The city is obligated (presumably by the specific terms of its contract with the teacher union) to give teachers advance notice if it wants to lay them off during the following school year, so it's giving the entire system warning that they might be laid off. Issuing the layoff notices doesn't oblige Providence to actually fire anyone.
So, so infuriating that all this sanctimonious bullshit about "shared sacrifice across our community" never, ever includes a possibility of raising revenue.
The unemployment rate in Rhode Island was particularly bad the last time I looked; I'd suspect that the Providence school district (which is not wealthy, despite the presence of those Del's lemonade-sipping jagoffs at Brown) is having real trouble making ends meet and is largely doing this as a stunt to try to shame the state legislature give them more money.
(Spot the regional inaccuracy and win a bubbler!)
That's all well and good, but the mayor's website also says things like As Mayor, I will veto any increase in the residential or commercial property tax rate that comes across my desk until we have exhausted every other option - zero-based budgeting, cuts of 10% and more in the discretionary spending of each City department, pension reform, labor givebacks, renegotiated PILOT agreements and more - to save taxpayers money.
I don't know anything about Rhode Island law, but in my state, teacher termination may only be done for cause, and requires a showing that the teacher's performance is unsatisfactory, or that the teacher has engaged in unprofessional or immoral conduct. Termination endangers the teacher's credential and future employability. It can happen at almost any time during the school year.
A layoff is without cause and does not impact the teaching credential. A teacher layoff notice must be given by a certain date (it looks like in R.I., the date is March 1). If you receive such a notice, it means that the District plans to lay you off. However, the District can rescind the layoff notice at any time before the layoff is actually conducted. Teachers must be notified of their final layoff at a later date (about two months later).
(Because we have an incredibly stupid system of taxation and a dysfunctional legislature, there have been vast layoff notices every year in my state for the past several years. Not all of those teachers were laid off in each year, although a good number of them were. At some point thereafter, the legislature has put together a budget and also come to the belated realization that they can't actually teach the population of students with a 30% reduction in staff, whereupon they start rehiring teachers. As you may expect, this puts extraordinary personal and financial strain on public school teachers. At one and the same time, we continue to be totally baffled by the fact that it is so hard to attract and retain highly qualified teachers to the profession.)
Exactly one year ago, another Rhode Island city did this, and we had a 382-post, almost entirely on-topic thread about it. I bring this up because of the NYT's recent story about Central Falls.
10 was me, and was also pwned by snarkout in 1.
1. Based on the article, it looks like in R.I., as in my home state, layoff notice deadlines and requirements are set forth by statute, rather than by union contract.
382-post, almost entirely on-topic thread
382 comments in thread 10382! OMG AMAZING
nosflow, do you regularly read the Fox News website?
382 is the first number that can be expressed as the sum of two squares in two different ways!
382 is the first number that can be expressed as the sum of two squares in two different ways!
Namely, through interpretive dance and through a forthcoming analog synthesizer concept album.
I can't believe no one else has noticed (or at least mentioned) the glaring grammatical error in the first sentence of the post.
You can't notice what isn't there, boyo.
You can't notice what isn't there, boyo.
Seamus O'Heidegger's afternoon lectures were rather more entertaining than cogent.
That's a particularly evil thing to do. You tell people you're going to fire them, but it might not happen ... or it might happen so better stay doing your very best if you want to be one of the people who gets to keep their job.
At least when you immediately fire someone they can make plans and move on, get a little revenge going perhaps, but this just fucks people over.
I don't think this would be allowed in the Netherlands, where if you do plan a round of layoffs, you have to have a properly defined social plan and criteria for deciding whom to fire.
Still awful of course, but less evil. I went through one some seven years ago and it's incredibly frustrating being laid off because the company needs to lose so many people and has decided, together with the unions, to only look at your age, how long you've been working there and your job title to decide whether or not you're fired.
In Britain they do both. The point of sending 'at risk' notices, which is what I suppose this thing in RI is equivalent to is the vague hope that people who can find somewhere to go will jump ship and save (some of) the rest from getting fired. This works better in a better economic climate, but of course in a better economic climate they're not so likely to be firing large sections of their workforce.
In the public sector at least, they then do the sort of exercise Martin describes to decide who to chop if not enough take the hint. Except that increasingly they have the habit of making people apply for their own jobs, or for those that are left, presumably in an effort to avoid any kind of solidarity among the workforce who are forced to compete actively to stay in work.
Fuck 'em all, in summary.
In Britain they do both. The point of sending 'at risk' notices, which is what I suppose this thing in RI is equivalent to is the vague hope that people who can find somewhere to go will jump ship and save (some of) the rest from getting fired.
But the difference (I imagine, not being familiar with RI labour law) is that in Britain the employer is at least in theory obliged to demonstrate that the position doesn't exist any more, which could be difficult in Providence unless they are literally closing all the schools.
1 and 5 are correct. We just passed a school funding formula, and I'm not sure how that affects Providence yet. Also, the only tax the Mayor can levy is a property tax, and that's already pretty high.
I have a friend who survived a round of layoffs at her public agency by the most slender thread of "seniority" - she has been hired on the same day as someone else who was laid off, but his name was further down the alphabet, so hie employee ID was larger, so he was the most junior persion in the group and got the ax.
There's a certain amount of survivor guilt in that situation, although he has since been rehired and she's moved to a different part of the organization.