How big a deal are the recent teacher involuntary transfers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, MCPS treats teachers like widgets, not like the professionals they are. They can be pulled out of one school and put into another (or 2 others, .5 at one and .5 at another), at will. It SUCKS.

Yes, but it’s “for the kids”.
Teachers are expendable and mcps treats them as such. They always have (at least for the 25 years I’ve been in the county). I saw this happen to teachers my first year, it is one reason that I’ve been at the same school for my entire 25 years.
Parents, remember this the next time DCUM tells you had strong the contract is and how the union runs everything. They don’t. The contract is purposely vague. Teachers have little professional autonomy and increasingly less personal autonomy (see the health insurance issue).

Are they? In 2022 are teachers really that expendable?

I'm curious about how the contract is vague. The language quoted in this thread and by the news source (I'm not a teacher in MCPS) looks fairly specific.

I'm not a contract expert, but maybe someone who is can shed some light. Article 11 seems to conflict with Article 26 (which states the dates teachers are to be notified). Article 11 states:

The parties recognize that moving between classrooms and work locations is a necessary part of school-districtoperations. Providing as much notice as possible when a unit member must move is a goal that the district and association share. Thus, any unit member who has to move work locations due to building relocation or as a result of a District mandated reorganization, will be notified within a week of the Principal’s notification. When it is deemed necessary for a unit member to move, unit members will be provided with the opportunity to discuss the move and the reasons for it. Support will be provided to assist unit members with moves. This includes, but is not limited to, activities such as transporting instructional materials, moving furniture, handling of special equipment, and set up. Appropriate moving materials and supplies will be made availableto unit members. Every effort will be made to minimizeinvoluntary classroom reassignments from year to year.

Teachers have definitely been moved after the job fair/involuntary placements have concluded. I can't imagine that if there was a recourse, that the teachers and principals in these situations would have figured it out.

This is about physical location such as if a teacher needs to move classrooms. The involuntary transfer has its own section in the contract.

look again, it says between classrooms and work locations. Work locations is the part that conflicts with the section about involuntary transfers. This is exactly what the “contract is vague” PP is talking about.

DP
I also understand it to cover a change in not only classrooms, but to a classroom in another building. I'm not a MCPS teacher and I don't think that is vague nor does it conflict with the section about involuntary transfers. I also do not think that the involuntary transfer timeline addressed in Article 26 to be vague.

So maybe when it happens over the summer, it is that the actual position is cut based on actual enrollment which would be different than projected need for involuntary transfers.

If an employee is involuntarily transferred based on projected enrollment and the position comes back, the transferred employee is asked if he/she would like the position back before it is offered to anyone else.

If it happens based on actual numbers, then essentially the teacher's job is no longer there, and they have the option to move to another vacancy.

[Anonymous]

Apparently the Sherwood situation is because an ELL program is being phased out and the students are being told they have to return to their home schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:McKnight is an idiot.

A bit tardy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Apparently the Sherwood situation is because an ELL program is being phased out and the students are being told they have to return to their home schools.

MCPS is just now telling the families and students? Is that what's best for the kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apparently the Sherwood situation is because an ELL program is being phased out and the students are being told they have to return to their home schools.

MCPS is just now telling the families and students? Is that what's best for the kids?

Attending the home school is not a hardship. If the program was under-enrolled and they couldn't offer as much as was available at home schools, then yes, that is what is best for kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apparently the Sherwood situation is because an ELL program is being phased out and the students are being told they have to return to their home schools.

MCPS is just now telling the families and students? Is that what's best for the kids?

Attending the home school is not a hardship. If the program was under-enrolled and they couldn't offer as much as was available at home schools, then yes, that is what is best for kids.

Of course, but people here like to complain regardless.

[Anonymous]

If they are doing transfers by seniority any new teacher to the system hired this spring or last year is likely un-protected and on a list for transfers. Seniority is by county not by school.

What concerns me more is if teachers can be reassigned by certification. I have SpEd and ESOL endorsements but assume my unique current position protects me from being reassigned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apparently the Sherwood situation is because an ELL program is being phased out and the students are being told they have to return to their home schools.

MCPS is just now telling the families and students? Is that what's best for the kids?

Attending the home school is not a hardship. If the program was under-enrolled and they couldn't offer as much as was available at home schools, then yes, that is what is best for kids.

From what I’ve read, it’s about 40 SENIORS who were informed that they will now have to attend their home school. These are students who have been part of this ELL program for the past few years. These are students who are part of the school community, participate in sports/extra curricular activities at the school, have relationships with staff and students, etc. The program was being phased out, but from what I understand these students were told they would be allowed to stay for their senior year. That’s now been taken away. These students generally don’t have parents who are squeaky wheels. Who is advocating for them? How is this what’s best for these kids? From what I’ve read (from teachers from this school), these seniors were notified this week about this abrupt change. This is the reason for some staff being involuntarily transferred.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apparently the Sherwood situation is because an ELL program is being phased out and the students are being told they have to return to their home schools.

MCPS is just now telling the families and students? Is that what's best for the kids?

