I believe that the headlines of both the original article as well as this one are misleading and bias in their wording. First, the word "promotion" is being used in such a way that it leads the reader to believe that teachers are being promoted to new and better positions, both in pay and in status as is the case in the business world. As was stated by someone earlier, at no time have promotional type positions (Department heads, Team Leaders, etc.) been filled based on seniority but are filled with the person who will best meet the demands of the position. I believe that the correct word choice would be teacher retention.
What is really happening here is that the SC wants to have the right to dismiss every teacher in the district without giving cause and requiring each teacher to re-interview for their same position against each other as well as external applicants. While this may indeed weed out a few ineffective teachers, it also opens the door for someone who is doing an excellent job, but may cost more than a new teacher to be let go simply because they cost more. As a parent of students who attend Portsmouth schools, it worries me that there may soon be a time when my children will be educated by not necessarily the best qualified for the job, but the cheapest person who fits the bill. There is already a system in place to rid our system of teachers who are not performing effectively and the administration is using it appropriately.

This seems like a clear cut question to most people but stop and think about it as it relates to our situation here in Portsmouth. Naturally everyone wants teachers based on merit and there are senior teachers who are the best and younger teachers who do a fantastic job. In this economy, and with the thinking of many, it could be possible that senior teachers could take the hit because their salaries are higher and by eliminating them, people think "we could save money". It is a difficult thing because of that. The Commissioner's directive doesn't mean that. She means merit across the board. If you do a good job you have a job and if you are the most qualified, you get the position.

I think this is a great system. Keeps the teachers that have been in the system sharp am on their toes. Also gives opportunity for recent graduates. Politics will play out but this happens today.

Thirty years ago when I was a kid in Portsmouth schools, there were a number of terrible teachers that were protected by the union rules. The good teachers hated it as much as the kids and parents but there was nothing anyone could do. Thirty years later we see the first sign of hope in turning that problem around. I welcome it.

Those who are best qualified to do the job should be awarded the job. Hanging in there for the 'best retirement benefits' because of union approved contracts does not necessarily mean that the mature teacher is the most capable of doing the job. It is time for the public world to catch up with the private business sector. Though teachers put in a lot of personal time and creativity into their classroom & continuing education, so do the rest of us. Let's remember when we discuss 'salary' a teacher's year ends in June & starts up in late August. Almost European. Then there are those long 'vacation' breaks that are built into their schedule. We are led to believe that they are mistreated and suffer, but perhaps if the union was disbanded, they could prove their value based on their capabilities. Just sayin'.

Many say we can improve our education system by eliminating tenure and seniority as factors in deciding which teachers to retain and by applying other “business principles.” Is Portsmouth ready to pay what it costs to attract and retain the best of our college graduates to the teaching profession?

In the US, a large part of the “rewards” paid to teachers has come in the form of job security and deferred compensation -- a better retirement. If we are going to eliminate those rewards, we will have to increase salaries. The best college graduates will choose a profession based on some combination of financial rewards and prestige. Today, the majority of those graduating in the top of their college classes go into finance, law, medicine, or other high-paying jobs. According to a study by McKinsey & Co. (Closing the Talent Gap), the countries with the best-performing education systems (Finland, Singapore, and South Korea) draw the majority of their teachers from the top 1/3d of their graduating class. In the US, we draw 47% of our K-12 teachers from the bottom 1/3d of their graduating class.

We all want the best teachers in our classrooms, but are we ready to pay for them? Is Portsmouth willing to compete with Finance and the Professions for the teachers we want. If we are, that’s great, but be ready for a fiscal shock. Perhaps the reduction in retirement contributions will balance off the increase in salaries, but I'm not sure. Are you?

I feel validates after reading others posts. Much is to be said about the articles referenced. One would ask for a basic business plan for the school system as it incorporates the towns budget. In addition this is a local issue so how much do we pay starting professionals depends on their credentials and experience. This is new model for school systems and may be difficult for those without business experience to understand. However based on the opinions in this post change is supported.

The teachers union should still have strength however, it is slowly losing power (i.e. this new compensation system). The retirement benefits have been following corporate America so pensions go to 401K, health care is paid for by the individual in whole are up to a %, time off is still the focal point for teachers no matter how it is sliced/diced. this is going to draw non-popular vote in regards to salary. For example, if the regular work year is 180 days and the average person works for salary for 50 weeks, then the salary should be annualized for consistency. Should a teacher reaceive 50K today, they are truly getting more than 50K in comparison so someone working 50 weeks a year. I don't think we'll need to raise teachers salaries, there are more teachers than the demand for them. Until this changes then salary will change.

