Retire/Rehire

Discussion in 'Job Seekers' started by Weazy, Jul 23, 2007.

  1. Weazy

    Weazy Comrade

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Messages:
    478
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 23, 2007

    I'm not sure if this should be posted here or under General Forum, but here goes:
    Everytime I read a post I feel the frustration each time someone doesn't get the job they want. It sounds like there are many more teachers looking for jobs, than there are job available. In my state, Ohio, teachers who are eligible for retirement can retire, and then be rehired for the same position without being paid benefits. This seems to be beoming an epidemic. They receive their retirement pay, and another paycheck. Of course, it depends on the individual school district as to how they handle this. Some districts rehire them at first year pay, etc. I think this is doing incredible damage to the next generation of educators. THEY CAN'T BECOME EMLOYED! because these teachers won't give up their jobs! I had one principal (not mine!) get very irate withme because I called it double dipping. He said it is not double dipping, and it saves districts a lot of money. I understand that, but it also causes a lot of harm. I certainly don't want to offend any teachers who are retired and rehired, but I wish something could be done to stop this practice. Many teachers retire at 55 and teach another 8-10 years. This really hurts the young work force. When I retire, I will retire! I have known several "waiting in the wings" teachers who have subbed or have been student teachers and wait patiently for a veteran teacher to retire. Once the position is posted they apply only to find that it was filled by the original teacher! We are going to lose many good teachers to other professions! Would-be teachers will choose different majors in college because they know they will not be able to find a job in education.

    O.K. I'll get off my soapbox...but...does anybody else feel this way? I'm blessed to have my job, but you never know what could happen (cutbacks, etc). I know that if some of these schools would adopt a policy to not rehire the retired, more of these job seekers would be employed. Once again, I do not mean to offend anybody, but if you can't afford to retire, don't.
     
  2.  
  3. Mrs.Gould

    Mrs.Gould Comrade

    Joined:
    May 4, 2007
    Messages:
    467
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 23, 2007

    Wow, I might be completely naive, but I had no idea this was happening! Without knowing much about it besides what you posted, I would have to say that I don't think it is right at all. When I graduated high school in 1999 I was told that elementary education was an excellent field to go in because there was going to be a shortage of teachers (aka the baby boomers were all going to be retiring). That obviously didn't happen. I'm not saying that you MUST retire when you turn the age when you're eligible, but if you retire then get rehired, like you said, I believe that is wrong. There are some veteran teachers out there who are absolutely WONDERFUL but unfortunately there are too many that are so burnt out and are anything but a benefit to education. Wow.. that just makes me really sad that people do that for money. Teaching obviously isn't about money!
     
  4. Weazy

    Weazy Comrade

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Messages:
    478
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 23, 2007

    I know it happens in Ohio, I don't know about other states. That is what I would like to know, so I hope others post about their knowledge on the subject. I agree, there are wonderful teachers who have been teaching for many years. I don't have any problem with them teaching as long as they want, but "double-dipping" seems greedy and wrong. Maybe somebody can shed a different light on this for me, but I think it is going to do damage in the long run. We are going to lose potential teacers who could be wonderful, too.
     
  5. Mrs.Gould

    Mrs.Gould Comrade

    Joined:
    May 4, 2007
    Messages:
    467
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 23, 2007

    I totally agree with you. I would also like to hear more about this and want to know if it happens in New York. I haven't heard about it, but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen. I don't really understand how that can be deemed legal.
     
  6. Lovetoteachkids

    Lovetoteachkids Comrade

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2007
    Messages:
    293
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 23, 2007

    I haven't heard of it happening here in PA either but you never know. I never even thought about it really until now.
     
  7. yarnwoman

    yarnwoman Cohort

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2006
    Messages:
    693
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 23, 2007

    WOW! I have never heard of this but it does shed some light so to speak. I am in southern CA and here they post jobs but never look at the application. I have applied to over 75 positions through edjoin and at least 20 of them say submitted until the day they say posting archived. The other ones say district reviewed which lets you know the district looked at your application. I think it may be someting like you are saying, they have to post the position even thought they already have a person for the job.
     
