This Is Why I Carry

A few weekends ago, I traveled by train to visit one of my daughters for my grandson's birthday party.

My return trip was delayed six hours, and I ended up arriving at a mostly empty train station well after dark.

The mostly empty didn't include the several shabbily dressed people loitering around the station.

Although most of these individuals appeared to only be interested in using the shelter of the roofs and the empty benches as a place to sleep for the night, at least one of them had a more threatening demeanor.

I had parked my vehicle in a parking garage on the opposite side of the train station tracks, and would have to use the crossover bridge to get to the other side, and then walk a several block distance to exit the station and backtrack to the entrance to the garage.

This was a fairly simple process during daylight hours, but after 10 pm on a Sunday night it became a whole different affair.

As I approached the cross over, carrying a backpack, a laptop bag, and my crossbody purse, I saw a very questionable individual standing right at the entrance.

His body position was partially blocking the entrance to the stairway, but he was also within reaching distance of the elevator.

As I approached he was watching me closely, and when I got nearer he reached over to press the elevator button.

When I was within about five feet, a different man, another passenger from the same train, came from behind and pushed past the lurker and headed up the stairway.

The elevator door dinged open, I waited until the man who had pressed the button got inside and the doors were starting to close, and then I hurried up the stairs.

I passed a group of three young women heading down the stairs, and that gave me a sense of relief that there would be people within hearing distance if necessary.

I reached the top of the stairs ahead of the elevator and saw the fellow passenger halfway across the walkway moving towards the other side.

I quickly called out to him, "Hey! Could you wait for me to walk with you? I feel uncomfortable right now."

He passed and turned towards me just as the elevator opened and the other man walked out and started moving towards us.

Meanwhile, I had been walking as quickly as possible and the fellow passenger waited for me to catch up to him.

As he saw the man from the elevator walking towards us, he told me he understood why I was concerned.

The elevator at the other side was already at the top, and we got inside. My walking buddy quickly pushed the button for the ground floor and I began pushing the button to close the doors.

The other guy continued to head towards us, so I lifted my phone and stated loudly, "I don't feel safe!"

At that point, the lurker turned around and headed back to the side of the station that he was originally on when I first saw him.

The rest of my walk was reasonably uneventful, and I arrived at my vehicle without any further issues.

But this entire episode brought home to me why I carry.

A female at night carrying multiple items in a relatively isolated area is not always safe.

Sometimes happenstance places us in situations where we may not have any options.

If there hadn't been someone else going in the same direction as me, I'm not sure what might have happened.

But I am not here to play armchair quarterback and nerd bingo (what if....).

Due to train regulations, I was not allowed to carry, even though I was traveling solely within a state in which I am legally permitted to do so.

I could have placed the gun in checked luggage, however that would have meant even more of a problem.

 There was no secure location at the end station to unlock the case, reload the magazines, and then place the gun in a concealed location.

But that is beside the point, and I'd like to get back to the original premise.

We live in uncertain times and law enforcement isn't always close by to help.

I carry so that I can protect myself, and my loved ones, when other resources aren't available, or will not arrive in time.

What happened at the end of my train ride is just confirmation that my decision is right for me.

Riding that Train, Hoarding, no Shame!

 I recently booked on the AutoTrain (IYKYK) to make a round trip for personal reasons, and this form of transportation was the most cost-effective convenient means to accomplish my ends.

I arrived early enough, and had no issues checking in my vehicle and getting my boarding pass.

After a relatively brief (1-1/2 hour wait) we boarded the train. 

I was in coach this leg of the trip, and I was seated at the opposite end of the second level from the coach dining car.

The train began the process of coupling together and then.....nothing!

Apparently engine troubles were causing a delay. After about 30 minutes trying to repair the current engine, they called for a replacement engine.

Meanwhile, the coach car lounge was providing cups and ice so people could chill their own drinks or fill them with water from faucets.

