Teacher's New Contract

[Miulang]

Re: Teacher's New Contract

Because as a parent, is it not my responsibility to see that the environment my child is in is safe? Or as an unwilling customer since my taxes go into the public school system whether I use it or not, am I not entitled to a fact finding report much like you get a quarterly update if you're stockholder of a comp? I will apply your reasoning to another situation and then ask you the same question. If a pilot or bus driver is an addict but can maintain his/her appearance and can meet perfomance figures, are you ok with riding that plane/bus? Why should you care at that point?

Of course you, as the "employer" of a teacher, have every right in the world to monitor what they do while they are on the job. Bus drivers and pilots have control over the lives of the people who are on the bus or plane they command. Teachers have control over the students in their classes.

The degree of difference, I think, is that if you know that a teacher is impaired, you, as a parent, can do something to report that person to his superiors. How would you know this? By having a close relationship with that teacher, letting them know that as a concerned parent, you want to make sure they are doing their job properly. Talk to your kids about their teachers. Kids are pretty perceptive and if asked, they can give a pretty good assessment of the way their teachers act in class.

What do the consumers who are on buses and planes do to report an impaired driver or pilot? Well, nothing pre-emptively until it's possibly too late (and you die in an accident). And if you die in an accident, there's that absolute thing of not being able to do things correctly next time for you.

Miulang

[joshuatree]

Re: Teacher's New Contract

Yes. Absolutely. So, by all means, come sit in my classroom. Watch me do what I do. Ask me any questions you want about my methodology, assessment, and pedagogy. Do it for a whole month, or drop in unannounced whenever you please. Interview my professors, my administrators, and my students. Check my PRAXIS scores and read my Master's thesis. Follow me to and from school to see if my driving is okay. I am trying to say that I have not a thing to hide, and that if you could see me teach, you'd know it. Why do you need to get into my piss as well?

Joshuatree, I'm totally seriousl Email me and I'll set it up for you. You could watch me or any of my colleagues. I'm begging you to see for yourself what it's like to do my job and I'm begging you to ask yourself if this is the work of someone with a drug problem.

But would following you to and from school not be considered delving into your personal time and space? I'm not trying to place this whole issue on you personally but the only way to check across the board is something assembly line, not personal 1:1 investigations. And I never pressed for the piss test, I have stated hair test.

Regarding watching you, what if every classroom had a web cam instead? There are nursuries now that have web cams in every room so parents can look in any time. Would you feel better about that? Or would that be a violation of personal space as well? Also, are you simply against the notion of drug tests in your profession only or are you against the idea for every profession out there?

[joshuatree]

Re: Teacher's New Contract

The degree of difference, I think, is that if you know that a teacher is impaired, you, as a parent, can do something to report that person to his superiors. How would you know this? By having a close relationship with that teacher, letting them know that as a concerned parent, you want to make sure they are doing their job properly. Talk to your kids about their teachers. Kids are pretty perceptive and if asked, they can give a pretty good assessment of the way their teachers act in class.

But based on your previous statement, these addicts are so good at hiding their issue. So what if they are so good that even knowing your child's teacher on a personal level won't reveal that problem?

Does your employer do random drug testing? Are you against it? For it? Don't really care?

[Miulang]

Re: Teacher's New Contract

But based on your previous statement, these addicts are so good at hiding their issue. So what if they are so good that even knowing your child's teacher on a personal level won't reveal that problem?

Does your employer do random drug testing? Are you against it? For it? Don't really care?

Hard core addicts are devious, charming and will do anything to prevent detection. I have never been subjected to random testing, but I would also not avoid taking a job on the basis of a test. But what is more important to you? The fact that they are exceptional teachers who do a good job of teaching your kids, or closet addicts?

Perhaps more emphasis and education should be placed on the rehabilitation part of the equation. Even though the DOE intends to use tests to identify and rehabilitate those who fail the screens, our society, rightly or wrongly, immediately assumes that tests like this are meant to punish, even though that may not be the true intent. If the general population could just become more educated about addiction and its costs to society, maybe more people would self-identify and go into rehab. At some point, these addicts were not addicted. At some point, with help, they can become ex-addicts too.

Who is an addict

Miulang

[Pua'i Mana'o]

Re: Teacher's New Contract

I sense this is going to be a nightmare to layout:

I don't know how else to take it. I am telling you that there is nothing in my history, comportment, performance, or demeanor that should give you reason to suspect that I am using drugs; in fact, I have worked my tail off for eleven years to establish a reputation that is above reproach. I have a lot of weaknesses as a teacher, but none that ever calls into question my character or competence in the classroom. Yet you insist that I should be tested. Whether or not we agree on whether I should be tested, is it not a personal issue? You won't even acknowledge that I have reason to be offended.

