daughter-teacher "problem"

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

it was no accident that all my help were marines at one time. they said if i hired one more i got a flag. one cavaeat is they have to have been successful in the service. no bcd and other than honorable

[geronimotwo]

the teacher called us last thurs.  friday we had no school due to a flood warning. today our class had a substitute teacher.   we have left a message, so she should be getting back to us.

on another note, we have talked to a friend of ours, who was my daughters teacher last year.  she tells us that our current teacher will take things personnally and can make it difficult for a proper teaching environment if she perceives the child to be oppositional. of course that is in her opinion.

thanks for all the great advice thus far.  i am inclined to go into the meeting with mrs millcreeks attitude,  i would like it to turn out as well as she hopes that it may.  if not, we will have to decide what our next course of action will be.  

to get my daughter in a better frame of mind for attending school this morning, i suggested that she pretend that she was "harriet the spy" and keep an eye on the happenings around her.   this afternoon she came back with about twenty journal entries.  most of which were related to the sub teacher yelling at various students for petty things.  i can already see how this will help the situation if she is caught doing this by her regular teacher.   bring on uncle buck!

`

[MicroBalrog]

you're no mabs but didn't you mention some employment difficulties?
we dock folks an hour if they are 20 mins late   be late 3 times?  don't worry it stops being a problem.

I have two jobs.

One of them actually requires my presence at the workplace.

Two people need to be on-shift at any given time in theory, in practice the boss only requires one person. If I am going to be late, I call the guy whom I am replacing and tell him not to wait for me.

[MillCreek]

BTDT.

The last time I saw an educational system that had pretty much figured out how to do what you describe was in England during the 1950's - somewhere around our 6th grade (age 11) kids were tracked either into vocational/clerical training or separated from the drodd and prepped for university to become lawyers, accountants and government bureaucrats.

stay safe.

Don't they still do this in Germany?  I remember reading about this one time, and the great pride that came with being a skilled worker there.  They had a very elaborate, thorough and well-designed vocational training and apprenticeship program.  I thought that made a lot of sense, rather than the overarching emphasis on 'college or nothing' here in the USA. 

[Hawkmoon]

How interesting are the recommendations for the OP to do surreptitious and probably illegal audio recording without the knowledge and consent of all parties. 

That's twice already you have claimed that recording the session is (probably) illegal, and I haven't gotten to the end of the thread yet.

How and why do you think it even might be illegal?

[Hawkmoon]

Probably illegal is a stretch. Most states have allow recording of conversations as long as one party consents:

http://www.rcfp.org/taping/quick.html

Note that the law in many of the states addresses specifically "wiretapping," or recording of telephonic conversations. I only checked a couple. My state's law says nothing about in-person conversations. California's law treats in-person the same as telephone conversations.

Only 12 out of 50 states require permission of both parties.

[Perd Hapley]

For me it's "But I clocked in on time!"

Forgetting that they spent 30 minutes after that putting stuff in their locker locker, gabbing with their buddies, and picking lint out of their ass before moseying over to their work area and thinking about doing their job. Start time means you start working at that time, not run through the door swipe your badge and then take your time getting yourself in order.

That's what I always thought, but at my current job the boss likes to sit in the break room for 30 minutes to an hour, just talking and drinking coffee.  So we all sit with him.

[Hawkmoon]

End of first year exams, in which I got an E, my chem teacher pulled me aside, told me that she was predicting me an A for university applications and I could do it if I worked at it. I did work at it, and I did get an A.

What's an 'E'? In the U.S. we typically (unless high schools have converted to grade point average, whatever that is) use A (90-100), B (80-89), C (70-79), D (60-69), and F (below 60, and connoting "Fail").

'E' could only mean "Exceptional" or "Excrescent."

[MicroBalrog]

An E is a mark between D and F.

I know this because I hold 8 GCSEs and 4 A-levels.

[MillCreek]

That's twice already you have claimed that recording the session is (probably) illegal, and I haven't gotten to the end of the thread yet.

How and why do you think it even might be illegal?

They mentioned it in law school.  A cursory perusal of the case law shows the illegality of surreptitious audio/video recording in several states when two party consent is not obtained.  I don't practice in the state where the OP lives, there is no attorney-client relationship and thus would not presume to offer him legal advice.  Perhaps you are licensed in that state, have him as a client and are more familiar with the statutory and case law than I am.

[KD5NRH]

I am sure then, that you won't mind if we film you for every second of time you are outside of your house.  Surely you have no expectation of privacy or are concerned about being filmed, are you?

Following someone around is harassment.  Recording a voluntary interaction is not.

[KD5NRH]

No, they don't.  But....  Have you ever had somebody start recording a conversation that you were having with them?

It doesn't require a reel-to-reel and a boom mic these days.  Odds are you've been recorded without your knowledge fairly often.  Heck, for under $20 you can get decent audio and video in a very discreet package that no one will suspect even when it's sitting right in front of them.

Just assume that everything you tell someone can be proven later.

[Perd Hapley]

.

[RaspberrySurprise]

you're no mabs but didn't you mention some employment difficulties?
we dock folks an hour if they are 20 mins late   be late 3 times?  don't worry it stops being a problem.

How is not paying folks for their work legal?

[MicroBalrog]

How is not paying folks for their work legal?

I assume that's part of their contract.

[KD5NRH]

wanna know what symbolizes todays young workers for me? a kid late for work a few mins repeatedly  but he always shows up with a cuop of starbucks   he know hes late but stops for coffee.  its a regular occurence. especially union jobs

The client just got rid of one of those; seems after years of wandering in 15-30 minutes late every day with a Whataburger bag, cup of coffee and a newspaper, putting in a brief appearance at his work area, then heading off to the break room with his food for 20-30 minutes, followed by a similar seeion in the can with his newspaper, he got transferred to a different supervisor who noticed such things.  He lasted all of a week, while they went through the process of overlooking it once, mentioning it the second time, actual verbal warning on number three, written on number four, and walking him out the door on the fifth day in a row that it happened.