However, no engine means no power. Power = air conditioning, the meal systems, electrical outlets, wi-fi, even the toilets were electronic.

As 30 more minutes passed, one of the crew members manning the coach car broke out a few cases of the snack packs and small bottled waters - for free.

By that point in time, passengers had been an hour in the (not oppressive for Florida) stuffy warmth, and had begun to get agitated. 

Then the first voyagers back from the lounge car loudly announced "free snack boxes and water" and the feeding frenzy began (pun intended).

The occasional individuals passing through became a steady stream, and the reasonable division of the bounty morphed into hoarding selfishness.

People began returning, with each person carrying 2-3 snack boxes and several bottles of water.

And then, predictably, the free items ran out with over half the intended recipients not benefiting, while a small group took more than they needed.

This microcosm of an inconvenience is something we have seen repeatedly in the preparation time leading up to large-scale predictable events (COVID-19 lock downs, blizzards, hurricanes) and during the aftermath of unexpected events (floods, earthquakes, tornadoes).

Store shelves are wiped out of milk, bread, eggs (there must be a lot of French Toast aficionados out there), toilet paper, bottled water.

Gas cans and generators fly off the shelves, along with with batteries in sizes not often used anymore, only to have the remorseful buyers try to return them, obviously used, when they can't resell them on FB Marketplace or Craigslist.

When did we, as a society, become so focused on the self to the point that we no longer recognize that we are part of a community?

More to the point, how do we fix this problem? 

How do we redirect ourselves and others to function not just as one, but as many into one whole?

How do we come back together as a society interested in the good of all as well as ourselves?

(Serious answers only, please!)

I Am Not Okay....But Hey, (No) Thanks for Asking.

 "Are you doing okay?"

"How are you doing?"

"How are you holding up?"

The questions don't stop, and to be honest, when someone asks, I want to cry. Or punch them in the nose and ask the question right back at them.

Grief. It's a funny thing, but not in a "haha" way.

This isn't the first time someone close to me, in my heart, has died. But those were somewhat expected due to the circumstances. This was not.

I woke up in the morning to find that the man who had been by my side for  the past six years had died in his sleep.

I am not a heavy sleeper. After five children, and their sometimes late night peccadilloes, that was off the table decades ago.

But there was nothing to wake me.

All I know is that when we went to bed I said, "I really love you, you know."

"Yeah, yeah, they all say that!"

"I do really love you."

How can someone be okay? How can you hold up or do anything, when the person who has been there through every night and every morning is gone?

When I am not around people, I am truly alone. 

Before, even when we weren't in the same physical location, he was there, a phone call or a text away. Not anymore.

And when I am around people, it is exhausting. I have to pretend that I'm "holding up". But I'm not.

Today was not good. I went to go help a friend, and ran into another one who didn't know...yet.

"It's great to see you! How is everything going?"

And I started crying, and then explained. And she hugged me and asked me to call her anytime. And she meant it.

I had time to let it fade to background noise after that.

But then the call on his cell phone from another friend, who didn't know.

So I cried once again as I broke the news.

I am not okay. Not right now. Not for a while

We are not okay. Those of us who are faced with a sudden or unexpected death.

There is no warning, no ability to mentally prepare. 

Just the sudden arrival of death like a stone thrown through a plate glass window.

And we find ways to cope, to pretend to make it through another day so that we don't have to hear the silence, feel the absence in our lives.

But for now, it will take time to work through this.

Ask if we need a hug, or if we need to be left alone.

Ask if we need help with anything and be willing to follow through with that phone call, because we don't have the energy to do it ourselves..

But please don't ask "Are you doing okay?" Because we aren't.

Suave is DEI? Try an ARS(ehole) attempt to fit in!

 Your company is now pandering to the ageist, racist, and sexist portion of the DEI movement.

I am a 63 year old Caucasian woman with 2C hair type and some grey hair (which is also curly) and I used to purchase your Suave Professionals with Natural Shea Butter and Pure Coconut Oil Shampoo and Conditioner, as it worked best with my hair.

