Does dcps close for state funerals?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nah, people don’t get LIVID about that. They get LIVID when they have to change their routine/meeting schedule/lunch plans.

Yup. She's not worried about her kids' routine. She's LIVID that she has to change her routine for one day.

Not everyone has a job where that is easy to do. My young adult daughter runs a video conference meeting of 10 station managers every Wed AM 52 weeks a year. If she is sick, she has to run it. If she is on vacation, same. She doesn’t have kids yet, but she could not just “change her routine” to keep kids at home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:JFC you’ve got to be kidding me. NO ONE CARES about this one-term President. If my kids’ charter closes I’ll be LIVID.

Show some respect. One-term is irrelevant and you know it. Sorry about your snowflakes. Teach them some history and how to respect the dead.

Why?

-NP

Also NP.

Whether Bush was president for 4 years or 8 years doesn't determine whether he is worthy of a state funeral or respect. GWHB was president and a state funeral is warranted.

Now whether school in DC will or must or should close just because the federal government is closed is a whole different matter.

State funeral fine but leave our schools alone. It does not cause that much disruption....except maybe the cathedral schools but they can just cancel. DCPS - no way. Eaton isn't that close. Yikes.

I don’t think that most of DCPS needs to close but the area around Washington National Cathedral will be definitely affected. The federal government considers a state funeral like this to be a special national security event (like a convention, inaugural, etc) in that the sitting president, much of the government, former presidents, congressional leadership, all will be there. If J Eaton were a neighborhood school where all the kids walked, it might not be that big a deal, but it’s very much a commuter school. Street parking for teachers may be impacted as well, as parking is prohibited, used for staging, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:JFC you’ve got to be kidding me. NO ONE CARES about this one-term President. If my kids’ charter closes I’ll be LIVID.

Show some respect. One-term is irrelevant and you know it. Sorry about your snowflakes. Teach them some history and how to respect the dead.

Why?

-NP

Also NP.

Whether Bush was president for 4 years or 8 years doesn't determine whether he is worthy of a state funeral or respect. GWHB was president and a state funeral is warranted.

Now whether school in DC will or must or should close just because the federal government is closed is a whole different matter.

State funeral fine but leave our schools alone. It does not cause that much disruption....except maybe the cathedral schools but they can just cancel. DCPS - no way. Eaton isn't that close. Yikes.

I don’t think that most of DCPS needs to close but the area around Washington National Cathedral will be definitely affected. The federal government considers a state funeral like this to be a special national security event (like a convention, inaugural, etc) in that the sitting president, much of the government, former presidents, congressional leadership, all will be there. If J Eaton were a neighborhood school where all the kids walked, it might not be that big a deal, but it’s very much a commuter school. Street parking for teachers may be impacted as well, as parking is prohibited, used for staging, etc.

Eaton is *sort of* a commuter school. Many (most?) kids walk.

Otherwise, your points stand.

[Anonymous]

Ok, so I don’t think the secret service give AF about your work schedule or the fact that one poster would like a day to nap. From a logistics stand point it makes sense to close- which means we will be open!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nah, people don’t get LIVID about that. They get LIVID when they have to change their routine/meeting schedule/lunch plans.

Yup. She's not worried about her kids' routine. She's LIVID that she has to change her routine for one day.

Not everyone has a job where that is easy to do. My young adult daughter runs a video conference meeting of 10 station managers every Wed AM 52 weeks a year. If she is sick, she has to run it. If she is on vacation, same. She doesn’t have kids yet, but she could not just “change her routine” to keep kids at home.

And if she had kids, she would need to put in place a contingency plan for when those kids are sick or have a snow day. This would be no different. Go to Plan B or even Plan C.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nah, people don’t get LIVID about that. They get LIVID when they have to change their routine/meeting schedule/lunch plans.

Yup. She's not worried about her kids' routine. She's LIVID that she has to change her routine for one day.

Not everyone has a job where that is easy to do. My young adult daughter runs a video conference meeting of 10 station managers every Wed AM 52 weeks a year. If she is sick, she has to run it. If she is on vacation, same. She doesn’t have kids yet, but she could not just “change her routine” to keep kids at home.

These are the types of arguments that frustrate me. We all know schools inevitably will have to close at some point for some reason. The whole "my job isn't flexible" means you make a plan in advance. Maybe well in advance. Like "I don't have the patience or desire or ability to make accommodations for my child so I won't have kids I can't care for" in advance. Heck, I didn't even get a dog until I was certain I had a plan for his care, including to make sure if I dropped dead he had a place to go. If kids are too inconvenient why did you have them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nah, people don’t get LIVID about that. They get LIVID when they have to change their routine/meeting schedule/lunch plans.

Yup. She's not worried about her kids' routine. She's LIVID that she has to change her routine for one day.

Not everyone has a job where that is easy to do. My young adult daughter runs a video conference meeting of 10 station managers every Wed AM 52 weeks a year. If she is sick, she has to run it. If she is on vacation, same. She doesn’t have kids yet, but she could not just “change her routine” to keep kids at home.

And if she had kids, she would need to put in place a contingency plan for when those kids are sick or have a snow day. This would be no different. Go to Plan B or even Plan C.

Or get a new job. People act like they can't leave their job. It's a choice, they just don't like the other choices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nah, people don’t get LIVID about that. They get LIVID when they have to change their routine/meeting schedule/lunch plans.

