Anonymous wrote:I don't care if there is DL or not since I'm effectively homeschooling anyway, but I don't support an illegal strike to sabotage a return to real school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At this point, I’m pretty philosophical about this whole mess. I don’t think it’s fair to ask teachers to work in person until they are fully vaccinated. I certainly don’t think it makes sense in terms of public health. So I guess I see their point of view.

If teachers do decide to strike, I hope they don’t dump a load of “asynchronous” work for students to do on their own (aka teachers dump their role as DL facilitators on parents). If teachers vote for no DL, well what am I gonna do. But please: no DL means no DL.

Philosophically, what do you see the solution as being? Kids have a legal right to education from 5 years on. Parents have a legal responsibility to arrange for that education. Public schools exist because the mandate that every child be in school requires a public and collective solution.

If the teachers refuse to do any more DL and the schools aren’t open for whatever reason, what happens to the rights of kids to an education? Will parents be punished if they’re unable to provide one?

- not a hostile question, genuinely curious about your thoughts

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At this point, I’m pretty philosophical about this whole mess. I don’t think it’s fair to ask teachers to work in person until they are fully vaccinated. I certainly don’t think it makes sense in terms of public health. So I guess I see their point of view.

In person teaching without a vaccine can be done with risk reduction measures. Many people (teachers and non) worked in person without being fully vaccinated, since last march.

But that's beside the point, because vaccines are HERE. Teachers should be vaccinated, then return to in person teaching. It is not going to look anything close to normal until the broader community can be vaccinated, but we can begin to move in that direction.

Also, I don't think the state/district/anyone can require vaccines until they are fully approved, instead of just approved for Emergency Use. Not that I expect them to actually mandate it in any case, but it really isn't possible with the current state of vaccines.

I do not support a strike. I have been pro-union my whole life, but not anymore.

I'm pro-Union, but I wouldn't support that strike. Teachers have the right to a workplace that's following CDC guidance and implementing appropriate precautions -- good ventilation, enforcing mask-wearing by kids and staff, limited-size cohorts and other measures to minimize the number of people everyone is exposed to, necessary supplies like soap and hand sanitizer, etc. Teachers are eligible for the vaccine. Teachers with pre-existing conditions or vulnerable family members should be able to request a accommodations. If there is some precaution that teachers can point to that precludes a safe opening, find, point it out. But "the risk must be zero" is just misguided. We don't operate on a zero-risk standard for anything else. If some schools aren't ready, then let's talk about those schools, and what needs to be done to bring them up to snuff. If there are additional mitigation measures that can be taken, they should be. But a general strike just to oppose opening at all, at the cost of all education, DL or in person? Nope, I wouldn't support that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At this point, I’m pretty philosophical about this whole mess. I don’t think it’s fair to ask teachers to work in person until they are fully vaccinated. I certainly don’t think it makes sense in terms of public health. So I guess I see their point of view.

In person teaching without a vaccine can be done with risk reduction measures. Many people (teachers and non) worked in person without being fully vaccinated, since last march.

But that's beside the point, because vaccines are HERE. Teachers should be vaccinated, then return to in person teaching. It is not going to look anything close to normal until the broader community can be vaccinated, but we can begin to move in that direction.

Also, I don't think the state/district/anyone can require vaccines until they are fully approved, instead of just approved for Emergency Use. Not that I expect them to actually mandate it in any case, but it really isn't possible with the current state of vaccines.

I do not support a strike. I have been pro-union my whole life, but not anymore.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At this point, I’m pretty philosophical about this whole mess. I don’t think it’s fair to ask teachers to work in person until they are fully vaccinated. I certainly don’t think it makes sense in terms of public health. So I guess I see their point of view.

If teachers do decide to strike, I hope they don’t dump a load of “asynchronous” work for students to do on their own (aka teachers dump their role as DL facilitators on parents). If teachers vote for no DL, well what am I gonna do. But please: no DL means no DL.

Philosophically, what do you see the solution as being? Kids have a legal right to education from 5 years on. Parents have a legal responsibility to arrange for that education. Public schools exist because the mandate that every child be in school requires a public and collective solution.

If the teachers refuse to do any more DL and the schools aren’t open for whatever reason, what happens to the rights of kids to an education? Will parents be punished if they’re unable to provide one?