Much to my disappointment, when I received my most recent order of these two products from Amazon, you had rebranded this product to cater to a single segment of the population which did not represent me, or many other people and included unappealing name changes, "Lush & Coily".

The cartoonish representations on the new labeling are all women of mid- to dark- skin tone with not a grey hair among them, and not a single man or boy.

You are deliberately shutting out those of us over the age of greying hair, with lighter skin tones, and not the gender that you have portrayed with almost stereotypically offensive caricatures.

Unfortunately, the heads of the US government you are covertly supporting with this exploitation have also destroyed our economy to the point that I am realistically unable to afford throwing the products in the trash.

Rest assured that after this point, I will no longer purchase any Suave products, nor will my household, until you issue a formal apology and return to what used to be a classical, non-biased packaging.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

A Kick in the Face!

 Dear Supreme Court,

I am writing to support Lainey Armistead and the ADF in a case appearing before your body.

At no point was I approached to do so, but instead felt compelled to reveal my own miniscule place in the history of women's sports.

I attended high school in a "small city" during the late 1970's, when Pele was becoming a household name for his amazing soccer skills.

At that time, Title IX was in it's infancy, and my fellow female athletes and I were struggling to make a foothold for ourselves in the sports arena.

During 1977, a group of us wanted to play soccer, and managed to convince one of our PE teachers (Marilyn Thomas) to supervise us on a less than standardized playing field.

We were only able to practice when her schedule was free, and our equipment was the standard gym class issue including well-worn soccer balls and multi-purpose nets.

While we practice and learned, we were constantly reminded of our "less than" status by seeing the boy's team practicing on the regulation field nearby, using real soccer nets and equipment purchased just for their team.

Fortunately for us, "Coach" Thomas was able to locate a few nearby schools that had similar "clubs", and we were able to actually have a few scrimmages. 

Even so, we had to provide our own "uniforms" - matching T-shirts and shorts we bought out of our own money.

We had to provide our own transportation - parent taxi and carpool.

The writing was on the wall, and having a father who was a school board attorney for my school district, as well as over 10 surrounding districts, meant that change would come sooner rather than later, despite our rural location.

The following year, there was a bonafide girl's soccer team, with a coach, uniforms, equipment, transportation, and a schedule of practice and competition.

But it was a difficult fight for us to get that far, and that progress many of us fought for is being eroded by leaps and bounds.

Recent laws and rulings allowing biological males to compete in women's sports are a grave disservice to our history and struggle.

If competing in sports is that important to transgender athletes, allow them to compete in their biological sport, or form a league of THEIR own.

The physical and developmental differences between a biological male and biological female mean that it will usually be a struggle for a female to reach the same competitive level as a male.

Even the still present inequities in opportunities, facilities, and resources make it more difficult for females in sports, despite Title IX.

Caitlyn Jenner, who competed as a male world class Olympic athlete, does not support a transgender male competing in female sports, citing the inequity for her own daughters, and that should resonate with your body.

My granddaughter has recently begun playing sports, and the last thing I want for her is to achieve excellence, only to be outranked and lose opportunity to someone who is not truly biologically the same.

This is not about being "anti" anything, but rather about being "pro" common sense and pragmatism.

Please don't yield to the vocal minorities, but instead rule in favor of preserving the gains made in the late 1970's for female athletes.

The athletic future of our daughters, sisters, and females in general depends upon it.

Thank you for your time and consideration,

Elizabeth M Scanlon

Woolley Bully

Woolly bully

Woolly bully

Woolly bully

Woolly bully

Woolly bully

Watch it now, watch it, here he comes

You got it, you got it

~Sam The Sham & The Pharoahs

-------------------------------------------------

Principal Nicholas Woolley:

On Thursday, January 13, 2022 you/your school (St. Theresa's Catholic Secondary School) were contacted by ********* City School District on behalf of my daughter, ****** ****, for a copy of her school record.

