t buy for a minute that it is a parent’s responsibility to burn vacation or sick days or possibly lose their employment by not going to work in order for another group of workers to gain better wage, benefits, or working conditions.”
this is a great statement, and i don’t mean that pejoratively. on one hand, i would burn my benefit time in a heartbeat to take care of my kids because its my responsibility to do so, regardless of the trigger. on the other hand, it is insulting to have to burn that time because of the indulgence of another group of workers.
oh well. started getting the house ready for sale today. the strike didn’t precipitate it, my so’s experience in working for the district for the last year and the thought of sending our children to middle school in d150 triggered this exodus. believe me, no one is blameless in this morass.
At this time of year, I enjoy reading the heartwarming stories about people rising above and reaching out to others. What a downer to read about the strategies meant to force teachers to feel that they must strike in order to have their voice heard. What type of leadership uses a Win-Lose paradigm? Whoever was on the news the other day might as well have been Khrushchev, “We will bury you!” What type of leadership skips over the triple dare (arbitration) and goes straight for the triple dog dare (go ahead, make our day and strike–we will bury you!). Is this about negotiating a contract taking all parties into consideration or is this about a power struggle? Fear, intimidation, and censorship belong in the fascist’s arsenal and should not be used by the leaders of our schools. I expect better from those leader our school district. This strategy is so conniving and heartless–way to take the Christ out of Christmas!! I must leave the blogs and seek the heartwarming stories of Christmas. Guess I won’t be the only one spending time with a few bad apples at Christmas. Merry Christmas!!
Ed – I imagine the District stated the parties had reached an impasse because they have to get the issue of transfer rights settled in order to plan for the reassignment of teachers to the existing highs schools next year and to be able to plan for other restructuring down the road.
By the way, could someone “in know” describe for me what the issue is with transfers. What is the District asking? What do the teachers want?
Frustrated: I joined the union for the first time in the 1980s because of the transfer policy at the time (the one the district wishes to bring back). It was during the time that the high schools went from a 7-hour day to a 6-hour day; therefore, teachers had to be eliminated–very much the same as the situation will be next year. The unfair transfer policy involved a veteran Manual teacher (but not old) who was the head of the social studies department and actually had a master’s degree in her teaching area. She was very active at Manual. She was in charge of the National Honor Society. She and her husband attended just about every event–whenever Manual’s doors were open at night, they were there; she believed that was her obligation. The principals were allowed to follow their own dictates in deciding whom to transfer to a middle school position. The principal decided to keep all teachers who had “paid” extra-curricular activities–National Honor Society sponsor was not a paid position. As might be expected, the social studies department was filled with coaches, so they all had paid extra-curricular activities. Also, she was “chosen” to leave because she was the kind of person known for her professionalism–a person who would do as she was told. As it happens she, also, had integrity and a sense of fair play, so she filed a grievance–to everyone’s surprise (it was a big deal at the time). She was transferred, but as a result of this situation, the policy was changed for the future. No one should consider middle school a punishment–and that’s not the point here. It’s just a matter of fairness. She did have more academic qualifications than did the others in her department–she should have stayed at the high school level–in a few years she did get a position at Peoria High. Of course, there is the case of Terry Knapp, who challenged the superintendent by going over his head to speak to school board members about the unfair policy of coaches having to transport students to athletic events–being liable with their own insurance policies. Terry was punished by being sent to Harrison to teach (probably a middle school at the time). When he won his legal case, he also won the right to return to Woodruff. That’s the reason the transfer policy is so important. Principals have been known to use the policy in very unfair ways–and in ways that are not in the best interests of students either. Lest any of you believe that this is a way to get rid of “bad” teachers, think again. The receiving principal also has a say in the matter. It’s just a way for administrators to show their authority.
The way it is now and should be: After Dr. Kherat eliminated the Manual teachers that she did not want at Manual, those teachers were notified of all the positions in the district available in the field in which they are certified. They indicated their first, second, third choices–and the positions were filled on the basis of senority. I don’t know of any of those teachers who were unhappy about their new placements–the reason: the transfers were made in a fair manner–everyone knew the rules going in. No principal could go “over the head” of another principal to pick the teacher he/she wanted. No teacher could count on favoritism or friendship to get the position he/she wanted.
WMBD reporting reverse discrimination lawsuit filed against D150.
WMBD reporting a racial discrimination lawsuit has been filed against D150. Link to the document is on their website.
If the allegations in the complaint are true, it does not paint a pretty picture if either the white or the black teachers at this. Very sad.
