Working at a charter

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm really confused. All of the charters I have interviewed with have offered great benefits and good salary. Maybe it's just my subject as it's in high demand

Depends on what charter.
Authoritarianism is the word which best explains those charters which exist to enrich their investors. Education is a mere by-product. If you are a team player and keep people happy, then you'll get a high salary plus bonuses.

My charter is a non-profit.

They can still have obligations to payments to the entity that licenses their name and/or management fees that can go to for-profits. There are also vendors that PCSB steer charters toward using...I'm not sure that's out and out corruption (maybe they get savings from economies of scale?) but those seem at the very least monopolistic.

The whole idea of charters is to siphon money that would otherwise be paid as wages to union employees...that's why the oligarchs support them. The movement has nothing to do with failing schools. As long as this nation has generational poverty, there will be plenty of those...

Hi union shill
(PS, I'm not anti union. I am against derailing every thread with oligarchical shrieking.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm really confused. All of the charters I have interviewed with have offered great benefits and good salary. Maybe it's just my subject as it's in high demand

Depends on what charter.
Authoritarianism is the word which best explains those charters which exist to enrich their investors. Education is a mere by-product. If you are a team player and keep people happy, then you'll get a high salary plus bonuses.

My charter is a non-profit.

They can still have obligations to payments to the entity that licenses their name and/or management fees that can go to for-profits. There are also vendors that PCSB steer charters toward using...I'm not sure that's out and out corruption (maybe they get savings from economies of scale?) but those seem at the very least monopolistic.

The whole idea of charters is to siphon money that would otherwise be paid as wages to union employees...that's why the oligarchs support them. The movement has nothing to do with failing schools. As long as this nation has generational poverty, there will be plenty of those...

Hi union shill
(PS, I'm not anti union. I am against derailing every thread with oligarchical shrieking.)

Hi Charter shill!
(PS, I'm not anti-charter or a teacher, I just wish people would stop pretending that charters are these ethically perfect constructs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm really confused. All of the charters I have interviewed with have offered great benefits and good salary. Maybe it's just my subject as it's in high demand

Depends on what charter.
Authoritarianism is the word which best explains those charters which exist to enrich their investors. Education is a mere by-product. If you are a team player and keep people happy, then you'll get a high salary plus bonuses.

My charter is a non-profit.

They can still have obligations to payments to the entity that licenses their name and/or management fees that can go to for-profits. There are also vendors that PCSB steer charters toward using...I'm not sure that's out and out corruption (maybe they get savings from economies of scale?) but those seem at the very least monopolistic.

The whole idea of charters is to siphon money that would otherwise be paid as wages to union employees...that's why the oligarchs support them. The movement has nothing to do with failing schools. As long as this nation has generational poverty, there will be plenty of those...

Hi union shill
(PS, I'm not anti union. I am against derailing every thread with oligarchical shrieking.)

Hi Charter shill!
(PS, I'm not anti-charter or a teacher, I just wish people would stop pretending that charters are these ethically perfect constructs.

Where and when did someone assert that charters were an ethically perfect construct?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm really confused. All of the charters I have interviewed with have offered great benefits and good salary. Maybe it's just my subject as it's in high demand

Depends on what charter.
Authoritarianism is the word which best explains those charters which exist to enrich their investors. Education is a mere by-product. If you are a team player and keep people happy, then you'll get a high salary plus bonuses.

My charter is a non-profit.

They can still have obligations to payments to the entity that licenses their name and/or management fees that can go to for-profits. There are also vendors that PCSB steer charters toward using...I'm not sure that's out and out corruption (maybe they get savings from economies of scale?) but those seem at the very least monopolistic.

The whole idea of charters is to siphon money that would otherwise be paid as wages to union employees...that's why the oligarchs support them. The movement has nothing to do with failing schools. As long as this nation has generational poverty, there will be plenty of those...

Hi union shill
(PS, I'm not anti union. I am against derailing every thread with oligarchical shrieking.)

Hi Charter shill!
(PS, I'm not anti-charter or a teacher, I just wish people would stop pretending that charters are these ethically perfect constructs.

Where and when did someone assert that charters were an ethically perfect construct?

PP and others seem to equate 'non-profit' with something noble where nobody makes any money. That's just not the case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm really confused. All of the charters I have interviewed with have offered great benefits and good salary. Maybe it's just my subject as it's in high demand

Depends on what charter.
Authoritarianism is the word which best explains those charters which exist to enrich their investors. Education is a mere by-product. If you are a team player and keep people happy, then you'll get a high salary plus bonuses.

My charter is a non-profit.

