OT -- Panhandle School Keeping it Classy

[For_The_U]

Do you feel the production would drop significantly for teachers if they watched their kid while they graded papers at home?

A teacher's primary job role is the teaching itself; grading papers is a corollary component that is always done on 'off' time. My wife was a school teacher before our daughter was born. I thought middle school for two years myself. Could a teacher teach a class of students effectively throughout a schoolday while simultaneously being the sole supervisor of their own young children? Absolutely not.

 

[Brains]

Based on the current comments in this thread, I may get destroyed for this but it's a genuine question...

My read of that article is that it only applies to people whose job requires them to be on location M-F 9-5. Yet they aren't saying "You must all come in, COVID be damned!"; in fact, quite the contrary, they are allowing people to elect to work remotely instead. What this policy is saying is IF you are a job that requires you to be on location and IF you elect to work remotely from home instead, then you must have child care options in place as you will not be allowed to both elect to work from home while also being the one in charge of supervising your children at the same time. Why would that be received as such a crime to humanity? Have you ever tried to have a constructive work day at home while you're in the care of young children by yourself? It is literally impossible. Sure, you MIGHT be able to get a burst of work in here and there, but there is ZERO chance you can work 9-5. Zero. In fact, you can't come anywhere even remotely close to working a full work day if you're in charge of young kids on your own, youd be lucky to get 2 productive hours in.. unless you have a spouse, babysitter, family member, day care, etc, in which case this entire discussion is moot.

I am well aware that for many people with schools being out of session and finances hurting because of COVID it leaves them in a very difficult spot to figure out how to return to work while also having their kids cared for, especially single parents. My analysis here has no impact on my sympathy for those in that situation. But I'm still not grasping the outrage here. If you think this policy is so absurd and offensive, what would your alternative be for single parents who have no means of child care yet are supposed to work M-F 9-5 in their job (regardless of whether its FSU or any entity or corporation in America)? Do they just not work (or try their best to get a few mins in here and there from home if they get lucky and their kids both nap at the same time) and yet still get paid their full salary? And if you say yes to that, then for how long? What if schools dont open in the Fall or even next Spring? What if their is no vaccine? All companies are required to just keep paying all employees full time even if they cant work anywhere near full time, and do so indefinitely?

I'm not getting the outrage re this policy. School me on what I'm missing here. And no, I'm not "siding with FSU".

Your questions are fair.

 

[Paranos]

Either you've never had kids or you are just being plain disingenuous here. This hypothetical you keep relying on has no basis in reality.

I have 3 kids so I am speaking from experience and I know several people who else have children an are executives that make it work. Zoom meetings an all. You just have to check your area lighting, make sure the area is not child accessible, and remove unwanted items from the background.

Do a test shoot like this soccer mom, just to cover your ***.

Go Canes

 

[Tad Footeball]

You know what this really says about FSU as a business entity? That they have a **** supervisory structure in place whereas "managers" are unable to make sure that their employees are fulfilling their necessary work duties while at home- with or without kids.

 

[5ringshowboutu]

A teacher's primary job role is the teaching itself; grading papers is a corollary component that is always done on 'off' time. My wife was a school teacher before our daughter was born. Could a teacher teach a class of students effectively while simultaneously being the sole supervisor of her own young children? Absolutely not.

My college professors have one "live class" a week and those lectures are recorded so you can watch anytime. It's not FSU but I dont see why a teacher would need full attention for 40 hours a week when I'm not getting instruction for 40 hours. I understand lesson plans take time but why couldn't that revolve around the times you're not watching your kid?

It's not horrible policy but the timing of enforcement is pretty horrible lol

Is it worth losing good teachers? Is that really it? Or are you afraid of the backlash that will come with 20k students being moved into an online leanring structure and still paying 40k a year tuition. I think it's more that than "the quality of your education will drop if professor mike wipes his kids *** for 5 mins".

 

[For_The_U]

My college professors have one "live class" a week and those lectures are recorded so you can watch anytime. It's not FSU but I dont see why a teacher would need full attention for 40 hours a week when I'm not getting instruction for 40 hours. I understand lesson plans take time but why couldn't that revolve around the times you're not watching your kid?

