This may only be a partial list of reasons; please, add anything else in the comments. The deadline to file to run for the Board is May 19th. Entire Board Majority NOT vetting the Superintendent in any way, shape or form. Even the Seattle Times thought that was wrong. It was just absolute hubris and it was wrong. For the second time in just over a year , board members voted to negotiate a superintendent contract during a special meeting with no opportunity for public comment. This time, they showed an even deeper disregard for their responsibilities as public servants: Aborting a national search for a new superintendent and denying Interim Superintendent Brent Jones a chance to show students, parents and taxpayers that, indeed, he is the best person for the job. Government bodies can’t fast-forward through transparent processes just because they think they know the right answer. One other odd thing about the hiring of Brent Jones - most permanent SPS superintendent contracts ar
Comments
Thus, it bothers me that Starbucks and the other 40 companies are making it easier for these kids to find jobs—minimum wage, I'm sure, and possibly taking a job away from an adult.
NOTE: The info makes a point that the youth should NOT be in school: Coalition of 40 Top U.S. Companies Set to Launch Long-Term Hiring Effort in Seattle to Bring Jobs to Opportunity Youth – 16- to 24-Year-Olds Who Are Not in School or Employed
Does this bother anyone else, or am I alone here?
It's not taking a job, it's giving a new opportunity to someone that doesn't have one. Thought we don't want kids to be taken advantage of, we do want them to have good life experiences.
If a 16 year old isn't going to school, it's good that they are getting life skills and contributing to the community!
I don't think you are the only one opinion, but I hope this helps you see the other side a little more!
What struck me is that the business person she spoke to said that many of the 16-24 unemployed youth are low-income and/or minority and that they're often not offered encouragement about being able to get work. He said something like, "They hear that they'll never get anywhere," and that this is the first time some of them have ever been given positive messages that they can succeed.
So no, I don't think this was a bad thing, and I don't feel that they are taking jobs from adults. Since I work with low-income minority youth, I can tell you that many of them, in or out of school, have the responsibilities of full adults, sometimes responsibilities that would crush adults with a good job or education. I'm happy to see companies willing to take a chance on some of them. Would you rather they remain unemployed and on welfare, or their struggling family go without heat, power or water? That's what some of the working teens I know are helping to provide.
Tenn Advocate