I acknowledge you taking this personally twice, and readily admit my failure to see this as a reason to be offended, because you are willing to comply with other laws determining your fitness as a teacher, including being fingerprinted, but consider testing for drugs a violation of your privacy and dignity, when the reason to do so is consistent with the other laws, practices and policies--to the benefit of the children and their environment. I fail to see it, Scriv.

When Mary Kay Latorneau (or whatever her name was) was caught doing what she did, there was no call for all teachers to be scrutinized for possible relationships with children. The case was taken for what it was: One sick woman, completely atypical of teachers in general. I do not minimize the repugnance of what this woman did, but it was not representative of teachers in general and everyone knows it. This drug-testing thing treats me as if, even under the scrutiny of the parents whose kids I teach, the administration who pays me to teach those kids, and the very kids themselves, there is still reason to suspect me of impropriety. I've worked too hard on establishing myself to have to go through that.

MKL resulted in three lawsuits; two criminal and one civil. Since then, cases involving teachers and their students now make national headlines--such sordid news never circulated the globe in my school days. It is these "bad apples" towards whom you should aim your ire--not the people who are trying to protect our kids, and let's face it: it is the lawsuits for failing to protect our <ENTER NOUN HERE> that created today's environment of drug testing. Need drives change.

Not as many as at other schools, but more than you might think, and I'm not really allowed to tell you anyway. As for "falling through the cracks," don't even go there. My students are where they are because of cracks in other schools. For many of them, I'm the bucket beneath the sieve.

I mentioned schools with over 80% of the student body not able to pay $1/day for school lunch. Families of five making less than $41K adjusted gross income. Schools that cannot pick and choose which children become enrolled. Do you have reallllly low-makamaka parents who feel the right to tell you what is what because their tax dollars pay your wage, in between hitting the pipe? Are we talking apple/apple comparisons? Nah, don't answer that; I know you cannot/shouldn't anyway.

I can't argue with that because you're right -- I'm not being asked to do this. But as I have said, what affects the profession affects the professional. What happens to my colleagues in public schools affects me. However, if I am unqualified to make this argument just because I'm arguing a "theory," are you not equally unqualified, since you don't do what I do?

Being completely candid, you don't know what I do, what I am qualified to do, or what my resume holds. For all you know, I am quite qualified, especially because I am a piss-tested colleague of sorts.

You're also right about really having very little argument if the teachers vote to accept this deal. Is it not possible, though, that the majority is wrong? There was a time in this country when the majority of women might have said they are undeserving of the right to vote.

ok, tyranny of the majority. But aside from the risk of indignity, which I completely value Scriv, what is the downside? The harm upon your profession? Honestly and sincerely. What risks are we running here?

The indignity comes when my professional record and my professional word are not trusted. It is only by being trusted that one becomes trustworthy, and now I and my colleagues are having that taken from us.

Then why agree to be subjected to fingerprinting and FBI background checks? Why Praxis exams and assorted teaching certification hoops? How do you draw the line in your conscience?

I can also tell you all about the qualitative benefits a drug-free workplace enjoys, and nobody had to pee into a cup to achieve it. When an administration hires people it can trust and weeds out the ones who are suspect, I can wake up every morning and look forward to coming to work, secure in the knowledge that these administrators, these parents, and these children expect me to deliver on the promises I make and will support me as I endeavor to do so. What's wrong with that?

Of course nothing is wrong and how fortunate you are to be in such an environment. What about your poor colleagues who have no such luxury? What happens if key members of your school's faculty develop drug problems? How will you help them? How will you help your students if they won't help themselves? It is because these very real problems exist that solutions have to be found. And these problems are to found in our schools.

Sad as it is, there's a valid reason why teachers might vote for testing. And just as there are those like yourself who find drug-testing offensive, there are those like me who find it a sensible safeguard, because the alternative is worse.

[pzarquon]

Re: Teacher's New Contract

Please review this statement and ask if it's consistent with your beliefs. I suspect that it's not.

You know what, Scriv? You're right. There's a glimmer of an idealist left in me that can appreciate where you, and glossyp, and where your few other articulate allies are coming from. I just felt like taking the other viewpoint because you decided you hate everyone, and because of the repeated assertion that our public schools are missing out on great teachers like you because of issues like this (rather than, I don't know, a million other reasons).

