Anonymous wrote:Classes are going to be closing because of staff being exposed. There will be no subs. I don’t know that anyone is thinking these things through more than one step

Anonymous wrote:I agree with this. It also isn't legally binding if I say I will return but then apply for FMLA in order to care for a family member. There is nothing dCPs can do to deny me that time. I agree that not signing just pushes back the planning timeline. Or the WTU is trying to force DCPS' hand to all DL.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No matter what the research says or how parents and teachers feel, the issue is the economy. Parents can’t go to work if there is no place for their kids to go. It seems like Covid-19 is going to be around for a while and other viruses waiting to become a threat.

Are parents ready for almost constant rolling closures of classrooms/schools? That’s the bigger question

Anonymous wrote:No matter what the research says or how parents and teachers feel, the issue is the economy. Parents can’t go to work if there is no place for their kids to go. It seems like Covid-19 is going to be around for a while and other viruses waiting to become a threat.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What WTU “wants” isn’t clear; what it’s asking for at this point is definitely not just that some particular set of rules will ultimately be followed.

The 28 page Memorandum of Agreement is very specific in its demands.

But many of the things can’t happen or be specified until a plan is nailed down which can’t happen until teachers answer their surveys. WTU is operating in such bad faith at this point.

But so is DCPS. If they were just trying to survey for numbers, their questions would not have been so legally and strongly worded.

That's not true. For the answers to be meaningful, they need the choices made to be (at least mostly) binding. A temperature check of how teachers are feeling probably should have been conducted a month ago (DCPS sucks; we agree on that), but now DCPS needs actual concrete numbers for planning and WTU is stopping that from happening. If WTU wasn't intending to be obstructionist, they would tell teachers to submit forms now, see what the answers looked like and then bargain for written guarantees from DCPS (which I agree they should have) then. Remember that the questions are no more legally binding than the actual contracts teachers have already signed, so this isn't actually extra leverage over DCPS except from a planning perspective... of course, planning is also what WTU is allegedly demanding. At this point, WTU is trying to force fully DL plain and simple. They think if they can hijack the process long enough DCPS will be forced to cave. THAT'S why I'm glad to hear the CDC is stepping in. If WTU starts to think there's a real chance that if they play an obstructionist role DCPS will simply announce a hybrid schedule and penalties for teachers that didn't complete forms and then try to get out of in person, then WTU will have to negotiate in good faith.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What WTU “wants” isn’t clear; what it’s asking for at this point is definitely not just that some particular set of rules will ultimately be followed.

The 28 page Memorandum of Agreement is very specific in its demands.

But many of the things can’t happen or be specified until a plan is nailed down which can’t happen until teachers answer their surveys. WTU is operating in such bad faith at this point.

But so is DCPS. If they were just trying to survey for numbers, their questions would not have been so legally and strongly worded.

That's not true. For the answers to be meaningful, they need the choices made to be (at least mostly) binding. A temperature check of how teachers are feeling probably should have been conducted a month ago (DCPS sucks; we agree on that), but now DCPS needs actual concrete numbers for planning and WTU is stopping that from happening. If WTU wasn't intending to be obstructionist, they would tell teachers to submit forms now, see what the answers looked like and then bargain for written guarantees from DCPS (which I agree they should have) then. Remember that the questions are no more legally binding than the actual contracts teachers have already signed, so this isn't actually extra leverage over DCPS except from a planning perspective... of course, planning is also what WTU is allegedly demanding. At this point, WTU is trying to force fully DL plain and simple. They think if they can hijack the process long enough DCPS will be forced to cave. THAT'S why I'm glad to hear the CDC is stepping in. If WTU starts to think there's a real chance that if they play an obstructionist role DCPS will simply announce a hybrid schedule and penalties for teachers that didn't complete forms and then try to get out of in person, then WTU will have to negotiate in good faith.

DCPS already lost a case in front of PERB for refusing to negotiate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What WTU “wants” isn’t clear; what it’s asking for at this point is definitely not just that some particular set of rules will ultimately be followed.

The 28 page Memorandum of Agreement is very specific in its demands.

But many of the things can’t happen or be specified until a plan is nailed down which can’t happen until teachers answer their surveys. WTU is operating in such bad faith at this point.

But so is DCPS. If they were just trying to survey for numbers, their questions would not have been so legally and strongly worded.

That's not true. For the answers to be meaningful, they need the choices made to be (at least mostly) binding. A temperature check of how teachers are feeling probably should have been conducted a month ago (DCPS sucks; we agree on that), but now DCPS needs actual concrete numbers for planning and WTU is stopping that from happening. If WTU wasn't intending to be obstructionist, they would tell teachers to submit forms now, see what the answers looked like and then bargain for written guarantees from DCPS (which I agree they should have) then. Remember that the questions are no more legally binding than the actual contracts teachers have already signed, so this isn't actually extra leverage over DCPS except from a planning perspective... of course, planning is also what WTU is allegedly demanding. At this point, WTU is trying to force fully DL plain and simple. They think if they can hijack the process long enough DCPS will be forced to cave. THAT'S why I'm glad to hear the CDC is stepping in. If WTU starts to think there's a real chance that if they play an obstructionist role DCPS will simply announce a hybrid schedule and penalties for teachers that didn't complete forms and then try to get out of in person, then WTU will have to negotiate in good faith.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What WTU “wants” isn’t clear; what it’s asking for at this point is definitely not just that some particular set of rules will ultimately be followed.

The 28 page Memorandum of Agreement is very specific in its demands.

But many of the things can’t happen or be specified until a plan is nailed down which can’t happen until teachers answer their surveys. WTU is operating in such bad faith at this point.

But so is DCPS. If they were just trying to survey for numbers, their questions would not have been so legally and strongly worded.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a comment on anything moving forward but please stop using perceived lack of cleaning when teachers went to pick up materials as a sign of anything. Deep cleaning/sanitizing is not needed if a room is empty for an extended period of time because the virus cannot survive that long in the environment. Also sanitizing may involve a fogging like cleaner that does not require things to be physically moved around.

Didn't it say upthread that the issue was the DCPS had SAID that it had cleaned, but had not? Therefore, it was DCPS not being truthful, therefore not trustworthy.

This. We simply do not trust DCPS to do anything they say. Cleaning is just one example. There is no accountability so they can promise teachers anything and not follow through.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a comment on anything moving forward but please stop using perceived lack of cleaning when teachers went to pick up materials as a sign of anything. Deep cleaning/sanitizing is not needed if a room is empty for an extended period of time because the virus cannot survive that long in the environment. Also sanitizing may involve a fogging like cleaner that does not require things to be physically moved around.

Didn't it say upthread that the issue was the DCPS had SAID that it had cleaned, but had not? Therefore, it was DCPS not being truthful, therefore not trustworthy.

Anonymous wrote:Yu Ying full distance learning through at least October

Anonymous wrote:Not a comment on anything moving forward but please stop using perceived lack of cleaning when teachers went to pick up materials as a sign of anything. Deep cleaning/sanitizing is not needed if a room is empty for an extended period of time because the virus cannot survive that long in the environment. Also sanitizing may involve a fogging like cleaner that does not require things to be physically moved around.

Anonymous wrote:Not a comment on anything moving forward but please stop using perceived lack of cleaning when teachers went to pick up materials as a sign of anything. Deep cleaning/sanitizing is not needed if a room is empty for an extended period of time because the virus cannot survive that long in the environment. Also sanitizing may involve a fogging like cleaner that does not require things to be physically moved around.