  8. Weazy

    Weazy Comrade

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Messages:
    478
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 23, 2007

    Maybe this is only permitted in Ohio, but I doubt it; although, it hasn't always been the case here. I'm not sure how long the state has allowed this, but it has made a difference in the job market for would-be teachers.
     
  9. cwalsh

    cwalsh Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2003
    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 23, 2007

    It was happening in Maryland a couple of years ago too. Not sure if it still is though. However the situation was different there was a huge teacher shortage and this was one way to help keep teachers in the classrooms.
     
  10. abequette

    abequette Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Messages:
    87
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 23, 2007

    I know here in KY teachers cannot teach more than a certain number of days in a year without losing their retirement pay. Also when they do this they are only subs and can only be paid sub pay. However I do know that they can retire and then teach in a college or some other job and still draw their retirement.....they just can't ever teach in another KY school district again. This being said it is still no easier to get a job in KY....at least not in elementary ed.
     
  11. patti2

    patti2 Cohort

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2006
    Messages:
    557
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 23, 2007

    I am also shocked at this happening! I am in IL and have never heard of this. Is it even legal?....sounds so fishy! I just keep asking myself why WOULDN'T every teacher do that? Wow, I really feel bad for you young teachers!
     
  12. Weazy

    Weazy Comrade

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Messages:
    478
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 23, 2007


    It is legal in Ohio, and you have hit the nail on the head--more and more teachers in Ohio are doing it, making it harder and harder for new teachers to find jobs. I would love to see this practice change. Can you imagine what would happen to the job market (any job) as a whole if this becomes a regular practice? The younger generations will never become employed.

    I like the way KY handles the situation. After so many days of subbing/teaching you lose your retirement pay, but you can teach in college or find a different job.
     
  13. Aliceacc

    Aliceacc Multitudinous

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Messages:
    27,534
    Likes Received:
    6

    Jul 23, 2007

    I'm not about to make lots of friends, but I disagree, big time.

    For the record, I'm 49 and my youngest child is 4 years old. I'm sorry if you're waiting in the wings for my job, but it's going to be QUITE SOME TIME before either my husband or I retire. I'm very sorry that so many are having such a hard time finding work, and I'm doing what I can here to help. But that help does not extend to giving up my job so that someone else can have it.

    I'm not sure why you are so angry about the "double dipping" thing. If these people couldn't double dip, I'm guessing they would stay on full time, and cost the districts more money. As a taxpayer, I'm in favor of whatever keeps good teachers in school at minimal cost-- if it means playing games with what you call that paycheck, I'm OK with that.

    Also, if you're ever thinking about receiving a check from the Social Security system you're paying into, think about the benefits these people aren't using. I'm guessing that most people couldn't survive on pensions alone. At some point, either social security or welfare would come into play-- again,that's my tax money.

    At least in the metro NY area, the job market has been abysmal since the Vietnam War provided draft exemptions for teachers. Anyone who didn't know that going in either wasn't well informed or chose to ignore the obvious. People in this area who major in elementary education KNOW that they're going to have trouble finding a job. Some choose to "wait in the wings", some find other careers, some sub, some relocate and some become known to districts that way.

    But I cannot support the idea of asking 55 year old teachers to retire so that you can have a job. For the record, this weekend my father in law will celebrate his 80th birthday, my mother in law is 82 and my mom is 76. That's a LOT of years to get by on a pension, don't you think??
     
  14. abequette

    abequette Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Messages:
    87
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 23, 2007

    I don't think that the person that posted this was trying to say you should go into retirement before you are ready I think they were simply saying that people should not retire with the intent to go right back into the same poistion. However I know that when I am of retirement age, I will retire and draw my check and if I still want to teach I will probably obtain a position as a professor or something. However if at that point you are still wanting to teach and are happy where you are than there is no need to retire...is there? If it is just about that the income at that point you would make more money drawing your check and working, than just continuing to stay in the same position...just my 2 cents.
     