It's not horrible policy but the timing of enforcement is pretty horrible lol

Is it worth losing good teachers? Is that really it? Or are you afraid of the backlash that will come with 20k students being moved into an online pay from and still paying 40k a year tuition. I think it's more that than "the quality of your education will drop if professor mike wipes his kids *** for 5 mins".

The article specifically states that the policy does not apply to professors. Again, it ONLY applies to those with job descriptions which require them to be on campus full-time M-F from 9-5 and specifically excludes professors.

Facts matter, guys.

 

[Artist Formerly Known As]

Agree 100% with that. That is the arrangement in our house and I am appreciative every day for everything my wife does for our family. My wife's full-time job IS being a stay at home mom and it can be as challenging and straining as any other job in America. But the discussion about this FSU policy has nothing to do with stay at home parents. It is about parents who have chosen not to be stay at home parents and instead have elected to be fulltime members of the work force.

If they have chosen to be full time workers, that is what their duty is, whether they’re at home or in the office. If you can’t bring your kids in to the office and watch them there, why should you expect to when you’re on the clock at home?

 

[For_The_U]

If they have chosen to be full time workers, that is what their duty is, whether they’re at home or in the office. If you can’t bring your kids in to the office and watch them there, why should you expect to when you’re on the clock at home?

Bingo!

 

[Brains]

I am sure I will incur the wrath of the parent here, but I don't really care. When you choose to have kids, you take on the responsibility of raising and providing for them. That will necessarily mean sacrifices down the road, including sacrifices that your childless friends and coworkers will not (and should not) have to face. Time and time again, though, the workplace puts parental wants over those of the childless. Those of us without kids are forever being tasked with picking up the slack for "emergency" absences and "important life events." Your kid's school play is not more important than my attendance at a football game. We've just chosen two different paths.

When this pandemic started and we went to a work from home situation, an interesting scenario developed. Typically, we have several attorneys cover many in-person events for a coworker who works remotely from out of state. It's part of the job. But with everyone working from home, those in-person events were all remote. When still faced with covering these, others pushed as to the reason. It was due to conflicts with being able to get child care. That's a parent's responsibility to figure out the arrangement. Fortunately, the issue was addressed appropriately.

Being a parent is hard, but no one should expect that every organization- or their coworkers- will bend over backwards to accommodate them.

 

[5ringshowboutu]

The article specifically states that the policy does not apply to professors. Again, it ONLY applies to those with job descriptions which require them to be on campus full-time M-F from 9-5 and specifically excludes professors.

Facts matter, guys.

Why do you do think professors should be excluded?

 

[For_The_U]

Why do you do think professors should be excluded?

Because the role of a professor rarely ever involves standard work hours. THAT is a type of work that can be done at various hours and while juggling other things because the times you're actually required to be somewhere are rather limited. But I think we'd all agree it would not be ok for a professor to bring their own young kids and supervise them WHILE they are in the middle of their actual lectures to students.

 

[5ringshowboutu]

Because the role of a professor rarely ever involves standard work hours. THAT is a type of work that can be done at various hours and while juggling other things because the times you're actually required to be somewhere are rather limited. But I think we'd all agree it would not be ok for a professor to bring their own young kids and supervise them WHILE they are in the middle of their actual lectures to students.

What support staff that can work remotely, would need to be without distraction for an 8 hour period?

Also sensationalizing would be taking this current situation and comparing it to every day scenarios. Of course a teacher couldn't be 100% effective with their kid in the class every day of their teaching career. Would this be a scenario that goes on forever? Or just the until the virus dissapears as our preisdent has said?

I'm all for letting these people temporarily watch their kids. It just shows FSU doesn't value their support staff, which is irionically the reason they use for rising tuition costs.

 

[For_The_U]

What support staff that can work remotely, would need to be without distraction for an 8 hour period?

Also sensationalizing would be taking this current situation and comparing it to every day scenarios. Of course a teacher couldn't be 100% effective with their kid in the class every day of their teaching career. Would this be a scenario that goes on forever? Or just the until the virus dissapears as our preisdent has said?