This does sadden me greatly. What bothers me most is that the district ignored the situation for far too long–and problems escalated. Personally, I would rather view this situation as an administrator vs teachers issue. There is no doubt that the racial aspect is in the mix. I believe the district should be proactive in these situations (and I believe there are others brewing) to try to bring the two sides (be it white/black or administrator/teachers) together for discussion, etc., and resolution. This should have been resolved at the grievance stage so as not to go to legal action. The Davis case is another one that should have been taken care of in-house, Instead the district ignored the complaints, believing an employee could be coerced into silence. When people have complaints, they don’t respond well to being ignored. For its own sake, the district should take all complaints seriously before the situations become public. Like it or not, blogs, etc., have made the world more transparent.
The district has no conflict resolution. That is a huge problem. Could this lawsuit be another reason Hinton left early? I am surprised a couple other admins. aren’t named in this. I hope fairness wins in this case.
There is no question that these allegations are well documented. Patricia Bennassi won’t take a case unless it is solid. Very difficult to read… but very believable. I don’t understand Frustrated’s comment that this doesn’t paint a pretty picture of the white teachers. Would love to know what Frustrated would do if she were in a similar situation.
Hopefully Hinton has his brand new custom made BMW import by now. He is going to need a fast, dependable set of wheels to make it to all his court dates!
My friend had a similar experience with Rogy’s about 8 years ago. The teachers were cursing and rough with the kids and when my friend witnessed this and called back to speak to the director of the daycare the director said it was culturally acceptable to treat little African American kids that way. Needless to say, she did not send her kids to this daycare in Peoria Heights.
Jenny – Please explain what you mean by “similar” experience. And the story about Rogy’s is deplorable. How bold and stupid of the director to utter such words!
Ooo I probably should of said reminded me of an experience my friend had during a tour at Rogy’s. I am connecting it because in the lawsuit the white teachers are claiming to witness the black teachers using curse words and physical contact with the students and that white teachers need to realize cursing from children is acceptable in black culture. I don’t believe this to be true. Clear as mud? 🙂
Read this everybody.
http://centralillinoisproud.com/media/pdf/Dist150Lawsuit.pdf
Thanks, Jenny, the mud is much clearer. 🙂 I haven’t heard such absurdities often–but I have heard them (that it’s OK in black culture, etc.). I think it is time that we all work together to stop this underestimating of black young people. There is nothing in black culture or genetics that keeps them from behaving according to acceptable standards of behavior. In my lifetime, I have known many, many black young people (even those at the lower end of the economic spectrum) whose behavior has been polite, appropriate, etc. And I’ve know many black parents who expected that behavior of their children. Making these unnecessary excuses for bad behavior isn’t helping anyone, certainly not the young people themselves–and, yes, there are administrators in 150 that have made that the norm rather than the exception. I taught some of the black administrators–and I can’t them of one of them who, as students, did not treat me with the utmost respect. I think it’s time that they realize that the young people under their watch can do the same.
I don’t know what “black culture” you all are talking about, but where I was raised kids don’t cuss and their parents don’t cuss at them. So if you “teachers” see my kids coming and you think it’s okay just because they are black – they have been informed to advise you otherwise and let me deal with the fall out.
Nonsense.
Emerge, I certainly understand that and took it for granted that this is the way you and your child was/is raised. As a teacher, I took it for granted that all my students were raised to be respectful–and, frankly, I rarely was proven wrong. I have heard both black and white administrators ask teachers to be more lenient with students with regard to inappropriate language, etc. As a teacher, I often heard language that was not appropriate–rarely, if ever, directed at me. Most of the time all I had to do is look at the student and the student would apoligize–because he/she knew they had violated acceptable standards. Certainly, I didn’t seek further punishment for students whom I recognized had misspoke. I think what teachers are discussing in this lawsuit is an acceptance of confrontational language, which is different than a bad word that just slips out. I know that my students jumped 10 feet high if they thought I had said an inappropriate word (I don’t think I ever did, but a few times they thought they heard something that they hadn’t heard). Kids, especially older ones, know the difference–they are just playing games with those who would think otherwise.
PJStar: “District 150 Implements Final Proposal …”
FYI: We teachers have already accepted the hard wage freeze and have been working under freezing conditions since August. We fully understand that the board overspent (again) — leaving the district with an 8,000,000+ deficit. That pill has been swallowed. Next, we’ll be swallowing the effects of the recession pill. Keep in mind, the recession hasn’t trickled down to school districts yet due to the Obama administration’s Recovery Act money. Still, it’s coming. I walk out my front door every morning knowing that two of my neighbors have been laid off. You won’t hear me or very many other teachers whining about money at a time like this. Again, though, don’t think the deficit is a result of the recession. It’s the result of mismanagement and outright incompetence.