Upon information and belief, you refused to comply with that request, claiming that she had no rights to the record.

On Thursday, January 13, 2022 at 12:06 pm I contacted you requesting that you provide ********** City School District with a copy of my daughter's (****** ****) school record.

You refused to comply with that request, and verbally stated that the grounds for your refusal was that I had no rights.

I asked at that time, before the termination of the call, that since ******* was over the age of 16 and had been emancipated under Canadian guidelines, she had the rights to her school records.

You stated that you would look into that question "when you had time" but made no effort to secure a phone number or email to respond to that request for information.

After the end of the phone call it took me all of two minutes to locate the MFIPPA (https://www.ipc.on.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/guide-to-privacy-access-in-ont-schools.pdf) which you should be fully acquainted with as a school administrator.

Under the provisions of the MFIPPA:

DO STUDENTS AND THEIR PARENTS HAVE A RIGHT TO ACCESS STUDENTS’ RECORDS? Yes. Students and their parents have a right to access the student’s personal information from their schools and school boards. This right is provided for in both MFIPPA and the Education Act. These two pieces of legislation operate independently, have different rights and responsibilities, and may also lead to different results.

HOW DOES A CHILD’S AGE AFFECT THE PARENT’S RIGHT OF ACCESS TO PERSONAL INFORMATION? Until a child turns 18, their parents or guardians have a right under the Education Act to examine the child’s OSR, without the child’s consent. Where a student of 16 or 17 has withdrawn from parental control, this right would likely not apply.

I once again called you on January 13, 2022 at 12:13 pm to refer you to the MFIPPA, and to remind you that under its provisions ****** was entitled to the records without consent of her parents.

You once again responded that you would "look into it", and made no effort to give a time frame or ask for return contact information.

As you had been informed that ****** was attempting to register for school in *********, **, United States, and would know from her school record that she was over the age of 16, the wishes of her father and stepmother (Kenneth A and Mary S Shaw) would no longer come into play.

As an educator myself, I find it reprehensible that you would knowingly and willfully interfere with any student's attempt to continue with their education, and question whether or not you truly belong in the educational field.

Yet your refusal to provide ****** and ********* City School District with her school record demonstrated just that negative attribute.

Your recalcitrance is not preventing her from attending school, it is merely preventing her from being appropriately enrolled in the courses which would result in the best educational outcome for ****** at the earliest possible time.

This is abhorrent behavior for any educator, especially one holding a position as an educational leader such as a building principal.

I am requesting that you immediately provide a copy of [my child's] student record to ********* City School District/********* High School so that she might be correctly enrolled in a course of study towards her diploma.

The contact information for Central Registration is: 

[Not relevant to the privacy of the post]

The contact information for ********* High School is:

[Not relevant to the privacy of the post]

Thank you for your cooperation in advance.

---------------------------------------------------------

So here's how I really feel! (Click Here)

(7)30 Days on Congressional Wage

 In 2005, Morgan Spurlock produced an episode of his 30 Day Series titled "30 Days on Minimum Wage".

The premise was fairly simple - he and his girlfriend had to try to live for thirty days on minimum wage in a place that represented the "average" demographic for the United States. 

They were unable to resort to their bank accounts or credit cards for assistance and ended up in debt at the end of the thirty days.

Although this experiment was a failure in one respect (they were unable to eke out an existence without landing further in debt), it was a success in another respect (it proved that minimum wage was not subsistence level).

However, even more to the point, it provides an interesting basis for something that should be an essential part of reform in our country - our elected officials and their spending habits.

Did you realize that the yearly wage for most (not all) Congressmen and Senators is $174,000?

Not only that, they have approximately 72% of their health insurance paid for by the government, as well as a good portion of their retirement.

They live in a prosperity bubble that most of us only dream about, yet they somehow continue to milk the system for even more perks.

