Can Schools discipline students for speech?

 Can schools discipline students for speech?

 

Lots of students have been suspended and/or otherwise disciplined for using inappropriate language in school.  But what happens when the kids do that online or in the community?  Believe it or not, the Supreme Court weighed in on the issue back in 1969 with a very landmark case called Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District.   Back then the issue was the kids wanted to wear black arm bands in school protesting the Viet Nam war.  The school district refused to allow the kids to wear the armbands.  The case went all the way to the Supreme Court.  The Court’s decision was sort of split.  On the one hand the students had a first amendment right to free speech.  On the other hand the school administration had the right to suppress any speech that would disrupt the work and the discipline of the school.  And that has been the reason used by schools for many years to control student speech.

Over the years since then, there have been many cases  that have further narrowed students’ free speech rights.

Of course, the internet both broadens and amplifies an individual’s speech while at the same time increasing opportunities to disrupt the school.

This latest case began in 2017 and is just now getting to the Supreme Court.  A student  was angry at being moved to the JV cheerleading squad from the varsity squad.  Over the weekend she posted vulgar language about the school, the cheer team and “everything to do with this school” on Snapchat.  As a consequence, she was even removed from the JV team.  Her parents sued alleging that her removal from the JV squad was a violation of her free-speech rights and that the school’s rules were overbroad.  In a federal district court decision this past summer, the court ruled that school had overstepped in its “coercive power” and that Tinker does not apply to off-campus speech.

There really are a couple of issues here, even though this particular district court ruled in favor of the student’s free speech allegation, five other federal district courts have ruled that Tinker CAN be applied to student off-campus speech when there is a sufficient connection to the school.

Hence the Supreme Court is now involved.  

But, however, the Court rules, there is really another issue here.  The young woman who used the vulgar language on Snapchat was behaving in a crude and vulgar manner when expressing her disappointment about not making the varsity team.  Rather than allowing her to have consequences for this behavior, her parents leapt to her defense and did, literally, make a “federal” case out of it.  Is that what parents should be teaching their kids?   Behave crudely, inappropriately, as a way to manage your disappointment?  Not to worry, we will defend your right to misbehave.  Perhaps in terms of child rearing, this court fight might not be for the greater good.

Kids come in last again

 Kids come in last again!

 

There is a great debate going on across the country right now and even in the great state of Maryland.  Should children after almost a full year come back into the building for school.  Is it safe cry the teachers’ unions from behind their laptops wherever they can get a signal?

The reality is that is it much more unsafe to keep children out of school buildings.   Adults have acquired skills that children NEED in-school learning to acquire.   Yes students have lost up to a year academically during the lock-out.  But that is not anywhere near the penalty they have paid emotionally. 

The suicide rate among adolescents is climbing almost daily.   An Arizona study found a 67% higher suicide rate in 2020 over 2019!  The Centers for Disease Control have reported a marked increase in depression and anxiety among children.  

Children use school to learn academically.  They also use school to learn emotionally.   They learn the skills to make friends.  A child in kindergarten cannot learn that on a Chromebook.   A year is a critical time in a child’s life.   Adolescence is another critical time.  Kids' bodies are changing dramatically.  They are beginning to sort out what their cohort is socially, jock? nerd? Their bodies are sending them sexual signals and many kids need peers with whom to discuss these feelings.  What equals normal?  Only another kid going through these feelings can validate what is normal.   Think about this- A stranger looking at a child can usually accurately guess whether that child is 5 or 6, or 12 or 14.  That same stranger looking at an adult would be hard pressed to guess if the adult were 35 or 36.  The reason is that a year is a child’s life is reflective of much more growth and development than in an adult’s life.

 The medical evidence is clear.  A child’s emotional safety is much more at risk with online instruction than his or her physical safety is at risk if attending school.  For the most part, kids in western Europe have been in school.  Not in the U.S.  One of the reason is the age of our school buildings.  They are difficult to retrofit for better ventilation.  Another big reason is the refusal of the teachers’ unions to give up online teaching.  They don’t even have to do lesson planning anymore.  Most of the school districts are providing them to the teachers.  One size fits all right?   Something that every short, tall, thin, heavy person knows for sure.

