Yet the Daily News, aided and abetted by their resident legal expert, Campbell Brown, prints story after story about how city teachers should be fired based on unsubstantiated or dismissed charges. They print features about publicity-seeking politicians who sympathize with this ridiculous point of view. And for two years now, they endlessly condemn city teachers who have been convicted of nothing.
As I've repeatedly written, I know only one of these teachers, but I also know this teacher is no more a "perv" or "sex creep" than the Long Island teacher whose cause the News seems to espouse. Why, then, are city teachers subject to a different standard?
This is not, in fact, unique. A few years ago, there was a big stink about seniority rights, and Emperor Bloomberg wanted to torpedo them here in Fun City. In fact, there was a bill, sponsored by Long Island State Senator John Flanagan (and supported by Gotham Schools fave E4E), that would have decimated seniority rights only for NYC teachers. This did not apply to the teachers in Flanagan's district, of course. They, apparently, are above this sort of thing.
Of course, that bill died with the help of Governor Cuomo, who strongly suggested the junk science APPR would result in teachers being fired, eventually satisfying the bloodlust of the Emperor.
The thing is no one complains about the quality of teaching in the suburbs. It turns out when you have fewer kids with learning disabilities, fewer kids who don't speak English, and fewer kids in poverty, all the teachers are highly effective, just like the one who (gasp!) took his shirt off.
Had the same thing happened, or been alleged to have happened, in NYC, the law pushed by the News and legal expert Campbell Brown would have allowed Walcott to fire him. Would the News have published a piece complaining about that?
Since they've repeatedly condemned all city teachers who've been lawfully acquitted of "perv" charges, I have my doubts.
Posts