Just like any other job, what you get paid is determined by the cost of living. This is not a local problem, it is a national epidemic and it's not just teachers, it is all public servants who pay into the kitty for health care and pension benefits. Just as steel once made men millionaires, times change and we need to remain attuned with the fact that the teachers paying into the system (for pensions) cannot support the funds being doled out. This is a sad fact. If the union was disbanded, union fees would stay in the teacher's paychecks and could be invested for their future. In life there are no guarantees. If you have a calling to be a teacher, become one. If your heart says make the most money possible, become a lawyer. Either way, it is your life to live and the choice is yours.

Both should be considered. If a teacher has seniority then they must have been given very good evaluations each year to have become senior teachers. So as long as the administrators evaluating have been doing their jobs we should only have outstanding senior teachers. If you want to question the evaluation system, maybe that is what should be looked at. But without seniority, politics will play too large a role in determining who teaches our children. I would prefer for the administrators to evaluate and if someone is not doing a good job they should not be employed.

News tonight, November 9. The Providence Journal is reporting that the Superior Court has ruled in favor of the union on the seniority policy, holding that the "Portsmouth School Committee can't make staffing decisions without first negotiating those issues with the teachers' union." The School Committee lawyer says they will appeal to the Supreme Court. How do I spell Kacheeng, you know, like the sound of a cash register?

Why does the school committee keep wasteing money on this stuff. they lost get over it and move on.

Because the school committee knows the antiquated seniority policy needs to go. They can use as much of my tax dollars to fight it.

Joe... Since you don't live in Portsmouth, why don't you start sending money to the town of Portsmouth to continue this fight? I, for one, am sick of seeing my tax dollars spent on fattening the wallets of lawyers to fight losing battles!

HOW do you JUDGE a teachers performance. How many kids she Passes.....?? How many kids don't make it in the next class because they didn't learn enough in the last class....Just wondering....................

Oh WAIT: Every student "Makes It". NO ONE FAILS...

BTW: When I was in High Schooll..(1955-59) .I FAILED Math and English. I went to Summer School. to make it up. Do we still have summer school...?? AGAIN..Just wondering.

I think that the Town should stop once they lose a fight. Just negotiate for gosh sakes and stop wasting our taxes on lawsuits that are pointless. Just decide how to equitably evaluate a teacher's performance and once that is done make sure that their performance is maintained by evaulations each year. Just like any other job, if you don't do the job properly you lose the job.

Joe... Union dues are not paid by the town, they come out of the pay of the union members. I am tired of paying lawyers to fight losing battles. I want to see the money passed on to programs or to improve the quality of life of portsmouth

residents. We keep spending money on lawyers to fight battles we cannot win. We don't have the money to waste! And yes... I do live here and my taxes went up significantly for the first time in 15 years with the current TC and sc and I see no value for that extra money I am paying!

Well said M.P.

Lets buy some Fire Engines.

@ Average Joe. Gee wiz, holy-moley, Joe, with that brilliant line of thinking, then maybe the town council should enact legislation that stipulates that ALL public employees must have their personal spending deemed appropriate.

I am sorry that they chose to rule this way. I believe that the most qualified person should be doing the job. Since they ruled this way, the only option would be to change the rules for future hires. Existing employees would be grandfathered under the original plan. Has anyone proposed this option yet? If the entire country is moving in this direction, perhaps we need to look forward and plan for the future.

I think I can cancel my satellite TV, now. I don't need to watch The Daily Show, The Colbert Report, or the Tonight Show. Joe makes me laugh more than all of them combined, and he's not even trying to be funny. I'm tired of having my tax dollars used by some of our employees to buy foreign cars, which only hurts our auto industry, so maybe we should prohibit that. I'm also tired of my tax dollars being used by by public employees to buy items at WalMart, which sells mostly foreign-made goods. No more shopping at WalMart, folks. And, heaven forbid that a public employee should use some of that money to pay for an abortion! I propose we elect Average Joe as consumer-in-chief for all public employees. He can give us a list of how they can spend their money. Jeeze, you probably object to the individual mandate in the health care act as an intrusion on your liberty.

Joe says, "They have every right to complain, just like I have the right to complain that my tax money is being used to fight for a policy I find damaging." Joe, you still don't get it. Once the money is paid to the town's employees, it is no longer your tax money. The other people were complaining about how the town was going to spend money in the future choosing to spend the money on lawyer's rather than on other things. They were not complaining about how the town's lawyers spend the money after they have earned it.
Can someone return the conversation from Joe's detour through the looking glass back to the original topic.

People like Joe are the reason we need public employee unions.

Joe, where are you? Isn't time t say, "yes, I overstated my point. You're right, they should spend heir money as they please, even if it against what I want." Have you ever admitted that you overstated your position?