Yup. She's not worried about her kids' routine. She's LIVID that she has to change her routine for one day.

Not everyone has a job where that is easy to do. My young adult daughter runs a video conference meeting of 10 station managers every Wed AM 52 weeks a year. If she is sick, she has to run it. If she is on vacation, same. She doesn’t have kids yet, but she could not just “change her routine” to keep kids at home.

These are the types of arguments that frustrate me. We all know schools inevitably will have to close at some point for some reason. The whole "my job isn't flexible" means you make a plan in advance. Maybe well in advance. Like "I don't have the patience or desire or ability to make accommodations for my child so I won't have kids I can't care for" in advance. Heck, I didn't even get a dog until I was certain I had a plan for his care, including to make sure if I dropped dead he had a place to go. If kids are too inconvenient why did you have them?

On a snow day, that argument makes sense. But this would be an unnecessary closure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It just doesn’ t make any sense to close schools. Kids are more likely to learn something about GHWB and the presidency at schools and participate in some show of respect for the government at school than at home playing video games.

This.

Though as a SS teacher, I think any individually and hastily developed lesson plans on Bush I are likely to set off some parents’ bias detector. I’d rather have a regular school day with a moment of silence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nah, people don’t get LIVID about that. They get LIVID when they have to change their routine/meeting schedule/lunch plans.

Yup. She's not worried about her kids' routine. She's LIVID that she has to change her routine for one day.

Not everyone has a job where that is easy to do. My young adult daughter runs a video conference meeting of 10 station managers every Wed AM 52 weeks a year. If she is sick, she has to run it. If she is on vacation, same. She doesn’t have kids yet, but she could not just “change her routine” to keep kids at home.

And if she had kids, she would need to put in place a contingency plan for when those kids are sick or have a snow day. This would be no different. Go to Plan B or even Plan C.

Or get a new job. People act like they can't leave their job. It's a choice, they just don't like the other choices.

Do you realize how rare full time jobs with benefits are if you are under 30? And it’s worse if you are a blue collar worker.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nah, people don’t get LIVID about that. They get LIVID when they have to change their routine/meeting schedule/lunch plans.

Yup. She's not worried about her kids' routine. She's LIVID that she has to change her routine for one day.

Not everyone has a job where that is easy to do. My young adult daughter runs a video conference meeting of 10 station managers every Wed AM 52 weeks a year. If she is sick, she has to run it. If she is on vacation, same. She doesn’t have kids yet, but she could not just “change her routine” to keep kids at home.

And if she had kids, she would need to put in place a contingency plan for when those kids are sick or have a snow day. This would be no different. Go to Plan B or even Plan C.

Why can her husband/partner stay home with the kids? Men father these children, they can help with shifting schedules.

[Anonymous]

As usual DCUM pretends that every DCPS parent has a 9 to 5 job with benefits and flexibility. While many parents in DCPS simply cannot take days off work to care for children because they will not get paid for that missed day. I would rather children are in school, learning, being fed breakfast and lunch than sitting at home doing nothing. Or wandering around the streets getting themselves into trouble.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nah, people don’t get LIVID about that. They get LIVID when they have to change their routine/meeting schedule/lunch plans.

Yup. She's not worried about her kids' routine. She's LIVID that she has to change her routine for one day.

Not everyone has a job where that is easy to do. My young adult daughter runs a video conference meeting of 10 station managers every Wed AM 52 weeks a year. If she is sick, she has to run it. If she is on vacation, same. She doesn’t have kids yet, but she could not just “change her routine” to keep kids at home.

And if she had kids, she would need to put in place a contingency plan for when those kids are sick or have a snow day. This would be no different. Go to Plan B or even Plan C.

Or get a new job. People act like they can't leave their job. It's a choice, they just don't like the other choices.

Do you realize how rare full time jobs with benefits are if you are under 30? And it’s worse if you are a blue collar worker.

But there ARE other jobs, are there not? So it remains a choice. You choose salary and benefits over something else. I'm not saying that's the wrong choice, just that parents who complain that they can't handle a school closing because their job isn't flexible makes their choice someone else's problem. They choose to stay in that job, they choose the inconvenience. The argument they make is just annoying, that's all.

[Anonymous]

If dc schools are serious about the every day counts stuff then they won’t close. Why the heck would they close when the majority of schools will not be affected.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nah, people don’t get LIVID about that. They get LIVID when they have to change their routine/meeting schedule/lunch plans.

Yup. She's not worried about her kids' routine. She's LIVID that she has to change her routine for one day.

Not everyone has a job where that is easy to do. My young adult daughter runs a video conference meeting of 10 station managers every Wed AM 52 weeks a year. If she is sick, she has to run it. If she is on vacation, same. She doesn’t have kids yet, but she could not just “change her routine” to keep kids at home.

And if she had kids, she would need to put in place a contingency plan for when those kids are sick or have a snow day. This would be no different. Go to Plan B or even Plan C.

Or get a new job. People act like they can't leave their job. It's a choice, they just don't like the other choices.

Do you realize how rare full time jobs with benefits are if you are under 30? And it’s worse if you are a blue collar worker.

But there ARE other jobs, are there not? So it remains a choice. You choose salary and benefits over something else. I'm not saying that's the wrong choice, just that parents who complain that they can't handle a school closing because their job isn't flexible makes their choice someone else's problem. They choose to stay in that job, they choose the inconvenience. The argument they make is just annoying, that's all.

This is why people don’t like white people.

- other white person