Darren’s district had required hiring substitutes from the “laid off teacher list,” even if meant a laid-off third-grade teacher would be assigned to “cover” his math class instead of a retired math teacher. New policy: Go back to the old policy on requesting substitutes.
Today we got the following information from our school secretary: ”As of today HR has removed the restriction of not being able to request and confirm subs of your choice. Hurray!”
Did too many teachers complain? Or did all the laid-off teachers find jobs?
About Joanne
Laid-off teachers receive unemployment (and yes, that’s legitimate!). Working a day here or there, messes with the unemployment system. They basically would work for free. As a result, using laid-off teachers for subs not only doesn’t work, but wrecks havoc.
If a teacher calls in sick the morning of class, then the first sub (laid-off) is called, then the next (laid-off), then ….. As a result, a sub may not be found for hours. Really! Asking laid-offs to voluntarily remove themselves from calls, then “officially” kills unemployment benefits in general.
Unintended consequences!
I don’t know if all the laid-off teachers have been hired, but when this same policy was implemented last year, it ended at about the same time.
I have a brilliant solution: Substitutes must be selected from the laid-off pool, provided that they hold certification appropriate to the class that must be covered. This is simple, elegant, and too intelligent for the average bureaucrat.
Most likely the laid-off teachers have been rehired as District’s tend to lay-off way more teachers than actually needed. Further, remember that this isn’t just District policy, rather the District was following state ed code.
Although, I do agree with the seemingly simple fix suggested by Mr. Moses above.