Obstructed Employment

I'm in the rather peculiar position of wanting/needing a full time job with benefits and having one of my sites wanting to hire me on a full time basis or close enough to qualify for benefits.

So what's the problem?

If the department submits the paperwork to human resources for the position then that position gets offered to a totem pole of other folks in my department based on their seniority. It will also be offered to recently laid off workers who get priority rehire treatment for 39 months after being laid off.

But the site doesn't want to fill the position with anyone, they want to fill it with me. But they are not able to actually choose who they hire, they can only choose that they hire someone. Everything else is out of their hands. Which is, of course, ridiculous. Sites and departments should have the final say-so on who works for them and should be able to reject any prospect they choose. But the sites are unable to do this because of collective bargaining agreements, bumping rules and all the other things that unions put in place to protect the most senior members at the expense of the most junior.

So I'm stuck either staying as an unprotected contract worker or opening up the position the tender mercies of a bumping lottery.

In the end, nobody wins. The site gets short changed because I've got one foot out the door at all times, I am and have been on a constant job hunt. If/when a job is offered to me, I will take it and they will have to start from scratch with a new employee.

The education system in California is seriously broken and in need of a fix, not continuing budget cuts and furloughs. And there really needs to be an amendment to the collective bargaining agreement that returns some of the local site administration to the local sites. Running school sites by unionized bureaucratic dictums is backwards at best and directly detrimental to the smooth operation of school sites and districts at worst.

At the end of the day there is really a pretty simple calculation to run. Do we want to have to build more prisons or do we want to have to build more colleges? Underfunding education at the primary school level means we are going to be building more prisons to house an uneducated and unemployable populance. If it were up to me, I'd definitely go with funding education. It is a long term investment that strengthens the state on all levels. Prisons just weaken us all and cost an insane amount of money.

Fund Education Now or Build More Prisons Later
blog comments powered by Disqus