When you started counting the number of figures in your salary and pulled the "I'm giving up that juicy state paycheck because I won't stand for this kind of malarkey!" card, I just had to poke at you a little. Forgive me.

I suppose I should just cop out and say... maybe I don't understand because I'm not a teacher. But then I'd also say, maybe you don't understand because you're not a parent.

Yeah, maybe we're penalizing the majority for the potential and presumed actions of a lowest-common-denominator minority. There's a slippery slope here that should make everyone just a little uncomfortable.

On the other hand, again, I submitted myself to the "indignity" of random drug testing for a paycheck, and that was for a job in an industry that's purely financial and overinsured up the yin yang. Why not drug test in schools? When taxpayers pay and the students largely cannot benefit from the wonderful nirvana of principled, drug-test-free private school instruction of which you speak? Are teachers special or not? If we assign to them all the noble values and worth that you espouse, shouldn't they similarly be held to a higher standard than the night shift manager at Widget, Inc.?

At least they got to vote on the question. And they get a path to rehabilitation and redemption, even if they test positive. And a powerful union to fight back, if it comes to dismissal. Most people in the same employment environment don't have such luxuries.

Is what I'm saying consistent with my beliefs? Probably not. But it's consistent with what I, and others, feel they gotta do to put food on the table. Like my many liberal friends, I lament the evils of WalMart and big box stores. But I shop there all the time. I resented the addition of random drug testing to my employers' mandatory code of conduct, but I wasn't about to quit over it. Frankly, becoming a parent has made me the biggest hypocrite I know.

I'm sure I could give up my suburban life and live off the grid and assert every single god-given right I've got (including the Second Amendment -- yee haw!). But I'm weak. And I love the Internet.

I'd definitely like to thank PM for arguing this issue with similar articulation and passion. I suspect I was outclassed and outwitted from the outset and should've just kept my yap shut.

[scrivener]

Re: Teacher's New Contract

I've got a lot to say (duh!) but before I get to any of it, I want to say this: I was going to throw in my position leave it there and let everyone else hash this out, but if someone is not the voice of resistance, then this thing passes as if unanimously and I couldn't have that. It's why I still vote Libertarian even when I know the candidates can't win.

Someone has to say no; silence implies agreement.

And so if I have come across too strongly, please know that while my sentiment is real, the manner of my expression is the way it is because I know I'm on the losing end. If I were going to be on the winning end, I'd have faded away in this discussion long ago.

It is NOT a clear-cut, black-and-white issue. I can't let it appear to be, even though it is clear that nobody is going to change anyone else's mind.

[Peshkwe]

Here's a list of stuff that pulls a false positive:

http://www.cleartest.com/testinfo/falsepos.html

This was an interesting one:

Black Skin. This is not a joke! Those of African origin, certain Orientals, or pacific Islanders might test positive for marijuana. Dr. James Woodford, a toxicologist associated with Emory University labs hypothesized the pigment melanin which protects the skin from the sun, approximates the molecular structure of the THC metabolite to cross react on the marijuana urine test. Dark skinned Caucasians such as those from the subcontinent of India could also read positive on marijuana tests. The body eliminates some melanin in a dark person's urine sample.

~snort~

Oh yeah....hope the hell you don't have diabeties, kidney or liver problems. You could be nailed as a ice user or crack head:


http://www.med.nyu.edu/patientcare/l...ChunkIID=13837

If you are mistakenly found positive for drug use, evaluate whether you have taken any substances known to cause false-positives. Also, remember that liver problems, kidney problems, or diabetes may cause a false-positive for amphetamines, opiates, or cocaine.

Copied for the handy and complete list:

"The chances of you getting a false positive depends on the
quality of the laboratory that does the testing. There seems
to be about 1,200 of these labs in the United States currently
testing for drugs. Less than a 100 of these meet federal
standards and most of the individual states do not regulate
drug test labs. The number of false positives returned range
from 4% to over 50%, depending on the lab.

A concern here is that, if your company tests for drug useage,
they are probably not required to use a certified drug testing
lab, which means you have a greater chance of getting a false
positive.

Listed below are all the substances, that we found, that can
cause a false positive drug test result. With your help, this
will grow into a comprehensive list.

