You don't have to have been a reader of this blog for very long to know my longstanding views on a topic like this--the fact that the idiot involved is a teacher does not mean he should necessarily be fired for his foul posting:
In case you missed it, the funeral for slain NYPD Detective Jason Rivera was held on Friday. The procession route for the funeral was lined with thousands upon thousands of police officers and other first responders...
Unfortunately, not everyone was feeling the spirit of paying tribute to the life of the officer who was murdered during a cowardly ambush. One New York City public school teacher took to Instagram and posted a suggestion that someone might want to take a vehicle and plow into the sea of police officers.
He didn't incite anyone, he merely let his own idiocy overwhelm his humanity and common sense:
The post was captioned, “5/30/20: NYPD SUV drives into a crowd of protestors. Ideal conditions for reciprocity.”
I've said it before and I'll say it again: we teachers are not required to be saints. We're allowed to have our own opinions, and even to express those opinions outside of school--both of which seem to be the case here. That the guy is a worthless turd seems, at least to me, to be obvious, but if being a worthless turd were a disqualification for a government job, then government (including government education centers) would be much smaller indeed!
The loser is free to express his worthless opinion, and the rest of us are free to criticize him for having such a worthless opinion. That's how free speech is supposed to work. It might feel good to play the lefties' game and try to get this guy fired, but doing so would be at the expense of one of the most precious parts of conservatism--venerating the Constitution, especially the First Amendment. No, we must attack what he posted, and perhaps even the man himself for being so stupid as to entertain the thought of what he posted, but trying to get him fired is a bridge too far. If he's to be fired it should be for something related to his teaching, not merely for expressing a gross opinion.
When we talk about firing teachers, there are all sorts of "what ifs". I used to be against those rare firings of a (usually woman) teacher who was subsequently found to have had nude pictures published to make a little money back in the college days; I've since come to the realization that such firings are reasonable, because we can't have students checking out their naked teacher. It's just not good for classroom management or decorum. So there's one example of where a teacher's out-of-classroom actions can be cause for firing, but that cause is because it directly relates to the ability to maintain order in a classroom. Other outside causes--untreated drug or alcohol abuse, for example--are probably statutory.
My point is that, with the fewest of exceptions, we should be firing teachers for what goes on at work and not what goes on their Instagram pages. In fact, here is a post from last September summarizing four stories about teachers, and you can see that such a view is consistent in each of them. So let the teacher above spout off--and face the social opprobrium that comes with his views. And make no mistake, social opprobrium is as far as I'm willing to go in such circumstances. Anything above that is harassment and worse.
Update, 1/31/22: That didn't take long:
“We do not condone or promote violence of any sort. As of this afternoon, Mr. Flanigan is no longer employed at Coney Island Prep,” Coney Island Prep CEO Leslie-Bernard Joseph said in a statement.
“The teachers and staff of Coney Island Prep are public servants; and like all public servants we hold ourselves to a much higher standard,” Joseph said. “We work hard to serve the young people in our community, and we know our police officers do as well, taking innumerable risks, to keep our city safe.”
The teacher also tried to "explain" his comment:
He claimed his message was “misconstrued” and that he was merely commenting on the “vulnerability” of the crowd of cops.
“I respect the NYPD. I do not condone violence,” he insisted on Sunday. “A 22-year-old police officer murdered in the line of duty is reprehensible. I’m devastated by that.”
Apparently the school didn't buy that explanation.
While I expected this outcome, I don't support it.
12 comments:
I have problems with both answers of the question. I don't think that he should be fired, but with that kind of behavior, perhaps increased scrutiny of him, just to make sure he is a loud mouth, but not an doer.
I am reminded of the Christmas parade attack, and knowing that similar events happen in Europe.
What do you do with the kid in his class whose father/mother/family member is in law enforcement? Their teacher wants them dead. May not make for good classroom dynamics.
Was he on the clock when he was doing his opinionating? Did he use his own private resources or the Public School equipment & internet to post to his 'followers'?
Did he do his union's cause good by professing outside his lane?