Many of the most prominent politicians come under scrutiny on a regular basis because they manage to increase their net worth while living a lifestyle comparable to celebrities.

Maybe it is time to rein in the riches and refocus our elected officials on the best interests of their constituents, not themselves.

Let's institute some simple rules for our elected officials:

1) You can maintain your current home in your district, but you must rely solely on your Congressional wage to make the payments/utilities for that residence, unless you have a spouse/partner who is allowed to contribute a percentage of those expenses not to exceed their percentage of total household income.

2) You must use your Congressional wage to purchase all groceries and entertainment expenses, both at home and in DC. (Again, a spouse/partner may contribute a percentage of those expenses not to exceed their percentage of total household income while at home, but none in DC. Your spouse/partner was not elected to the office.)

3) As it is necessary to travel to DC and stay there to perform your job, residences will be established with common dining areas, lounges, and exercise facilities - the rooms will be single occupancy with individual bathrooms. If you want anything beyond this, you must be able to afford it with your Congressional wage and no contribution from any outside source.

4) Your travel to and from DC by plane, as needed, will be reimbursed at the cost for economy travel with no "add ons" (upgraded seats, checked bags, exit rows, etc) on airlines that allow one free carry on bag. If you already have a frequent flier account prior to election that allows perks at no taxpayer expense, you may use that. If driving, you will be reimbursed at the standard mileage allowance posted by the IRS. You will not be provided a vehicle at taxpayer expense, and the costs of your personal vehicle and insurance are your responsibility. (The IRS allowance covers reasonable expenses related to personal vehicles.)

5) Your job is representing the American People and your personal constituents. This requires reading and studying all legislation which has been presented. This aspect can be done either at "home" or in DC, but does not include attending any events outside of Congress sponsored by any agency, individual, or corporation.

6) Your job does require attending all sessions of Congress, as well as all meetings of committees to which you have been appointed - this is what you are being paid for. Short of a family emergency or state of emergency in your district, you will not be absent from any of these.

7) You are not being paid to attend parties, galas, or any other functions. Should you choose to do so, you must pay all associated costs (tickets, food/drink, clothing, transportation, preparation) from your Congressional wage with no donations, gifts, or loans from any individual or group.

8) At any time any of your constituents can demand an accounting of all your Congressional expenses and verification of how those were paid, receipt of documentation to be completed within 10 business days.

9) All gifts received during your tenure as a Congressman need to be declared and surrendered to the U.S. GAO (Government Accounting Office) which will then sell or auction the gift and post the proceeds towards reducing the Federal deficit.

10) Your vacations will not be paid for by the taxpayers who elected you (travel expenses, accommodations, meals, entertainment, etc) and you are not to accept gifts of vacations or travel and accommodations from any other individual or group (see rule 9 above). Your vacations will only be taken during recess from Congressional sessions and not be considered an acceptable absence from attendance in Congress or your committee meetings (see rule 6 above). Financing must be done on your Congressional salary, with your spouse/partner able to contribute a percentage of the expenses not to exceed their percentage of household income.

These are all reasonable expectations for our elected officials, which might help start restoring the US Citizenry to faith in their elected officials.

If these rules seem "unfair" or "unreasonable", consider them from the perspective of any job held by a non-elected official who is considered "working class"(not the elites).

It is time to stop complaining about abuses by our elected "representatives" and to start holding them accountable.

These ten rules would be a good start.

Shattered Glass, Shattering Illusions

 

Just as you proceed with caution when you are cleaning up actual broken glass, so should you be when presented with a situation that has been lauded as "shattering glass".

Unfortunately, too many people have jumped on the bandwagon of (wrongfully) assuming that the results of this election heralded in a new era in what is possible for women to achieve.

As a parent of daughters, I realize that there have been two sets of standards in many realms of life for women, and it has been an uphill journey to gain ground and strive for equality.

But the 2020 election was NOT a new era for women in goals that can be achieved, but rather a cautionary tale which instead should be a "How Not To..." guide.