  15. Aliceacc

    Aliceacc Multitudinous

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Messages:
    27,534
    Likes Received:
    6

    Jul 23, 2007

    If it's cheaper to the district (because they're not paying HUGELY expensive benefits) and it means more money in the teacher's pocket, who is being harmed? If the tradeoff weren't possible, that same teacher would remain in the classroom and the taxpayers would be paying benefits instead of having the pension plan pay it.
     
  16. abequette

    abequette Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Messages:
    87
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 23, 2007

    I don't know I guess I just don't understand why the teacher would ever retire in the first place...I mean if the are going back to a starting salary they would be losing money that way.
     
  17. Missy

    Missy Aficionado

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Messages:
    3,742
    Likes Received:
    309

    Jul 23, 2007

    engmom,
    I don't see this happening much in my area of Ohio for teachers, but I have seen more than a few administrators do this.

    I think part of the job problem in Ohio is how attractive the retirement package is for those who teach 35 years.
     
  18. Missy

    Missy Aficionado

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Messages:
    3,742
    Likes Received:
    309

    Jul 23, 2007

    They are not losing money - they get retirement ( a LOT in Ohio if they taught 35 years) pay and salary.
     
  19. Aliceacc

    Aliceacc Multitudinous

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Messages:
    27,534
    Likes Received:
    6

    Jul 23, 2007

    I don't teach in a public school, so this is how I read the post:

    They're not. I assume that they're keeping the number of years and credits they have on the pay scale. Their pension picks up their medical benefits so the district doesn't have to.
     
  20. Mrs.Gould

    Mrs.Gould Comrade

    Joined:
    May 4, 2007
    Messages:
    467
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 23, 2007

    The way I see it is that teachers are retiring and getting rehired in order to get more money. I don't think that is the right reason to retire or be teaching for that matter. I also don't think that anyone feels that teachers should retire as soon as they are eligible. If you aren't ready then don't retire.
     
  21. TeacherGroupie

    TeacherGroupie Moderator

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    29,807
    Likes Received:
    1,170

    Jul 23, 2007

    Given the high cost of the monthly health insurance payment for the over-50 crowd, if just a handful of them take a deal like this, that could free up enough money to allow a district to add an entirely new entry-level position, thus bringing down the student:teacher ratio while keeping all that experience available.
     
  22. Mrs.Gould

    Mrs.Gould Comrade

    Joined:
    May 4, 2007
    Messages:
    467
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 23, 2007

    That's true but not when enrollment is at a stand still or a decline. Around here that's what's happening and when it's time to vote on the budget, community members will shoot it down in a heartbeat if new teachers are hired when the class numbers are already low.
     
  23. abequette

    abequette Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Messages:
    87
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 23, 2007


    I agree with Mrs. Gould 100%.
     
  24. born2teach84

    born2teach84 Comrade

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2006
    Messages:
    310
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 23, 2007

    As a second year teacher I think it is perfectly fine for a teacher to double dip. I would!! I mean think about it. If you work 30 years and then your able to retire and get more money to survive why wouldn't you? I mean life is hard you may have grandchildren or children who are still in school. I think that it is perfectly their right to work as a teacher and draw from retirement. It is their money they are taking. How many people do you see these days retire and sit at home and do nothing? They can't because their can't live off their retirement and do things. I can empathize with those teachers who can't find jobs, but you can't take it out on someone who has worked 30-35 years and want to get what they deserve. JMO...
     
  25. Caesar753

    Caesar753 Multitudinous

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2007
    Messages:
    14,606
    Likes Received:
    2,712

    Jul 23, 2007


    I agree.
     
  26. Weazy

    Weazy Comrade

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Messages:
    478
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 23, 2007


    I'm not saying retire at 55--not at all. Teach until you're ready to retire. Once you leave-let somebody else teach. Yes, there is experience there, but you're assuming that the next generation isn't going to be good. In fact, I know of two experienced teachers who weren't the best for the positions, but they retired and and were automatically rehired. They had first "dibs" at the jobs even though they could have been replaced by better teachers.
     
