As we discussed, seniority is an important provision for many union negotiators.

Question

As we discussed, seniority is an important provision for many union negotiators. Presently, the last-hired-first-fired school of thought is being hotly debated in public education. Unions consistently take the stance that seniority should be the only factor in job loss due to layoffs. Many politicians and their constituents have begun to question the wisdom of this method and have recommended that school districts move to a layoff procedure based upon job performance rather than seniority.

What do you think about this issue? What have you learned about this issue from reading the newspaper or watching the evening news? Please post by taking a stand for or against seniority-based teacher layoffs in education.

Explanation / Answer

Answer: After reading about this issue in news papers and watching T.V news I feel that job performance should be the factor which should actually be used in the layoff procedures. It is the performance of the teacher which matters rather than seniority. By using the seniority based layoff system, the students are the ones who are most hurt. Because of this system many good teachers lose their jobs while the inefficient teachers continue to remain in the system directly impacting the quality of teaching. Therefore I feel that this system should change and seniority should not act as a measure for decisions related with layoffs. In the past there are many examples where the efficient teachers were just laid off as they had less seniority. The teachers determine the quality of education and hence it is important that the quality is used as criteria for retaining the teachers of for their layoff.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse A
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.