Those who are celebrating it as a victory for new heights to which women can aspire are either sadly mistaken, or they are deliberately deceiving themselves and others.

To truly break down barriers (whether they be based on gender, race, religion, or any one of a million characteristics by which we identify ourselves or differentiate from others) means that a role model should at least be above egregious misconduct.

Unfortunately, what we have in office now is not that type of individual, for several reasons.

First, we should not have someone who changes their identity like a pair of shoes - wearing whatever matches the occasion. 

Although originally billing herself as the child of an "Indian born mother" and a "Jamaican born father", this so-called exemplar has morphed herself into a Black woman in order to secure that minority vote. 

The Asian Pacific Island Coalition even ran a commercial shortly after the election claiming her as one of their own, which was apparently short-lived on the airwaves.

If you have ever spent time around Jamaicans, they describe themselves as from the Islands, not as African Americans, so her self-rebranding was disingenuous at best.

The second issue is her failure to practice justice when dealing with the law, an ominous foreshadowing of what could happen in the future.

One notable example is her 2010 position on truancy in California - she even found it laughable and joked publically about imprisoning parents who ran afoul of her policy.

As an educator of 31 years, there are many reasons why students become truant, and it occurs at a  disproportiantely high rate among those socio-economic groups who would most benefit from mercy instead of malicious prosecution.

Another significant case, highlighting her history as a prosecutor, is that of Jamal Trulove.

Rather than being the exception, the rule for her career in California appears to have been one of wrongful convictions and insistence on maintaining incarceration for exonerated individuals.

Her legal career has been characterized by her willful disregard for true justice when it interferes with advancing her political career, but it is somehow no different than changing her identity like a toxic chameleon.

As if these issues weren't enough, they are amplified by the moral turpitude exemplified by her affair with Willie Brown. 

It isn't the de jure adultery with a higher ranking politician, as that doesn't violate the "community standards" that have become commonplace (read complacent) in today's society (after all, he had allegedly been separated from his wife for at least a decade).

The dilemma is that this adultery was the basis for securing appointments to well-compensated political positions, and later used to leverage other political ambitions after the affair had ended.

So with regret, I cannot uphold this election as an example of shattering a glass ceiling any more than I would praise Jeffrey Dahmer as an innovative cook.

Moral bankruptcy is simply that, and not something to be praised or celebrated.

Instead, we should seek out and lift up those women, and all those individuals, who persist and persevere against all odds.

The true role models are the single parents who work full-time while pursuing an education; the immigrants who marshal all their resources to secure legal citizenship and provide a better future for themselves and their families; the everyday individuals who do not compromise their principles for fame and glory, but rather do what is right even when nobody is looking.

This is the parting glass that I lift up to you tonight!

Biden's "Back Up" Plan /s

With the imminent passage of SB145, the Dem Presidential candidate is already planning out a new home-based business.

The provision allowing for an age difference exemption from the sexual offender registry in California should spark a demand for fake IDs.

"C'mon man! why wouldn't people want to be younger with these kind of benefits?" he was heard to say in response to the news. "Ten years? If I could have a fourteen year old girlfriend at twenty-four, I'd hit that!

NYS AG Tish James appeared to endorse the business plan, saying "If I could get away with being four years younger for decades, why wouldn't someone be able to pass for long enough to fool the police?"

It appears that other politicians were in line with the program, even going so far as to start prepping for photo shoots for their new ID.

"With a good wash and blow out, and the right neck scarf, I could shave half a century off
my age!" one of Biden's supporters was heard to say on a hot mike. "After all, the public doesn't even realize I had cosmetic work done while I was quarantined!"


We all know it is a good idea to have a backup plan, if something goes wrong. But this is truly genius!

Most of the fake ID businesses focus on making teens older to sidestep drinking laws. 

Biden's proposal turns the whole industry on it's head - making people seem credibly younger (also to avoid laws).

