Skip to main content

Let's be like New Jersey?

This story from today's WNJ deserves some additional comment:

TRENTON — New Jersey's education commissioner has ruled that a teacher should forfeit more than $50,000 pay for making a four-minute personal call during class.

However, Desly Getty won't lose her job as a performing arts teacher at Asbury Park High School.

Court records show Getty was covering for another teacher for 45 minutes in 2008 when she called suspended superintendent Antonio Lewis.

A student recorded two students dancing while she was on the phone and posted it on YouTube.

Getty went back to the class the next day to question students after she had learned about the video.

The teacher was reprimanded.

Asbury Park prohibits teachers from making personal calls while performing assigned duties.

Getty can appeal the ruling.


Aside from the grossly inappropriate relation of the fine to the offense, this case is not an anomaly in New Jersey.

Let me explain. I do a lot of consulting on Teaching American History grants, and a lot of it is in New Jersey. New Jersey school districts are no longer allowed to purchase lunch for their teachers during a day of professional development.

Why?

About two years ago, one NJ District Superintendent went to England on some sort of government-paid educational junket, and charge a meal (one meal!) on his state credit card that came to something like $170.

The State legislature reacted to this outrage by passing legislation forbidding school districts from ever paying any of their employees for meals again. That'll show the bastard!

Yep: the NJ way. Instead of punishing the person who actually committed the infraction, the government punished every teacher in the State.

Ultimate insult to injury: that former superintendent is now a NJ state legislator.
Labels:

Comments

RSmitty Doesn't Like Tuesdays, Either said…
$50-freaking-k? That's an annual salary (er...more than) for most teachers in our state (DE)!!! That's outrageous and continues to show yet again how horribly out of touch the powerful are with those who have boots-on-the-ground.
August 11, 2009 at 1:11 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...
44 comments
Read more

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...
70 comments
Read more

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...
31 comments
Read more