Substances that cause false positives [not just for amphetamines]

Accutrim
Advil
Afrin
Aleve
Allerest
Amfepramone
Amifepramone
Amineptine
Amoxicillin - False positives for cocaine
Ampicillin
Ampicin
Anti-anxiety pills - Many will test positive for Benzodiazepines
Antibiotics - False positives on Heroin Tests
Asthma medications (Marax, Bronkaid tablets, Primatine Tablets)
B2 vitamin
Benzphetamine
Blue Lettuce
Bronkaid tablets
California Poppy
Cathne
Chloropromazine
Clobenzorex
Contac
Contact
Cough medicines - See if any ingredients are on this list
Cough suppressants with Dextromethorphan (DXM)
Cylert
Demerol
Deprenyl
Desoxyephedrine
Dexatrim
Dexdenfluramine
Dexedrine
Dexfenfluramine
Dextroamphetamine
Dextromethorophan
Diabetes
Diazepam (generic name for valium)
Diazepam False positives for PCP
Didrex
Dilantin
Dimetapp
Dristan Nasal Spray
Dronabinol (Marinol)
Elavil - False positives for opiates for up to three days
Eldepryl
Emprin
Ephedra (Ma Haung)
Ephedrine
Ephedrine based compounds
Etafediabe
Excedrin IB
Famprofazone
Fenelylline
Fenfluramine
Fenproyorex
Fioricet and derivatives
Fiorinal
Fluspirilene
Hempseed Oil
Hydroymethamphetamine
Ibuprofen - False positives for Marijuana
Ketoprofen
Kidney disease
Kidney infection
Lettuce - Both Prickly and Blue
Liver disease
Liver infection
Lodine
Lortab - an opioid analgesic
Ma Huang
Marax
Matilija Poppy
Mefenorex
Menstrual cramp medications like Midol and Trendar
Mephentermine
Mesocarb
Methoxyphenamine
Methphenidate
Midol
Mini-thins
Morazone
Mormon Tea
Most prescription pain medications
Motrin
Naproxen
Nasal decongestants - False positives for Amphetamines
Neosynephren
Nuprin
Nyquil
Nyquil Nighttime Cold Medicine - False positives for Methadone up to 2 days
Orudis KT
OTC diet aids with phenylpropanolamine (Dexatrim, Accutrim)
Over-the-counter nasal sprays (Vicks inhaler, Afrin)
Pamprin
Pemoline
Percocet
Percodan
Percovil
Phendimetrazine
Phenegan-D
Phenergan
Phenmetrazine
Phenobarbital
Phentermine
Phenylephrine
Phenylpropanolamine
Pholedrine
Pnenypropanolamine
Poppy seeds
Prescription sleeping pills
Prickly Lettuce
Prickly Poppy
Primatene-M containing perylamine
Primatine Tablets
Promethazine
Promethegan
Propanolamine
Propylephedrine
Pseudo ephedrine
Pseudoephedrine
Quinine water - False positives for opiates
Red Poppy
Redux
Riboflavin
Ritalin
Robitussin Cold and Flu
Selegiline
Sudafed
Tavist-D
Telectin
Tonic water
Trendar
Tylenol Sinus
Tylenol with codeine
Valium
Vicks Formula 44M containing Dextromethorphan
Vicks inhaler
Vicks Nasal Spray
Vicks Nyquil
Vitamin B2
Wygesic "
[note the mention of vitamin B2]
http://www.askdocweb.com/falsepositives.html


From the Phentermine Forum:

"Phentermine can cause a false positive for amphetamines on some
drug test. These are urine test."


http://www.phentermine.com/forums/ul...ic/38/964.html

More info here:

http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=784817

[craigwatanabe]

Re: Teacher's New Contract

I've got a lot to say (duh!) but before I get to any of it, I want to say this: I was going to throw in my position leave it there and let everyone else hash this out, but if someone is not the voice of resistance, then this thing passes as if unanimously and I couldn't have that. It's why I still vote Libertarian even when I know the candidates can't win.

Someone has to say no; silence implies agreement.

And so if I have come across too strongly, please know that while my sentiment is real, the manner of my expression is the way it is because I know I'm on the losing end. If I were going to be on the winning end, I'd have faded away in this discussion long ago.

It is NOT a clear-cut, black-and-white issue. I can't let it appear to be, even though it is clear that nobody is going to change anyone else's mind.

You know Scriv, you are right about your right to decency. There are people like yourself that bend over BACKWARDS to stay the straight and clean for the sake of your profession and for that you DO NOT deserve the indignity of peeing in a cup.

Then there are those who so desparately want to prove to the world that they can handle drugs/alcohol/whatever and function in society without any negative effect.

So the compromise should be test those who exhibit signs of drug abuse. You know...case by case. That's fair.

The only problem then would be, who would determine when one is subject to a drug test? We know you don't do drugs right Scriv? So we won't focus on you. Instead we'll focus on another teacher we "suspect" is doing drugs. Don't worry Scriv your performance evals are stellar so you got nothing to worry about. But Braddah over here well...not so good so we going keep on eye on dis guy.

