EagleTribune.com : Blogs : The Soapbox

You seem to be doubling up on some days. You mention "national holidays" and the "half week at Thanksgiving" as separate entities. One of the days that week is a national holiday and the half day prior is, as I understand it, a required half day due to the schools being a public entities. The Friday after is more or less useless. Do you think a classroom full of eight year olds will be learning anything after a day and a half off, with the weekend staring them in the face? Forget little kids, how about teenagers? At best, you could save a whopping ONE day there.

If you "wipe out" February vacation, at least in my local district, you would then have to add on President's Day since those two coincide. Also, some years Good Friday coincides with the spring break. So by cutting out one of the vacations (adding 5 days) you are in actuality only adding four days.

Teacher in-service days are required by contract and by law, they cannot be cut out of the schedule.

Lastly, your 180 days in the working world comment is vague. Is that pointed at the staff or the students? Why would we hold young children to the same standard as working adults in terms of number of working days and days off? If it is aimed at the teachers, I am sure you are aware of teachers show up to work more than the 180 days that their students are in school. However, that is an argument for another day.

I guess I'm one of the lucky few whose child begins school after Labor Day and ends approximately the second week of June, depending on snow days.

Unfortunately, I feel no sympathy for teachers when it comes to work schedules. It isn't like they didn't know what was expected of them when they decided to pursue this particular career path. I've spoken with many of my daughter's teachers over the years, and many of them have said the limited work hours were what attracted them to the profession to begin with. It has allowed them time to spend with their own kids and families during vacation weeks, holidays, and summer breaks, a luxury that those of us in the private sector can rarely afford to do.

Maybe if they cut back on some of these "workshops", etc, they may be able to squeeze in the required school days. Do they really need to have monthly, all day meetings? What about holding smaller staff meetings, staggered throughout the month, either before or after the school day begins?

Just a thought...

When I was growing up in Billerica we always started school after Labor Day, had February and April vacation weeks, half a week for Thanksgiving and almost 2 weeks for Christmas plus the usual holidays, teacher training days (though far fewer than we have today) AND in Billerica they used to close the elementary schools on election day as those were the polling places. We always went till near the end of June. I think the rush to end school as early in the "summer" is possible is the problem here.

I don't think this is a "teacher" issue though I do take issue with the attitude that many folks on the E/T editorial staff seem to have about teachers and teachers unions. Teachers are among the hardest working public employees and arguably have one of the most important jobs anyone can have yet they are paid poorly for it, not given a fraction of the respect they deserve and are constantly looked at askance as if they are getting fat of public largesse all the while being blamed for our children’s bad behavior and mediocre academic performance. There may well be scheduling advantages to teaching but most teachers work far longer hours and deal with more stress than the average working stiff in the private sector and have, to be candid, far more responsibility.

Teacher in service days are not legally required. They are contractually required, but what was negotiated into a contract can also be negotiated out.'
I used to feel very strongly that teachers were underpaid. That feeling has long since been negated by unholy contracts
that wiped out any disparity in teachers pay compared to almost any other profession. In addition the fringe benefits given to teachers makes the pendulam swing to the other side and makes teaching a very desirable profession from a compensation point of view. This is not solely a teachers union fault because they ran into a bunch of weak kneed negotiators, i. e. the school committees.

I'm not old by any stretch (early 30's) and grew up in the Merrimack Valley. We routinely went back to school after Labor Day and were out mid-June except for the years when we had an unusual number of snow days. We had more half day curriculum days than full day curriculum days but the hours still had to be met and they were. The change happened when parents made it clear that it was easier to find child care for a full day than for a half day, particularly the second half.

Speaking of the district where I work, I would gladly give up the Catholic and Jewish holidays we receive (Good Friday, Rosh Hashana, and Yom Kippur) as well as go back even two days before Labor day in exchange for getting out a week earlier in June. The end of the year is always harder than the beginning anyway. Adding heat to the equation does not help.

Mr. Carlson, I read a lot of your posts on here and you are spot on with many. However, in-service days are required by No Child Left Behind in so much as schools are required to train teachers in "best practices" to help their schools reach AYP goals.

I am wondering which "fringe benefits" you are refering to in your post. The ones where we have to attend workshops and take courses to accumulate credits and professional development points every five years, the cost of which we are mostly responsible for? I know plenty of people in the private sector who have had to go back to school to get another degree, or at least take a training course and have had it completely paid for by their company. Strike one for the private sector on that. The courses and workshops which we either take during our time off or taken at night and on weekends. Again, many private sector jobs will just take you out of the workplace while you are trained and plug you back in when you are done.