Although one of his primary funding sources has encountered "difficulties", he expects that other angel investors will quickly line up. Some well known individuals have already
expressed delight at the concept of this business.

"Why didn't they have this when I was in college?" one of them was heard to say. "I might never have married, and we all know how bad that choice was!"

Meanwhile, the marketing department has been making phone calls to Greece in order to get a commitment from their choice of celebrity spokesperson.

Should that individual fall through, they have a long A list of potential endorsements, and expect an announcement any day now.

Sen. Weiner was heard to say, "I approve of this business message!"

Sarchasm Alert: This "article" is meant as a parody of current events, and if you are under the impression that it is "fact", you are probably voting for any of the politicians mentioned above.

Chump Change - Working for an Essential Employer!

The alarm goes off, you go to work, often getting shortchanged on your breaks and mealtimes, then clock out at the end of your shift.

You head home to manage your own family and household, then get up the next day and do it all again.

Dolly Parton summed it up best in her anthem to the workforce, "9 to 5".

This year, the inconceivable happened to many hourly employees who worked for "essential businesses" - the job that was helping pay the bills became one that was also a potential health risk to themselves and their families.

 To add insult to injury, their friends and neighbors who worked for business that closed down not only got unemployment, they "earned" the equivalent of a $15/hour 40-hour work week "pay" on top of it.

But these dedicated individuals continued to work, often no longer being allowed overtime, and frequently being subjected to testing for COVID19. (For those of you who don't know, it is an invasive process up the nostril with pressure and friction applied.)

These non-salaried employees are paid AFTER they have put in the hours, and based on the actual time that they worked.

So can you even comprehend when payday rolls around, and you have less than half of what you are due in your check? Or when you check your bank account and there was no deposit?

Such was the situation this morning for the employees of a healthcare system.

This is a screenshot from a July 30, 2020 article about Samaritan Medical Center/Samaritan Health Systems located in Upstate NY.

Yet this morning's paychecks were anything but "normal", and these employees were unilaterally shortchanged.

Samaritan issued a letter to employees on Tuesday, August 4, explaining that they were going to make some adjustments to pay, with "new" employees having 25% of their check withheld for "taxes" and the remaining employees receiving a paycheck the same as their prior one.

Let's ignore the fact that 25% is an amount in excess of what is normally withheld on minimum/low pay employees for taxes, and arbitrary figure.

Those "pre-existing" employees were finally allocated overtime hours at the conclusion of their prior paycheck, and many of them took advantage of the situation after moths of reduced hours, and so were entitled to far more pay than the prior check would indicate. 

For many of these individuals, the amount they received was far less than 50% of the amount due them for hours they already worked.

These are frontline, essential employees in healthcare.

These are the men and women who have put their lives in harm's way on a daily, no wait, hourly , basis to help protect, care for, and heal our most vulnerable.

These are the people who worked at nursing home facilities in a state where the governor saw fit to deliberately send COVID19 individuals.

These are the individuals who did NOT receive a $600 a week bonus from the government to stay at home and do nothing.

These are the hardworking people who have NOT received any type of bonus or compensation from their employer.

And these are the people who just were given a virtual flipping the bird salute for their dedication by Samaritan Medical System.

Apparently, this same organization was able to pay $2 MILLION dollars ransom to malware perpetrators who hacked their system and held it for ransom, apparently claiming that the FBI directed them to do so.

This healthcare organization is beginning a systematic replacement of their computers, at a final cost in excess of $2 million.

And yet they can't provide their employees fair, timely, and equitable compensation for time and hours that were already worked.

Essential employees have been front and center throughout this entire crisis, often taking verbal abuse from others, as well as being underpaid, and now unpaid, for their dedication to their professions and employers.

Is it too much to expect an employer to do the right thing??

***************
Update:

Apparently this employer has been forcing employees to sign letters stating that they will accept the "adjusted" pay for as long as necessary.

Statements from the administration about how long it will take involve estimates of up to eight months.