- not a hostile question, genuinely curious about your thoughts

https://www.npr.org/local/305/2020/05/11/853892794/d-c-s-black-residents-make-up-less-than-half-the-population-80-of-c-o-v-i-d-19-deaths

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At this point, I’m pretty philosophical about this whole mess. I don’t think it’s fair to ask teachers to work in person until they are fully vaccinated. I certainly don’t think it makes sense in terms of public health. So I guess I see their point of view.

If teachers do decide to strike, I hope they don’t dump a load of “asynchronous” work for students to do on their own (aka teachers dump their role as DL facilitators on parents). If teachers vote for no DL, well what am I gonna do. But please: no DL means no DL.

Philosophically, what do you see the solution as being? Kids have a legal right to education from 5 years on. Parents have a legal responsibility to arrange for that education. Public schools exist because the mandate that every child be in school requires a public and collective solution.

If the teachers refuse to do any more DL and the schools aren’t open for whatever reason, what happens to the rights of kids to an education? Will parents be punished if they’re unable to provide one?

- not a hostile question, genuinely curious about your thoughts

Anonymous wrote:At this point, I’m pretty philosophical about this whole mess. I don’t think it’s fair to ask teachers to work in person until they are fully vaccinated. I certainly don’t think it makes sense in terms of public health. So I guess I see their point of view.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would support a strike if the demand is full, effective vaccination of faculty and staff barring documented medical excuse. Every faculty/staff member would report to the middle school where they teach or that is part of their school’s feeder pattern the following Saturday for the first shot and three Saturdays later for the second. In-person school would start the following Monday. Teachers who have a medical excuse not to be vaxxed would teach DL for the students who cannot attend in person. Teachers who refuse to be vaxxed would be placed on unpaid leave.

Otherwise, no. I do not support a strike.

This will not happen, of course.

I generally support the decisions of union members to participate in a strike. I'm not thrilled about the way WTU has conducted themselves _as an organization_ during all of this, but ultimately, given the history between the district and the union, I place more of the fault for the overall situation on DCPS _as an organization_ - not just for the way they have behaved during the pandemic, but going back for years during which school facilities slid into disrepair, teacher contracts took YEARS to negotiate, and pandemic recovery plans contained a lot of "just trust us" rather than hard numbers about what would be provided and when. In general, morally, I support labor over management. Every time.

I also support the above. I do not believe there should be philosophical vaccine exemptions for students or staff. Medical exemptions only and if you refuse to get the shot for anything other than medical reasons (documented by a physician), you are no longer eligible for your job. I personally think that vaccination for everything (including the flu shot, every year) should be mandatory for anyone working in schools (excepting the people with documented medical exemptions). I think it should be considered the same as any other qualification. Ditto healthcare, including home healthcare. I am extremely tired of this American mentality about vaccines that regular people working as lawyers and grocery store clerks and yoga instructors suddenly know enough about the science of vaccine development and epidemiology to competently decide whether something is safe. I'm pretty tired of the "everyone makes the best decision for themselves and their family" bs. Widespread public vaccination in line with CDC standards should be the requirement for education and healthcare. If you don't want a vaccine or don't want your kids vaccinated, you don't get to participate in those systems, period.

I'm concerned that people think teacher vaccination will just end the DL nightmare, and they won't. I'm hoping that teachers (and the WTU) will be good with vaccination + masking + distancing (through hybrid) + updated ventilation systems + all the other OSSE protocols. However, I've heard teachers (and seen WTU twitter) state the following:
1) vaccines aren't 100% effective (I'm not sure what the conclusion is on this point....)
2) we still don't know if being vaccinated means you can't carry it, so all people that teachers live with also need to be vaccinated to make teachers feel comfortable. This starts the thinking that teachers with kids will only be comfortable going to in-person learning when there is a childhood vaccine.
3) kids can still get covid and DIE even with teachers vaccinated (again the argument seems to be that a childhood vaccine is necessary before in-person school can happen?)
4) kids can still carry covid home so everyone they live with needs to be vaccinated too before they go into school at all
5) all school staff and their families need to be vaccinated before in-person learning can happen
6) new variants mean the vaccines don't matter (I'm not sure this is supported by science, but that's not really the point)

I'm just saying that already there are multiple new ways of arguing for DL forever, even with teachers fully vaccinated.