  27. Weazy

    Weazy Comrade

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Messages:
    478
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 23, 2007



    It's quite possible that this happens more frequently in the poorer school districts. It is enticing for administrators to rehire veterans as a means to save the district money. I have several cousins who teach all over Ohio and they say they see it happening more often as well.
     
  28. Caesar753

    Caesar753 Multitudinous

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2007
    Messages:
    14,606
    Likes Received:
    2,712

    Jul 23, 2007

    The retire/rehire thing really just sounds like a technical way for everyone to walk away with a little extra money in their pockets.

    I mean, if the teacher chose not to retire at 55, the state would continue to shell out tons of money.

    If the teacher retired in name only, and then was immediately rehired, the state would save a few bucks.

    I guess I don't really see what the problem is. People are allowed to work as long as they like, so long as their employer is willing to keep them around. Retiring on paper isn't the same as retiring in deed.

    And sure, number of years in the classroom does not necessarily indicate teaching skill. It is, however, a fairly decent indicator. Furthermore, if a district continues to employ ineffective teachers, however old they are, well that's a problem with the district, not with the retire/rehire setup.
     
  29. Mrs.Gould

    Mrs.Gould Comrade

    Joined:
    May 4, 2007
    Messages:
    467
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 23, 2007

    If it's a financial problem, then that would be a reason not to retire in the first place. Also, I don't think any of us are taking it out on a teacher who has worked for 30-35 years. I really think the problem is that teachers are allowed to do this. Of course it would be tempting. I think it shouldn't be an option. That's all I'm trying to say.
     
  30. TeacherGroupie

    TeacherGroupie Moderator

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    29,807
    Likes Received:
    1,170

    Jul 23, 2007

    Or the money freed could allow a district to retain a less senior teacher who would otherwise have to be let go.
     
  31. Mrs.Gould

    Mrs.Gould Comrade

    Joined:
    May 4, 2007
    Messages:
    467
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 23, 2007

    That's a whole other issue in itself. I agree that is separate from the retire/rehire issue. Unfortunately I don't even think that the districts really have that much power unless the teacher is non-tenured or has done something incredibly bad. There was a teacher where I student taught who had given students answers repeatedly on a STATE exam. The teacher was caught and it went through a whole long drawn out process. To make a long story short, as punishment, the teacher was moved from 4th grade to 2nd grade. Yep, that's it.

    Sorry... got a bit off topic. :rolleyes:
     
  32. Aliceacc

    Aliceacc Multitudinous

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Messages:
    27,534
    Likes Received:
    6

    Jul 23, 2007

    OK, hypothetical: Me in 7 years. (Again, we have to transfer me into a public school in this scenario.)

    My kids are ages 16, 14 and 11. My husband is still teaching. (He's 2 years younger than I am.)We have 13 years left on our mortgage. Within the next decade we're looking at college tuition for 3 kids.


    My options:
    a) continue to teach full time in my public school job. The district pays me the full benefit package that the union has negotiated over the years. (For the record, I'm under the impression that this does NOT get approved/disapproved when the budget vote comes up each year.) No new jobs for those new teachers who are awaiting mine.

    b) I agree to retire/rehire. I make more money: both my pension and my salary. The district makes more money-- they're not carrying the tremendous burden of my benefits package. So some money is freed up. Whether or not that goes to hire more teachers or support staff or is used for textbooks or something else, I can's say. But still no new jobs for those teachers awaiting mine.

    If it's teacher incompetance we're talking about, we should be talking about tenure instead.
     
