scrubbedexpat099

Had a beer had a chat with the Teacher looking for a jib.

So the contracts are out for next year and the return date here was a couple of days ago, she has been talking to places that might have opportunities so this week she is hoping to get some feedback.

carcajou

GENERALLY below is how it works across districts but not UNIVERSALLY (my qualifier for when someone comes on here and wants to flame me because their district does it slightly or a bit differently from what I describe here):

The districts all vary with their pay structures (which are typically collectively bargained) but one of the huge changes that has arisen in pay structure in the last 15 years is the flattening of the curve for early-career educators. Pay is usually on "steps" tied to experience rather than merit (that part is not new). So you start at a decent entry-level wage - even in the South - but the trade-off for that is your first really significant raise doesn't come for a while (like, 5-10 years). Then after you rise significantly again. There are different steps depending on level of qualification (Master's/PhD = more money) etc. There can be hundreds of other variations etc. Previously it did used to be you started at peanuts and then rose substantially from the start.

I have heard many claim that teachers are being fired for salary reasons but I have never actually come across a verified case of it - just people who got fired and felt it was because of money. It would be very, very difficult for a school to fire a teacher for that reason. Typically after your third or fourth year (can vary but not much from that) the school has to make a decision as to whether to move you from a series of one-year contracts to a continuing contract (tenure). They normally cannot just keep you on a one-year contract forever. Legally, it means that on the one year contract, an employee has no expectation of being renewed, it's just a happy bonus if it happens. On a continuing contract, the employee has the right to expect to be renewed. They cannot be non-renewed on a continuing contract without valid cause - and salary being too high is not a valid cause. Subpar professional performance is a valid reason, as is criminal offence (on duty or off duty, on school grounds or off school grounds - usually called "moral terpitude" in the contracts) or some other professional or ethical scandal.

For subpar professional performance with a tenured teacher - the school would have to show (among other things) evidence that the administration intervened and instigated/engaged a series of improvement plans over time before termination. By "evidence" - that means a large amount of big binders bursting at the seems with paperwork. The principal and someone from the district office walking in and saying "yeah, we did a plan but the teacher didn't follow it so out they go!" won't come anywhere near cutting it, and it would be very, very difficult to collude to be able have the right paperwork showing the right things to fire a satisfactory teacher . . . and also highly illegal.

For a non-tenured teacher - they can just be non-renewed at the end of the year. A school or district CANNOT just say, this teacher makes too much money and we can hire cheaper - that is, for a tenured teacher. That would not hold up in arbitration/in the courts. If the teacher is non-tenured however they can.

Some erroneously believe the other extreme - that tenure means teachers can't be fired - absolutely not true. It does take a mountain of paperwork and process, but a non-performing teacher who has tenure can be fired.

I do however, know numerous teachers who were fired and who felt that it was for salary reasons . . . even when it definitely was not. But it is easy for some people to justify it to themselves that way, and easy for non-educators like family and friends to digest with how corporate America operates. But education is one of the few fields where union culture is still very alive, hiring and HR don't function the way they do in other professions, and it rarely happens that way.

Not saying it never happens that way - but for all I hear about it I have yet to actually find it . . .

carcajou

Let me just add one other thing - for principals and administrators, tenure/continuing contracts were abolished some time ago. They are usually all on one-year contracts. Yet it is still extremely difficult to fire a bad one! In almost all cases - I forget the exact percentage but it was well over 90% - fired principals were let go because of financial irregularities in their school's finances. NOT because of student performance etc.

Those who the district wants out of the way - they try to second them to other roles in the district (like, head of libraries in the southern/northern/eastern/western zone etc), but retaining the same title and salary. Because it's that difficult to get rid of them, there will almost certainly be litigation and the District will probably lose since performance criteria can often be nebulous and qualitative.

Pulaski

I am talking about mass lay-offs of dozens, or more, of senior staff simultaneously, not ad hoc terminations for poor performance.

To be clear, I am not saying every school district does it every year, but from time when the budget gets tight and there are "excessive numbers" of long-term staff, the temptation seems to get too much for some cash-strapped school districts.

carcajou

Pulaski, can you please provide a news link or something for this. I have never heard of a district being able to just sack senior teachers in mass numbers for salary reasons, and want to research/read about it. I was unable to find anything on line - normally mass school district firings generate news headlines.

The cases I know of with mass firings were done in reverse, on a "last in, first out" basis because of all the various protections regarding seniority. I have heard of school districts able to do emergency orders due to a financial crisis in which ALL teachers were fired and then had to re-apply - but it no case was that used as a tool to massively cull high-salaried staff.

tom169

Someone I know is at the end of the pay scale and is being strongly urged to retire early. She ain't listening one bit.

ian-mstm

Not sure if this is the sort of thing Pulaski was thinking of...

This
This
This one is old, but still...

Ian

Cherrysoda

I teach in California. So far I am finding conditions much better than in the UK and the pay is better too. Less scrutiny and more freedom to choose what you teach compared to the UK.
Teachers here in my city average out at 72K I believe but if you are willing to teach summer school for 4 weeks of your 16 week annual holiday, and saturday school- you can make 100k I am told. This is with no extra responsibility. Of course the cost of living is high here but it is still lower than London. A house to rent starts at 2500 up to 4000 a month( buying a house would set you back 650k for a small home in a good suburb and more like 800-900k for a 3-4 bed home) if you want more space but this is still less than London. So much is relative in life- you can but compare to what came before.Our quality of life is much higher here compared to London.
However I had a green card otherwise no way would the school district have even considered me. If you are a lecturer you could try that route but you are probably better off finding a position in Asia where visas are easier to get. I mostly love life in the USA and have been pleasantly surprised by the working conditions for teachers-the union is very strong in CA and honestly school feels like how it was in the 80's when I went to school- project based learning, less teaching to the test. I may have just got lucky in a progressive school with a great principal though. I could not return to UK teaching now after finding I can teach and still hace a life- out at 4 pm and home to enjoy my kids with maybe 2 hours planning work at the weekend. It is how I envisioned teaching but in the UK I used to work 50-60 hours a week for a great part of the year. I do not miss that life.Good Luck!

Rwley1982

Thanks, I've actually spoken to a couple of school boards in the mid West and they do hire foreign teachers for some subjects, one even got their assistant to go through licencing process with me. I'm going to keep trying and see what comes of it all, maybe nothing but nothing ventured nothing gained.

carcajou

Good - though keep in mind that assisting people with licencing is part of their job, and anyone can get one if they meet professional criteria, regardless of eligibility to work in the US.

Have you ever visited Kansas or Nebraska? Could be a good idea to come over and take a look, and while you are there, have a chat with some principals directly about the best way forwards.

Good luck and do keep us updated.