The in-year "vacations" where I spend at least two hours/day working to prepare? The hours I put in at home at night, which I am not compensated for? The extra days we must spend packing up my classroom after the end of the school year? The days we must spend unpacking everything, cleaning my classroom, and preparing for the start of the school year in mid-August when there is no air conditioning in the building which has been closed up for two months? The endless committees we serve on outside of school hours, all while receiving no compensation for our time and energy? The nearly 2.5 hours beyond contractual time I am in my classroom every day and still have to take work home? Which "fringe benefits" are you refering to?

I know I am never going to change many people's minds about the time, effort, or responsibilities that educators must put into their work. This is one of those things where you accept it or you do not and rarely do people's minds change on the matter. However, it seems to me that the Tribune, and other outlets, vilify teachers and what they stand for (education and our future) due to their schedule and the fact that they are public employees.

David, I am not blaming teachers. I am however blaming teacher unions. If they do not change their stance soon and be willing to negotiate on salary, fringes, work rules and almost anything else you can name, they are leading the teachers to an inevitable massacre. There will be layoffs galore because communities can no longer afford the cost.
At the risk of being called" picky", I need to point out that Good Friday is a Christian holiday, not solely a Catholic holiday.
The fringes I am referring to are Group Medical cost sharing, where teachers (and other government employees) enjoy lower premiums than 90% of private sector employees.
The second fringe I'm talking about is pension cost where again, government employees,including teachers enjoy an an enormous favorable advantage overthe private sector.
Lastly, I need to point out that even though the teachers put in many work hours that don't appear in their "official day", they are not alone because many private sector employees also do that.
Regarding the issue of in service days, I believe they preceded
"no child left behind" which might have increased the number but certainly didn't invoke them.
Lastly I need to say that it refreshing to discuss these issues with someone who doesn't fly off into the world of political correctness and says something with a little meat on the bones.

Something I found interesting in David's response was the phrase "2.5 hours beyond contractual time". The reason it caught my attention is that he referenced a specific time frame, not stating something like "the approximately 2 hours or so beyond contractual time". In the past I have had to join two different unions because of the companies I worked for. I remember people actually tallying the time they worked over and above their contracted time, sometimes up to the minute. Even though they wouldn't get paid overtime, they made it a point to record all their actual work time.

I am currently a salaried employee, and every week I work well over and above the 40 hours I get paid for. I knew that going into the position, and it's just a fact of life for me, I guess.

I mean no disrespect to David or any other teachers, it was just something that caught my eye.

I kick myself every time my son tells me about another day off from school he's going to get. Had I known when I was younger that there were jobs out there where you could get a year's salary and only have to work 180 days! Teachers nowadays get every concievable national, state, and local holiday plus religious days (soon I'm sure they'll get any Muslim holiday's too), "teacher's workshops", and 3 full weeks of "breaks" a year - or should I say from September - June. Don't forget the 2 1/2 months off during the summer. I know, I know, it's the hardest job in the world, the pay stinks, the kids are out of control, etc.,etc. Sorry, but my sympathy for "underpaid" teachers ran out long ago - about the time my paycheck remained stagnant due to the economy while my taxes rose out of sight as teacher contracts demanded more money and more free days from my local government. Remember, if you can read this - thank a teacher.

Jim thank you for clarifying. I'll be honest, I understand that I have a great benefits package and I appreciate it very much. I know I am fortunate to pay what I do for health care and such. I also understand that in our next contract that is likely to change. Also, the summers off are nice. However, none of those were factors back when I was a teenager and decided that I wanted to teach. I was coaching at a basketball camp and realized that I loved working with kids. After that I just worked with kids as often as I could. Even going through practicums, student teaching, etc, I never thought about unions, benefits, whatever. The first time it crossed my mind was the day that I signed my first contract. I was familiar with that district and knew people who had little negative to say about it so I took their job offer. Would it be a consideration if I were to change districts now? Sure, but not the be all, end all.

Bilge, funny you should mention that because we are negotiating and that is always a bone of contention with some. We have to understand that it comes with the territory. I was just going based on the fact that I am routinely at work an hour before contractual time and usually walk out sometime between 4 and 4:30, giving me the 2.5 number. It was neither deliberate, nor random.

Terry, you will not find a district that has 2.5 months off in the summer. Perhaps I'm nitpicking but most routinely get out around June 20th and the teachers are back around August 20th in some capacity, with or without the kids. In the district where I work, we have both mandatory and recommended workshops for about a week before school starts, not to mention the various curriculum committees most of us are on that will meet during the summer.

David, Once again, thank you for a thoughtful response. After reading your responses, I think you must be a good teacher and one I would have liked my children to have been taught by.
Back to Mr Amerding's original statement . I believe he was making the point that there seems to be enough room beteen the start of school and the end of the school year to solve New Hampshires problem without unduly burdening either the students or teachers.
Of course another solution would be for New Hamphire to offer jobs to immigrants (legal or illegal) as Cape Cod seems to do.