Isn't that a form of discrimination? You bet it is! And for that reason is why you cannot go case by case because you discriminate against those who look as if they could vs those who absolutely do not.

This is why random drug testing is the only choice to fairly test anyone at random. There is no selection process, there is no cronyism to protect certain teachers. You Scriv by virtue of your record of achievement would keep you out of any testing. And that's discrimination in reverse.

[Peshkwe]

Re: Teacher's New Contract

Way to kill your constitutional amendment rights....all in the name of "the chiiiildren" By the way, way to kill the rights of the children in the process.

Guilty until proven innocent is so much better than the other way 'round ennit? /sarcasm

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

^ up there is the match to set your straw man afire.

[Miulang]

Re: Teacher's New Contract

Even with the most infallible and scrupulous of testing methodologies (which don't exist at this time, as shown by Peshkwe's examples), the chances of detecting an addict still hinge upon the sample size (n). So if the n is relatively small, then the addict's chances of being detected are pretty small. And if an addict slips through the cracks and isn't detected anyway, what's the point of testing again?

Then the most logical next step would be to test everyone, routinely. First test, at the time of the job application (now required by lots of private companies) and then everyone routinely thereafter. Couple of really serious problems with that scenario: first, the cost would be extremely prohibitive to the State (unless the State also charges the testee for part of the cost) and two, that really would be assuming that a person is guilty first, and then using the test to prove innocence. But at least it would be FAIR.

Miulang

[timkona]

Re: Teacher's New Contract

I knew this guy once.......

He got 12 clean pee tests in 4 years working on the water. Learned several ways to cheat the test that are all physiologically believable. WindwardRN, please correct me if any of this is wrong.

First, fat is stored in layers where the new fat goes on and off real easy so the body can utilize the energy. The old fat is like bricks, and harder to melt.
THC is commonly stored in fat cells. So extremely vigorous exercise (think 2-a-days) accompanied with a couple days of fasting is guaranteed to clean your system like a bottle brush. Have a nice meal 3 hours before the test, and drink plenty water. This method works perfectly when getting the job.

The kidneys can be fooled. With just 8 hours of notice, it is quite possible to drink over 1 gallon of liquid. Be sure to exercise and eat no food. At this point, the filtering processes shut down, and it becomes more like a bilge pump on a sinking boat. Of course, toxins are building in the blood stream, but the pee is running clear as a Montana Creek. With 1 hour to go, drop a multi-vitamin to add color to the pee. The only problem is that with this method, you better make damn certain you are very near a toilet at ALL times. And pee right before you walk in to the lab. Then take your time to fill out the paperwork while the bladder reloads. This method has worked 9 times. There is a small risk of death, according to the story, when using this method.

The clean out teas (which are actually delicious) at the health food store have worked before. But seems like you just drinking a lot of liquids in a short amount of time. Makes your pee a vivid yellow color. Great for makin yellow snow.

I knew this guy once....... He never, ever failed a pee test.

[1stwahine]

Re: Teacher's New Contract

K-den since you brought your case up of the guy you knew Tim, I shall tell about the man I know.

He is in a Drug Program. Followed everything to the T. Took the piss tests. Failed twice. He told me he didn't use. He cried and wondered how it was possible. I told him to tell the TRUTH for to lie would be worse. He did...tell the truth and faced the consequences.

He was sent back to PRISON. He was put back at the beginning of the program. He has no regrets. He has learned one thing and that is not to trust no one. He is extra careful what he eats, drinks and touches.

The Program works. However there are flaws like everything else. In his case, it could have been any of the things listed that could have caused a false report. However, when you're in a position like he was...there are no mistakes.

Auntie Lynn

[Pua'i Mana'o]

Re: Teacher's New Contract

The testing has gotten smarter and more sophisticated. I am proof positive that those risks, per the list given of consumables, medical conditions, and uh, ethnic factors aren't tossing the "false positives" as mentioned. Also, those masking agents, like Urine Luck, are quite detectable nowadays.

[GnosticWarrior]

Re: Teacher's New Contract

Way to kill your constitutional amendment rights....all in the name of "the chiiiildren" By the way, way to kill the rights of the children in the process.

Guilty until proven innocent is so much better than the other way 'round ennit? /sarcasm

Just for the record, I am pro Pakalolo, peyote, LSD, DMT, Psilocybin and other conscious enhancing drugs.

However, your choice of employer is voluntary. I don't see any violation of the constitution. The constitution does not grant you the right to employment.