Our children are suffering and we adults are looking the other way, feeling secure that in providing for our children’s physical safety they will just “catch up” academically and emotionally.  That just ain’t so!

Our society always talks big about how kids come first.  But our behavior repeatedly demonstrates they come in last again.

How about the truth this time?

 How about the truth this time?

 

Teachers’ unions across the country are crying foul because families and elected officials are suggesting now might be a good time to get students back to work in school buildings.  The unions are crying it is not safe for the children.   I can’t remember the last time the unions did anything for the children.  The negotiations for new contracts are all around salary and benefits for themselves.  In fact, there is little evidence that being in the building seriously endangers children or teachers.   How could there be since it is almost a year since either has been in buildings.  Yet private schools both large and small have had in-school classes for many months without any significant outbreaks.  And the cases of the virus that do exist in these schools were almost entirely contracted outside of school.  Teachers have not been particularly smart either.  While arguing that being in school buildings is unsafe, they post FB photos showing themselves teaching from various vacation spots.  

What IS unhealthy for students is being out of school.  Very young children are losing opportunities to be taught social skills and develop emotional growth.  All children are losing ground with online instruction, some a year or more. The dropout rates in urban areas are huge. Will these kids come back and how far behind will they be?  Adolescents are suffering severe mental health issues while the suicide rate spikes.  Meanwhile, teachers insist that they are not safe in schools!   

Somehow frontline health care workers are doing their jobs.  People who work in grocery stores and at the Amazon warehouses and delivery personnel are doing their jobs.  Auto mechanics, retail sales people are all doing their jobs.  These teachers who refuse to do their jobs are being very well paid to teach from a lap top on a beach, their deck at home or wherever they can get an internet signal.  The average teacher’s salary in Maryland is over $69,000.   In normal times they work 180 days plus a few training days and other days off to do paperwork.  The rest of us work 237 days a year- that includes time off for weekends, federal holidays and a 2-week vacation.  I am pretty sure the grocery clerks that make sure we can get food are not that well paid.  So far Congress has appropriated 54 BILLION dollars for COVID aid to public schools and another 130 billion is in the works.

When are the kids going to see the benefit of this money?   The unions need to fess up.  They have a good deal here.  Full salaries and benefits, no commuting, working from wherever there is a signal- Oh right but is only the children’s safety that concerns them.  How about the truth this time!

How much is enough?

 How much is enough?      

 

The current federal minimum wage for typical people is $7.25 an hour.  Most states have minimum wages much higher than that but a significant minority stick to the federal minimum.  HOWEVER, under a law dating back to 1938, employers are able to receive special 14(c) certificates from the U.S. Department of Labor allowing them to pay individuals with disabilities much less than the federal minimum wage.

Disability advocates have been pushing for years to end this practice.  A few states and cities have already banned it.  As a candidate, Biden pledged to support a phase out of this exception for individuals with disabilities.

President Biden is making good on his promise.  He is proposing a new federal minimum hourly wage of $15 and eliminating the subminimum wage for those with disabilities.  

There is some pushback to this plan.  A minimum wage means an employee receives that amount whether or not he/she earns that amount with labor skill  and contributes that amount to the bottom line of the business.   Some advocates are suggesting that if employers were required to pay people with disabilities the same minimum wage as the non-disabled, employers would be much more slow to hire those with disabilities.  The unemployment rate for people with disabilities for 2019 was double that for the non-disabled.   The pandemic has dramatically increased that discrepancy since people with disabilities are more susceptible to most viruses and may be at home in an abundance of caution regarding their health.  

To be fair, most people earning the minimum wage are among the lower skilled workers with or without disabilities.  And the argument that employers will not hire people in these low skilled jobs at a higher minimum wage is regularly advanced every time any effort is made to raise the minimum wage for anyone.   So far, every time the minimum wage has been raised, employment dips for a short time, then moves back to its previous levels.   Would this same situation occur for people with disabilities?

As with most things in life, the glass is both half full and half empty.  Is it better to have fewer people employed but with a higher wage or to have more people employed with a lower wage. And there is no guarantee that the lower wage would result in higher employment rates once the pandemic is over.   Should people be paid what they earn or what they need to live on?  How much is enough- that’s a question for society and the taxpayer to answer.