Note the public was asked before hand to stand with the police. The NY Post actually helped out the wannabes by showing what one security post across from the Cathedral looked like. Perhaps in the future he might infer something from that, before he tries for internet fame.
Wouldn't you say that this teacher's views, as expressed publicly (albeit not in the classroom/at work), reflects badly on his employer? And isn't that enough to fire someone?
Anna: is there any indication that he *isn't* using his class time to teach? Sure, check if you want to, but don't harass.
Math Teacher: is reflecting badly on the employer enough for *government* to fire a worker? This is certainly *not* a private entity, and yes, that makes a difference.
lgm: what is his "lane"? Is he allowed to express public opinions only about math?
Steve: if one of my students read on this blog that "I spent the first several years of my adult life training to kill communists, and I don't see any reason to change that view now", and they or their parents are communists, should I be fired for that?
My point here is not to attack your arguments just because, but to challenge them so that we can better determine where the line is that must not be crossed.
I never meant inside the classroom, but outside. And not to the point of harassment.
Darren, finding it hard to drawn the line between a teacher with 10+ year-old nude pics on the internet and sitting in a classroom where last night your teacher wished your mom to be murdered. Either both are over the line, or neither.
I do not agree with your change of heart about the nude pics. Assuming the pics were revenge porn or just never knew they were out there, The teacher should have a job. If you no longer agree with this, then yes, by the same premise, you should be fired for your killing commies post.
'lane' is his area of expertise. Yes, he may spout opinions on anything he wants, on his own time with his own resources, within the limits on free speech. His listeners must decide if its worth listening to. As a NY public school teacher, he knows the role of the author and the role of the audience. Since the post was published after the event, it can be concluded he wasn't inciting an imminent lawless action. So, what is the motivation for publicly analyzing security organized by the PD and the Church, pointing out what he feels is a security lapse and drawing the particular parallel that he did?
I suggest in my comment that the young man stay in his lane if he wishes to do the cause of the union good -- that cause being the desire of the union to have teaching be considered a profession. Professionals adhere to a code of ethics and conduct. The post suggests he has not considered all the facts, thought thru alternative ways of stating his point that would just as effective but do less harm, decided on how the post would reflect on himself and his profession, etc.
I'd say that any employer, government or otherwise, is justified in firing someone for something such as this. There is at least one precedent I can think of -- a case that stretched from the 90s to early 00s involving a teacher in NYC who was a NAMBLA leader in his private time. It was never alleged that he did anything untoward at work, but he was still fired...and it was upheld on appeal: https://www.edweek.org/leadership/court-rebuffs-teacher-who-advocated-man-boy-sex/2004/03
Steve: I said nothing about revenge porn--just some pics made to make college cash. But anyway, I guess we'll disagree on this one!
lgm: you keep bringing up a union, are you referring to a labor union??? Gawd, if anything could have *less* to do with this situation than a labor union....
His bosses agreed with the two of you. I still do not! And, short of talking about my students, employer, etc, I'll still post whatever I like here...and just like that, an old post crept back into my memory. You can't say I'm not consistent in my views, as the post dates from 2005!
https://rightontheleftcoast.blogspot.com/2005/07/breasts-not-bombs.html
Math Teacher: only the Sith think in absolutes, and I'm not an absolutist here. I know there are lines, I just believe in drawing those lines with as much First Amendment protection as possible.
There are some things that are so abhorrent in our culture that I could justify firing. I wouldn't want the local Grand Wizard as a teacher, and neither would I want someone who supports "consensual" sex with young children.
But not so long ago, advocating for the legalization of marijuana was considered beyond the pale. Today, no big deal. BLM has certainly legitimized anti-white hatred amongst a large enough portion of the populace.
I'm not willing to have a guy fired because he made a stupid comment in his off time. It appears I'm the outlier in this case.
My wife and I once owned a business. If an employee made it his or her business to make online political pronouncements of any kind that I felt would negatively impact my business -- my livelihood -- I would first issue a warning, and then fire the person if the behavior continued. I understand that the calculus is different in the public sector; my link above was to indicate that even the public sector has its limits.
Post a Comment