TWO FOR THE PRICE OF ONE: MARILYN PENN
Â
Exclusive: Two for the Price of One
There is something infinitely satisfying about getting two for the price of one or, as the slightly different aphorism states, killing two birds with one stone. We like the appeal of mutual benefit and of both parties in a transaction coming out ahead – a win-win situation instead of a zero sum game. Examples abound: senior citizens volunteering to read to underprivileged elementary school children; teenagers visiting senior citizens who are home-bound or isolated in nursing homes; corporate sponsors subsidizing underprivileged children at private schools and universities and all the myriad religious, social service and charitable endeavors which engage so many Americans as volunteers.
Â
I have just finished serving jury duty at New York State Supreme Court and observed an excellent new opportunity for fulfilling the needs of one group with the usefulness of another. When the clerk for the jury pool asked for all those who wished to be excused because of language difficulties, a line of about 25 people appeared. Most were Asian with a sprinkling of Hispanic and other nationalities mixed in. The clerk explained that if these people felt they couldn’t comprehend English well enough to follow a trial, they would be excused for two years and then recalled. The rest of us could expect to serve an average of five to 10 days with the outside chance of a trial lasting longer. New York has extended the period of time for being recalled to six years which, on average, means that if selected as a juror,  you perform a civic function the equivalent of one or two days per year. Wouldn’t it be fairer and far more productive if, instead of dismissing those with language problems, we gave them English lessons for two weeks? They could be taught by the certified teachers already receiving full salary while they are out of the classroom awaiting arbitration to remove them from their jobs. There are approximately 600 such teachers throughout New York who have been accused of incompetence or misconduct but  thanks to the UFT, continue to accrue all the benefits of other teachers for years until their cases are determined.
Â
Surely most of them would be able to teach basic English to foreigners who would be grateful for the free instruction. Think of it as alternate jury service for the English-impaired and quid pro quo for the teachers who are currently being paid to sit in a room doing nothing. In the courthouse that I was assigned to, there were several rooms adjacent to the main one where potential jurors could lounge – there would have been no problem allocating one of them as a classroom.Â
Â
As for the teachers in limbo on full pay, their job teaching adults would be far less stressful than the ones they formerly held in NY city schools and might be a perfect opportunity for them to adjust their teaching techniques under less extenuating circumstances. It would restore their dignity as professionals instead of moochers on the public dole and might lessen the anger many of us feel at this egregious example of union lollygagging and government incompetence. The final benefit would be to all the rest of the people in the jury pool who silently questioned whether everyone claiming language difficulty as a way of avoiding public service to the state would claim the same if that were a requirement for receiving state benefits as well.Â
Â
FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Marilyn Penn is a writer in New York who can also be read regularly at Politicalmavens.com.
Â
Comments are closed.