Attending the home school is not a hardship. If the program was under-enrolled and they couldn't offer as much as was available at home schools, then yes, that is what is best for kids.

From what I’ve read, it’s about 40 SENIORS who were informed that they will now have to attend their home school. These are students who have been part of this ELL program for the past few years. These are students who are part of the school community, participate in sports/extra curricular activities at the school, have relationships with staff and students, etc. The program was being phased out, but from what I understand these students were told they would be allowed to stay for their senior year. That’s now been taken away. These students generally don’t have parents who are squeaky wheels. Who is advocating for them? How is this what’s best for these kids? From what I’ve read (from teachers from this school), these seniors were notified this week about this abrupt change. This is the reason for some staff being involuntarily transferred.

It is interesting that this is the population and program they chose. MCPS touts equity, but this seems like it would cause the least headaches for them from the parent population.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apparently the Sherwood situation is because an ELL program is being phased out and the students are being told they have to return to their home schools.

MCPS is just now telling the families and students? Is that what's best for the kids?

Attending the home school is not a hardship. If the program was under-enrolled and they couldn't offer as much as was available at home schools, then yes, that is what is best for kids.

From what I’ve read, it’s about 40 SENIORS who were informed that they will now have to attend their home school. These are students who have been part of this ELL program for the past few years. These are students who are part of the school community, participate in sports/extra curricular activities at the school, have relationships with staff and students, etc. The program was being phased out, but from what I understand these students were told they would be allowed to stay for their senior year. That’s now been taken away. These students generally don’t have parents who are squeaky wheels. Who is advocating for them? How is this what’s best for these kids? From what I’ve read (from teachers from this school), these seniors were notified this week about this abrupt change. This is the reason for some staff being involuntarily transferred.

It is interesting that this is the population and program they chose. MCPS touts equity, but this seems like it would cause the least headaches for them from the parent population.

That is terrible! I feel awful for those kids! And yes, mcps knows that these are parents who are less likely to be vocal, that’s why they chose them. This is why I try to stay away from this board and all mcps related topics in the summer, it’s too infuriating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apparently the Sherwood situation is because an ELL program is being phased out and the students are being told they have to return to their home schools.

MCPS is just now telling the families and students? Is that what's best for the kids?

Attending the home school is not a hardship. If the program was under-enrolled and they couldn't offer as much as was available at home schools, then yes, that is what is best for kids.

From what I’ve read, it’s about 40 SENIORS who were informed that they will now have to attend their home school. These are students who have been part of this ELL program for the past few years. These are students who are part of the school community, participate in sports/extra curricular activities at the school, have relationships with staff and students, etc. The program was being phased out, but from what I understand these students were told they would be allowed to stay for their senior year. That’s now been taken away. These students generally don’t have parents who are squeaky wheels. Who is advocating for them? How is this what’s best for these kids? From what I’ve read (from teachers from this school), these seniors were notified this week about this abrupt change. This is the reason for some staff being involuntarily transferred.

It is interesting that this is the population and program they chose. MCPS touts equity, but this seems like it would cause the least headaches for them from the parent population.

This is the angle that the news needs to go with. Great example of mcps saying one thing and doing another.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, MCPS treats teachers like widgets, not like the professionals they are. They can be pulled out of one school and put into another (or 2 others, .5 at one and .5 at another), at will. It SUCKS.

Teachers are absolutely professionals. That means they have expertise and training such that they can work in any school (so long as the specific position is within their specific expertise). Your employer asking you to change where you work isn't at all inconsistent with treating a job as a profession.

Even professionals have wants, needs, likes, dislikes. If you use up all of their professional goodwill by shuffling them around where they may have been comfortable and happy, don't expect them to stand by you when things get rough. It's human nature.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, MCPS treats teachers like widgets, not like the professionals they are. They can be pulled out of one school and put into another (or 2 others, .5 at one and .5 at another), at will. It SUCKS.

Teachers are absolutely professionals. That means they have expertise and training such that they can work in any school (so long as the specific position is within their specific expertise). Your employer asking you to change where you work isn't at all inconsistent with treating a job as a profession.

Even professionals have wants, needs, likes, dislikes. If you use up all of their professional goodwill by shuffling them around where they may have been comfortable and happy, don't expect them to stand by you when things get rough. It's human nature.

+1
Over on the Jobs and Careers board you can always find posts about people job hopping and asking "Should I take job A or job B".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the teachers dont want to transfer, every neighboring district is hiring

Leaving now would be a breach of contract. Teachers have to resign or file paperwork to go on leave by July 15. Violating that means you are never coming back to mcps.

Involuntary transfers happen every year. Ideally they happen in the spring and people have more options but this year has been anything but normal.

This is why it’s concerning. Why wait until after July 15 to tell teachers they’re involuntarily transferred? If they resign now they do so with prejudice limiting their ability to get hired by another MD school district. The timing is suspicious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Teachers are absolutely professionals. That means they have expertise and training such that they can work in any school (so long as the specific position is within their specific expertise). Your employer asking you to change where you work isn't at all inconsistent with treating a job as a profession.

Professionals are usually offered transfers, or put in requests for transfers, not usually told, "take this transfer to a new location or lose your job. "