  33. funeoz

    funeoz Comrade

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2006
    Messages:
    324
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 23, 2007

    I agree with Aliceacc and the others. I don't really get what the huffing and puffing is about anyway. Retirement is just a thing that people do in order to get certain benefits. Some people cannot retire and make enough money to survive. Most people decide when to retire based on when it makes financial sense to do so. That does not necessarily mean they are ready to stop working. If they plan to quit working at say 65 either way...what difference does it make to you whether they decide to make more money while they do it. Wouldn't you take higher pay if it were offered to you? Remember, they're going to quit at 65 no matter what. So they can either keep working for less money all the way till 65 and then technically retire or they can retire at 55 and make some extra money for the next 10 years. Either way...you aren't getting that job until they are 65.

    By the way...I'm 28 right now and currently searching for a job...if it makes any difference.
     
  34. Weazy

    Weazy Comrade

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Messages:
    478
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 23, 2007

    You make a valid point. Where I live, VERY FEW teachers work until they're 65. I don't care if they do. I plan on teaching until I'm 63, that will give me 20 years. As I said, I started late and this isn't even going to be an issue for me. It will be for my children should they go into teaching.

    I think Alice made the comment that if bad teachers are rehired, it is a district problem, and I agree with that 100%. I know where I live, the retired teachers do not have to interview for the "open" position, they refill it automatically. Apparently, many states do not agree with retire/rehire, as most posts on here have not heard of the practice. This tells me that it obviously doesn't work very smoothly and has glitches that they don't want to mess with.
     
  35. loves2teach

    loves2teach Enthusiast

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2005
    Messages:
    2,311
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 23, 2007

    I know of several teachers here who have retired from Ky, and then teach here. One I know of has taught here an additional 12 years!!!

    Double dipping doesn't bother me, I think because I have seen how hard it is for older teachers (and people in general) to get by on retirement.
     
  36. abequette

    abequette Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Messages:
    87
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 23, 2007

    I'm glad you said that because I was thinking that KY allowed for you to still draw your retirement as long as you didn't teach over a certain number of days WITHIN KY.
     
  37. yarnwoman

    yarnwoman Cohort

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2006
    Messages:
    693
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 23, 2007


    This is somewhat the same as here in San Diego. I just found out after applying for at least 50 post and bid jobs(I am a sub in the district) that 1st dibs goes to teachers who were downsized or retired before they will hire a sub or anyone else. This was posted in the news paper after a private school closed down. Here is what they wrote in the paper:
    "San Diego Unified is required by a union contract to give district teachers – some of whom have lost their jobs due to declining enrollment – first chance at openings, Zombro said.

    Alemán said the district wants to make sure that whatever it does is “fair” and does not violate the union contract."

    So I guess this whole thing about rehiring a teacher who retired could fall into some union thing.
     
  38. Mrs.Gould

    Mrs.Gould Comrade

    Joined:
    May 4, 2007
    Messages:
    467
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 23, 2007

    It's the same here in NY too, that teachers who have lost their jobs due to declining enrollment will be asked back first and that is also a union thing. That happened to me, but unfortunately the enrollment continued to decline so there was never a position for me to be asked back to!:(
     
  39. Weazy

    Weazy Comrade

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Messages:
    478
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 23, 2007


    It sounds like in your case, the union is simply protecting those who lost their jobs due to declining enrollment, not retirement. I don't see anyproblems with that, but I agree that retired teachers could possibly be protected by a union. I know of one public school who doesn't have a union!! Is this unusual?
     
  40. Mrs.Gould

    Mrs.Gould Comrade

    Joined:
    May 4, 2007
    Messages:
    467
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 23, 2007

    I'd say it's unusual. At least it would be around my area!
     
  41. yarnwoman

    yarnwoman Cohort

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2006
    Messages:
    693
    Likes Received:
    0

    Jul 23, 2007

    I think it would be unusual around here to unless it is a charter school. Some charters are under the district umbrella but do their own thing. In fact the one I interviewed at today is thinking about adding religious studies classes to their curriculum. I know that after working for a certain number of days in most districts around here you have to join the union, you have NO choice.
     

Share This Page

Members Online Now

  1. catnfiddle,
  2. miss-m,
  3. answerhope,
  4. hazaratbet,
  5. nklauste
Total: 395 (members: 5, guests: 357, robots: 33)
test