I'm all for letting these people temporarily watch their kids. It just shows FSU doesn't value their support staff, which is irionically the reason they use for rising tuition costs.

My comment about taking it from reality to sensationalism wasn't directed it at you. It was directed at the poster who responded to what I felt was a fair question by me with hypotheticals that were entirely unrealistic and nothing but a sidetrack to the actual discussion, commented that I needed to learn to multitask better if I can't supervise kids and simultaneously work full time, and then something bizarre about letting my kids run around and get eaten by animals. Though, the other sentiments expressed on this thread implying FSU doesn't care about families or its own support staff is pretty **** sensational IMO as well. Isn't it possible they DO care about families and their support staff yet still implemented this policy? Is that really completely out of the realm of possibility?

I read a quote the other day that was incredibly profound and so relevant to our times right now. The essence of it was so many in our current state of civil discourse attach to a group of people worthy of concern and facing true issue, then make a statement of their desired plan for to how to resolve those issues, and if anyone disagrees with the suggested salve they are immediately framed as not caring about the subject people themselves. That is such a disingenuous approach and an absolute perversion of civil discourse. One can disagree with a suggested resolution to a problem yet still care just as passionately about the problem itself. Or in this case, one can implement a policy that may ultimately have negative impacts on a group of people without that being evidence that they don't care about or even detest that same group of people.

You'd have to ask FSU which employees need to be able to work 8 straight hours without distraction. I don't know as I didn't write the policy. But having worked in the for-profit college industry, I can think of a few just shooting off the hip from my own experience such as financial aid and administration. At the crappy school I recruited for, those two departments had lines out the door from the moment we opened to the moment we closed. And they all worked regular hours. If you didn't get the FA done or the student fully enrolled by 5, you were likely out of luck and would need to come back the next day at 9. No, I don't believe those two departments could have continued functioning if their employees were allowed to work remotely while supervising their own kids.

Alright, I gotta bail from this thread for a bit. I'll circle back around later.

 

[5ringshowboutu]

My comment about taking it from reality to sensationalism wasn't directed it at you. It was directed at the poster who responded to what I felt was a fair question by me with hypotheticals that were entirely unrealistic and nothing but a sidetrack to the actual discussion, commented that I needed to learn to multitask better if I can't supervise kids and simultaneously work full time, and then something bizarre about letting my kids run around and get eaten by animals. Though, the other sentiments expressed on this thread implying FSU doesn't care about families or its own support staff is pretty **** sensational IMO as well. Isn't it possible they DO care about families and their support staff yet still implemented this policy? Is that really completely out of the realm of possibility?

I read a quote the other day that was incredibly profound and so relevant to our times right now. The essence of it was so many in our current state of civil discourse attach to a group of people worthy of concern and facing true issue, then make a statement of their desired plan for to how to resolve those issues, and if anyone disagrees with the suggested salve they are immediately framed as not caring about the subject people themselves. That is such a disingenuous approach and an absolute perversion of civil discourse. One can disagree with a suggested resolution to a problem yet still care just as passionately about the problem itself. Or in this case, one can implement a policy that may ultimately have negative impacts on a group of people without that being evidence that they don't care about or even detest that same group of people.

You'd have to ask FSU which employees need to be able to work 8 straight hours without distraction. I don't know as I didn't write the policy. But having worked in the for-profit college industry, I can think of a few just shooting off the hip from my own experience such as financial aid and administration. At the crappy school I recruited for, those two departments had lines out the door from the moment we opened to the moment we closed. And they all worked regular hours. If you didn't get the FA done or the student fully enrolled by 5, you were likely out of luck and would need to come back the next day at 9. No, I don't believe those two departments could have continued functioning if their employees were allowed to work remotely while supervising their own kids.

Alright, I gotta bail from this thread for a bit. I'll circle back around later.