One of the major issues of contention is related to transfer rights. If the citizens of Peoria want every school in District 150 turned into a Manual-esque kind of school, then side with the board. Keep in mind, the district was given a clean slate with Manual and the union made contractual concessions (esp concerning transfer rights) affording the Manual administration more leeway (power) in the name of restructuring. Since then, four teachers have walked out mid-year — just up and quit. Teachers have (and continue to) transfer out of the school. The principal of the school recently issued seventeen letters of concern to teachers (the first step in having said teachers transferred out of the school) before going ON VACATION FOR THE DURATION OF FINAL EXAMS WEEK. (That’s right. The principal bailed on the teachers and the students during final exams week.) (Keep in mind: The administrators at Manual hand-picked the staff they’re now trying to transfer out of the school.)
Union members want reform, restructuring, and innovation. If you visit the Peoria Federation of Teachers’ web site, you’ll see that we’ve been working with national restructuring experts and with other unions that have been working with successful reforms, restructuring, and innovation for years. We’re getting on the right track and are ready to collaborate with the board and the administration to get our district where it needs to be. We aren’t ready, though, to blindly give up rights that will turn all of our district’s schools into top-heavy, inefficient albatrosses that do nothing more than waste millions of dollars of taxpayer money. We want real reform . . . meaningful reform . . . not the kind of ‘reform’ talked about by people who leave our inner-city schools in $500.00 outfits only to hop into a $40,000 luxury car and drive as far away as possible from the heart of our city to homes in . . . oh . . . I don’t know . . . Dunlap . . . Brimfield . . . Mapleton.
Mark my words: NO ONE WILL BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE for the Manual debacle. . . the administrators there will cliche and jargon themselves into other six figure jobs . . . and will be no where to be found once the money runs out and my alma matter becomes a ghost town.
We can’t put the future of our district solely in the hands of people who think Manual is a model school. Our community . . . students . . . all . . . deserve better.
Jeff- Thank you for being a good steward of the best interests of children – rapidly becoming an extinct concept.
I guess it goes without saying how much I appreciate Jeff’s reasoned point of view. With regard to Manual’s principal’s early vacation–this is the second year that she took an early Christmas vacation during final exams week. I believe it is quite unheard of to give a school principal permission to leave on vacation while students are in school. Last year was an especially bad time for her to leave since it was the first time this all new administration had run a final exam schedule–there are always unexpected glitches and decisions to make (when students don’t show up for finals, etc.)
Leaving “early” for holidays and vacation was the norm when Jenkins was at Roosevelt. She would slither out early—at every chance!
Jeff – thank you for your thoughts. Since it seems transfer rights are a major sticking point, can you describe in more detail the Union’s position and the District’s.
Frustrated: I’ll try to answer for Jeff–but will tell him to get back on the blog to answer for himself–he doesn’t visit often. The district’s position is simply to move teachers anywhere that they want them. In a district the size of 150, there simply has to be a fair way to transfer people–the administration’s will not be fair or best for the students (that was proven before the policy changed). I don’t think it’s too hard to figure out why the administration wants a win on the issue right now. Woodruff is closing. Woodruff’s tenured teachers have to be placed. Manual has many non-tenured teachers and Kherat has already sent 17 letters of concerns to those who she feels are not working out at Manual. Tenured teachers are going to have to be assigned to Manual–none of them will want to go to Manual, especially under the current leadership. After all, Kherat hand-picked all the teachers, yet she sent out about 15 letters of concern last year and now this year. How will she feel about people that she didn’t “pick”–the ones who will receive involuntary transfers. Teachers have to be placed at Manual, so some sense of fair play has to be in place. The way Jeff and other Manual teachers were moved two years ago is the only fair way–by seniority as much as possible.
I surpised the lawsuit wasn’t a class action. Benassi surely knows that the problem is pervasive in 150, and not confined to one school.
Here is an interesting article out of peoria magazine where Jeanne Williamson is being interviewed in 2006. Funny how much has changed since then……..
http://www.peoriamagazines.com/tpw/2006/feb/interview-jeanne-williamson
Hinton on Newsmakers on WEEK. Why? Why is he getting any attention at all?
Hope he realizes that EVERYTHING he says WILL be used against him in a court of law. His name should be Waffleman because he tried to cut time out of the school day for teacher “inservice” yet he kept saying that innercity kids need a LONGER school day and a LONGER school year, basically to keep and eye on them since their parents obviously aren’t. He commented that being supt. was his most difficult endeavor…….that would be BECAUSE HE DIDN’T KNOW WHAT HE WAS DOING AND TOTALLY F#$$$D UP THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. THANKS WAFFLEMAN!
It has been a few months and I haven’t heard anything further about the reverse discrimination lawsuit. Any news?