Can someone explain to me how this is legal in any contract, much less one with a public teacher’s union that likely receives federal funds? we’ve jumped the shark. Minneapolis teachers union contract calls for layoffs of white teachers first
Not going to say this is the right way to address demographic inequities. It's not. If you look at the demographics of teachers in MN (approx 95% white) and Minneapolis (approx 84% white), it appears that recruitment & retention of BIPOC teachers should be a priority. A couple of sources: Minnesota teachers still overwhelmingly white as student population becomes more diverse - Minnesota Reformer Why 2021 might be the year to increase diverse teachers in Minnesota This is from 2019, but white teachers were 95% & black teachers were 1.4%. https://mn.gov/pelsb/assets/2019 Supply and Demand Report_tcm1113-370206.pdf
I certainly understand wanting to eliminate some of that historical disparity. Just like we’ve seen in other professions, like police and fire protection. But signing a union contract in blatant violation of the 14th Amendment doesn’t seem the best way to go about it.
He also wants retired cops, so on another timeline we could have gotten the guy who killed George Floyd to teach 5th grade. He already had a home here!
I don't know if its a good idea, but why is doing it by seniority any less arbitrary? What's the 'fair' way to plan out who gets laid off first? And who's in a position to lay off teachers anywhere?
Interesting that a 95% white union would sign off on it. Any comments from the rank and file teachers about why they supported this?
At some point, white people had it coming. I’m sure whites did some atrocious things in MN in the 1800s. CNN will fill us in tonight.
It certainly seems idiotic as do most quotas etc. As to why white teachers would sign off? Most of these "programs" to help minorities are just schemes to make people feel good about themselves.
My thin-slice guess is that the people who signed off were not in danger of losing their own jobs. Artificial diversity always sounds like a great idea as long as its effect is on other people. I have never once heard a person stand up and say, “I understand I’m from the wrong demographic, so I would like to volunteer my position to someone of a more desirable demographic, even if their credentials, experience, and conduct are not up to mine.” Rachel Nichols at ESPN is a great example of this. She would say all the right things on diversity until she, in her perception, was replaced by a less-qualified and experienced person strictly for artificial diversity. Then we got to hear her real feelings on the matter, which were essentially, they should have done this to someone else, not me.
I think in the more general sense, we are a long ways away from being able to layoff teachers anywhere because there are just way too many. Cant imagine there are too many places where classes are the right size and they arent perpetually in need of new teachers.
Problem: they recently hired diverse teachers and if they only go by seniority they’ll fire only diverse candidates. What’s your solution? White fragility kills me. If diverse candidate were represented or hired 20 years ago we wouldn’t be here. What is wrong with you people???
it has zero to do with “fragility”. And honestly trying to box someone like that so their views can be discarded is beneath you. it’s the idea that they are doing exactly what they claim to be against. Namely, purposely using race as a means to disenfranchise a specific group. You cant say it’s bad, it’s society’s biggest ill, and then say “well it’s good if it works for me”. If they want to be fair, do it on job performance. Or even lottery if seniority isn’t perceived as fair.
That’s intellectually lazy. They don’t want to go backwards rectifying a wrong. Have some perspective instead of fragility.
Just a guess and although I do not have data on that specific school district nor am I a teacher maybe they assumed that in view of the nationwide shortage of teachers the contingency of layoffs is very unlikely to occur at least in the reasonably foreseeable future.
what, you mean to say they would say this about laying off white teachers when they know there is not a chance in hell it happens, just to look politically right, shocked i tell you,shocked.
well if you want to name call and not actually discuss it, guess there’s nothing else to say, because neither solution I gave would go backward. Guess I didn’t toe the only possible allowable line hard enough. Really surprised it’s coming from you, but to each their own I guess.