They can still have obligations to payments to the entity that licenses their name and/or management fees that can go to for-profits. There are also vendors that PCSB steer charters toward using...I'm not sure that's out and out corruption (maybe they get savings from economies of scale?) but those seem at the very least monopolistic.

The whole idea of charters is to siphon money that would otherwise be paid as wages to union employees...that's why the oligarchs support them. The movement has nothing to do with failing schools. As long as this nation has generational poverty, there will be plenty of those...

Hi union shill
(PS, I'm not anti union. I am against derailing every thread with oligarchical shrieking.)

Hi Charter shill!
(PS, I'm not anti-charter or a teacher, I just wish people would stop pretending that charters are these ethically perfect constructs.

Where and when did someone assert that charters were an ethically perfect construct?

PP and others seem to equate 'non-profit' with something noble where nobody makes any money. That's just not the case.

And nobody working in DCPS, or contracting with DCPS, is making money. Everyone is only doing things for the children and takes a vow of poverty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

They can still have obligations to payments to the entity that licenses their name and/or management fees that can go to for-profits. There are also vendors that PCSB steer charters toward using...I'm not sure that's out and out corruption (maybe they get savings from economies of scale?) but those seem at the very least monopolistic.

Which vendors?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm really confused. All of the charters I have interviewed with have offered great benefits and good salary. Maybe it's just my subject as it's in high demand

Depends on what charter.
Authoritarianism is the word which best explains those charters which exist to enrich their investors. Education is a mere by-product. If you are a team player and keep people happy, then you'll get a high salary plus bonuses.

My charter is a non-profit.

They can still have obligations to payments to the entity that licenses their name and/or management fees that can go to for-profits. There are also vendors that PCSB steer charters toward using...I'm not sure that's out and out corruption (maybe they get savings from economies of scale?) but those seem at the very least monopolistic.

The whole idea of charters is to siphon money that would otherwise be paid as wages to union employees...that's why the oligarchs support them. The movement has nothing to do with failing schools. As long as this nation has generational poverty, there will be plenty of those...

Hi union shill
(PS, I'm not anti union. I am against derailing every thread with oligarchical shrieking.)

Hi Charter shill!
(PS, I'm not anti-charter or a teacher, I just wish people would stop pretending that charters are these ethically perfect constructs.

Where and when did someone assert that charters were an ethically perfect construct?

PP and others seem to equate 'non-profit' with something noble where nobody makes any money. That's just not the case.

And nobody working in DCPS, or contracting with DCPS, is making money. Everyone is only doing things for the children and takes a vow of poverty.

There's nothing wrong with making money. Capitalism - yay!

But there is a problem in the charter industry with self-dealing using public money. People try stuff like that in public institutions, but there are regulations, public information, and oversight that the charters don't have. In fact, the charter lobbying groups fight very hard to keep that type of information out of the public.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm really confused. All of the charters I have interviewed with have offered great benefits and good salary. Maybe it's just my subject as it's in high demand

Depends on what charter.
Authoritarianism is the word which best explains those charters which exist to enrich their investors. Education is a mere by-product. If you are a team player and keep people happy, then you'll get a high salary plus bonuses.

My charter is a non-profit.

They can still have obligations to payments to the entity that licenses their name and/or management fees that can go to for-profits. There are also vendors that PCSB steer charters toward using...I'm not sure that's out and out corruption (maybe they get savings from economies of scale?) but those seem at the very least monopolistic.

The whole idea of charters is to siphon money that would otherwise be paid as wages to union employees...that's why the oligarchs support them. The movement has nothing to do with failing schools. As long as this nation has generational poverty, there will be plenty of those...

Hi union shill
(PS, I'm not anti union. I am against derailing every thread with oligarchical shrieking.)

Hi Charter shill!
(PS, I'm not anti-charter or a teacher, I just wish people would stop pretending that charters are these ethically perfect constructs.

Where and when did someone assert that charters were an ethically perfect construct?

PP and others seem to equate 'non-profit' with something noble where nobody makes any money. That's just not the case.

And nobody working in DCPS, or contracting with DCPS, is making money. Everyone is only doing things for the children and takes a vow of poverty.

There's nothing wrong with making money. Capitalism - yay!

But there is a problem in the charter industry with self-dealing using public money. People try stuff like that in public institutions, but there are regulations, public information, and oversight that the charters don't have. In fact, the charter lobbying groups fight very hard to keep that type of information out of the public.

Every DC charter contract over $25,000 must be disclosed to the DCPCSB. They are also required to bid them out.

DC performs greater fiscal and academic oversight over its charters than any other jurisdiction. It isn't perfect, but you really should tailor your boiletplate anti-charter talking points to fit the DC situation.