Ah gotcha. Wasnt trying to argue or sound like I was, was just looking for your point of view. I also didn' think you were saying "***** them kids and their families" either lol

I grew up watching my mom take my special needs sister to work every day. Granted she was pretty high functioning and in a wheelchair so she couldn't get into much trouble, but the company (quorum healtchare) allowed it and encouraged it. She was a beast at her job and that probably had a lot to do with it and wasn't JUST a kindness thing.

All the large call centers here have in-house daycare on site. I think its kinda rough for right now to tell people they have to pick childcare or work. Maybe give a little for a few months until you know when schools will be back in session.

I also got 1600$ cash for the cares act from my school from money that my school took and becuase they have had recent bad publicity about post graduation job help they gave almost all back to the students. It seems like a day care situation for support staff might be a good way too spend the 15 million FSU got from the cares act that wasn't set for emergency grants.

 

[Rellyrell]

Terrible leadership, and it will drive away good employees from the company.

Already has, bro.

 

[ThomasM]

That’s how it should be.

Something has gone astray in the US. Not trying to go on a soapbox about it, but the idea of the stay at home parent has become looked down upon for some reason. Parents send their kid to daycare when it would make more financial sense for one parent to just stay home and actually raise the child. ****, with common sense, even the stay at home parent could work part time and still watch and raise children.

It's called greed. Just look at maternity leave in the US. Talk about a **** joke.

 

[Rellyrell]

**** I quit a pretty lucrative pest control job with a new small company in April because they valued profits over their customers and employees.

Didn't have any ppe besides dust masks. No state mandated half face respirators, no nitrile gloves for mixing chems and had me, the only guy with a preexisting condition (asthma) doing all the interiors becuase I had the most experience.

After all that lied to me about who was doing the most customer contact. My dumbass probably would have stayed if the decision had been mine instead of forced.

Sad thing is most of the people who "needed" their interiors done were elderly people. I advised that I had been in contact with many people through my route and they didn't care none.

Bro; trust me.....I applaud & salute you. This option is on the table for me, as well, despite the lucrative salary. I’ve already positioned myself not to have to deal w/ the bull chit, as 3 yrs ago, it was clear the direction of the company was in total contradiction of its 120 yr existence.

 

[duke4heisman]

It's called greed. Just look at maternity leave in the US. Talk about a **** joke.

Absolute joke. My wife is a teacher, no maternity leave. She has to get short term disability to just receive 66 percent of her pay. That runs out in like 12 weeks and then she has to take FMLA just to keep her health insurance. That runs out about 12 weeks after that.
The only benefit is, she can stay out for 12 months and keep her current position, they will guarantee a job for 18 months but it could be anywhere in the district. Of course, all that time is without pay... SMH

 

[StPeteCane]

Whether you are the sole supervisor of young children instead of working during your work hours is not your employer's concern? What?!? Mind you, they didn't have to offer a remote option, they could have demanded all full time employees have to report to campus in which case all the people in that situation would have been forced to either find child care arrangements or leave their jobs. Based on your logic, are you saying if that had been the case then everyone in that situation should have been allowed to bring their children to work with them everyday and babysit them there while they 'work'? This policy re those electing to work from home instead of on site is no different in that regard.

What you are doing is shifting this discussion from reality over to sensationalism. Your premise is based on an impossibility; that being, that someone can be the sole supervisor of young children while simultaneously working full time hours and being productive. That is simply not possible. Period. With maybe some extraordinarily rare exceptions, which can't be what drives the analysis.

So I'll ask again, if you think this policy is so wrong, what is your alternative?

If you're working remotely and are capable of doing a job effectively, who gives a **** if you're watching your kids or not? It's not that hard. I find it unethical that an employer can criticize a how virtual based employee handles caring for their child without attempting to provide a solution to better the circumstance or that employee. Furthermore, you say "they didn't have to offer a remote option" like they're gifting remote work to their employees, when they're simply just adapting to the current landscape of doing business during a difficult circumstance.

I find it comical that you say my premise is based on an impossibility when it's currently impossible for you to have an accurate market or workplace data set based the current situation you're speaking of.

 

[JG14]

They should reach out to marvin wilson and have him stage another protest amongst the players until they get to work from home