[Iain]

The last time I saw an educational system that had pretty much figured out how to do what you describe was in England during the 1950's - somewhere around our 6th grade (age 11) kids were tracked either into vocational/clerical training or separated from the drodd and prepped for university to become lawyers, accountants and government bureaucrats.

Not really how it worked, or works where it still exists.

The 11 plus was established by an education act of 1944 (where did they find the time?) and was supposed to set up a tripartite education system.

Grammar schools - highly academic system
Secondary technical schools - technical/scientific education
Secondary modern - practical skills, for lower skilled jobs and house-wifery

In practice there were flaws. The secondary technical schools never appeared on a wide scale, leaving a bipartite system. My dad passed his 11 plus and went to grammar school, but actually for the career he ended up in he would have ideally gone to a secondary technical school as he trained as an electrical engineer. My mother failed hers and went to a secondary modern, but again as she ended up as a radiographer perhaps the non-existent secondary technical school would have been better. Fairly clear that the secondary modern education did not stretch her.

It also appears that the 11 plus favoured certain socio-economic groups, apparently in the early days there were questions about the role of household servants. This was changed, and allegedly those changes then made the test unpopular with the previously supposedly favoured groups.

In places the secondary modern was a very poor relation to the grammar school, badly under-resourced. This and the failure to provide technical schools ended up with the practical situation that passing or failing the 11 plus seemed like it was make or break. That's a lot for an 11 year old to deal with.

In principle the idea isn't that bad, it wasn't properly resourced, possibly because in post-war Britain we couldn't really afford to radically overhaul the education system like that. I have no objection to streaming off in this way at some point, but 11 seems young, I've met plenty of later developers and bright people who failed their 11 plus.

There was a system in this country that worked better, a system of apprenticeships. My dad did one, went on to get an HND and did have the opportunity to make that up to an undergrad degree. He was working, learning technical skills and attending college. This started after O Levels, so 16-17. These days he'd have had to do an undergrad degree to get the same education, and then go into the workplace, and I'm not sure that anyone but the govt is really convinced that this is a superior set-up.

[geronimotwo]

Note that the law in many of the states addresses specifically "wiretapping," or recording of telephonic conversations. I only checked a couple. My state's law says nothing about in-person conversations. California's law treats in-person the same as telephone conversations.

Only 12 out of 50 states require permission of both parties.

btw we are in ny .

[seeker_two]

.

[AJ Dual]

.

Aaagh! Fistful's put up a micro-dot camera.

[Hawkmoon]

btw we are in ny .

Surprisingly, according to the link provided earlier (http://www.rcfp.org/taping/quick.html) NY does not require the consent of both parties.

Millcreek, I am not an attorney. However, I did study statistics. 12 out of 50 is 24 percent, which does not translate to "probably" in my lexicon.

[MillCreek]

Surprisingly, according to the link provided earlier (http://www.rcfp.org/taping/quick.html) NY does not require the consent of both parties.

Millcreek, I am not an attorney. However, I did study statistics. 12 out of 50 is 24 percent, which does not translate to "probably" in my lexicon.

In that case, allow me to point out to you the problems with relying on general-interest Internet resources for this sort of thing:

Privacy law is a very dynamic area of the law and frequently changes due to state and Federal appellate court decisions. I would not rely on a general-reference website to be as current as needed.

The actual fact pattern is key to determining if conduct is legal in a given state.  This usually requires analysis of the facts and interpretation of the applicable law.  General-interest websites are not capable of doing this other than to express some generalities. Based on the fact pattern, taping may be illegal under certain circumstances in more than 12 of 50 states. Especially if the taping is done surreptitiously.

You are completely disregarding the concept of civil liability. Even if taping is allowed under the laws of a given state, there may still exist a tort of invasion of privacy.  You can be sued in civil court for money damages. Case law is replete with cases on this topic.

There seems to be a belief that even if state law allows taping, the other party is somehow obligated to permit this. This is generally not true outside of some governmental settings, such as open meetings and the like.  I am perfectly within my legal rights to refuse to be taped, and if you do so without my knowledge (and/or in some cases consent), I will sue you for violating my privacy.  People should disabuse themselves of the notion that the legal right to tape does not necessarily translate into the ability to tape, especially if the other person does not consent. They have the option of walking away. You generally cannot compel someone to be taped against their will outside of certain circumstances.

My comments are not to be construed as legal advice but rather general educational comments.

[roo_ster]

I am less than sympathetic to claims of privacy made by a gov't employee going about their duties in a public building, all of which (employment, building, upkeep, operations) are paid for by taxpayers.

Unless the duty being recorded is that of the gov't employee popping a squat in the restroom or identifying and speaking about other children's' (or other persons') confidential data, those who are paid with taxpayers' dollars ought to be subject to observation, audit, and recording whilst performing their duties.

Don't like taxpayer supervision?  Don't take taxpayer dollars.

[MillCreek]

I am less than sympathetic to claims of privacy made by a gov't employee going about their duties in a public building, all of which (employment, building, upkeep, operations) are paid for by taxpayers.

Unless the duty being recorded is that of the gov't employee popping a squat in the restroom or identifying and speaking about other children's' (or other persons') confidential data, those who are paid with taxpayers' dollars ought to be subject to observation, audit, and recording whilst performing their duties.

Don't like taxpayer supervision?  Don't take taxpayer dollars.

Becoming a government employee does not necessarily mean checking all your rights at the door, of course.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

i have found folks who record sometimes get a rude awakening.  have seen them record the evidence used against them and get that funny look on their face