How are they forcing the employees to sign?

They (through their representatives) are telling the employees that if they don't sign the letter, they will not receive their back pay!

So, how legal is it to refuse to pay employees for time worked?

This is beginning to sound a lot like harassment and extortion to me.

Class action lawsuit anyone?

Can You Hear Me Now? I'm Claiming MY Time!

Hearing

It is an interesting word, hearing. 

Maybe a refresher on its two primary definitions is in order, not for you readers, but for those who supposedly are our elected representatives.

From Oxford English Dictionary, hearing is a noun and means:
1) The faculty of perceiving sounds; and
2) An opportunity to state one's case.

If you have spent any time reading my blog, you already know that I have the conviction that words matter, that the pen is mightier than the sword.

In light of two major "hearings" this past week, I felt the need to claim my time, and defend some of our basic principles which are falling by the wayside.

Both of the dictionary definitions of "hearing" were not only disregarded during the two Congressional Hearings that were held this week, they were completely negated.

Apparently many people wrongfully assumed that the second definition would be in play when the House of Representatives had people in the "hot seat".

After all, when you are being questioned, don't you have an intrinsic right to "state your case"?

Not in the eyes of the members of Congress on the Judiciary Committee, as it soon became apparent.

Although each of the interrogators was adamant about "claiming" and "reclaiming" their two minutes, none of the individuals called to testify was afforded even a minimum of wait time to process the question, much less to respond.

***************
For clarification, "wait time" is an integral part of the question/answer process.

After asking a question, both the questioner and the respondent should wait from 5 to 15 seconds in order for a full comprehension of the question and formulation of the response.
****************

Not only were the respondents involved in these "hearings" deprived of the time to even provide anything other than a "yes/no" response (despite many of the questions posed requiring far more or a different format), many of the interrogators were asking complex, multi-part questions, each piece meriting its own wait time.

And that is a good segue into the first definition of "hearing" - the faculty of perceiving sounds.

The definition of perceive inherently involves understanding and awareness, something that was clearly lacking in these Congressional Hearings.

Our elected representatives demonstrated that the only thing they understood and were aware of was continuing with their rehearsed speeches (couched as questions) and were intent on continuing forward with their personal agendas, rather than actually listening to anyone other than themself.

Considering that many members of the Judiciary Committee are attorneys, and allegedly experts in the law, they rendered the entire process into a burlesque show.

Had they been in a courtroom when any of these activities had occurred, they would have been demanding a mistrial.

Now that they are in a position to advance their own personal program, they no longer care about the niceties of appropriate behavior.

It is time for these public farces to end!

It is time for our elected representatives to stop acting like self-centered, squabbling adolescents!

It is time for our government to focus on solving our country's problems, not on political power wars!

It is time for our leaders to be held accountable for their decisions and actions!

It is time for our government and its officials to stop wasting taxpayer money and resources on their personal advancement!

It is time for true justice to return to our nation!

This is how I am claiming MY time!

How will you claim yours?

Beyond the Edge of the Blackboard

Boundaries. It's all about setting boundaries.

Unless you are suddenly thrust into a novel situation where there are no rules, no precedents, just guidelines hurriedly put in place over a few hours, a day, a weekend.

And the struggle is real. 

Teachers used to be able to show up at the school door, enter their classroom, get a lunch break (30 min, which for a professional with a college degree is far below the industry standard), leave school at the end of the day, and put the classroom behind them until the next day of work.

Contrary to the belief of many elementary students (and middle school, and high school, and even parents), teachers don't climb into their closet at the end of the day and turn off like a robot only to reactivate the next morning.

But the transition to online education in the wake of school closings has been anything but smooth, for students AND for teachers.

What used to be the sporadic casual encounters between parents/students and teachers, in grocery stores and public places outside of school, has now morphed into something pervasive.

Most teachers are in the profession because they care about people and helping others learn. They arrive at school early and work late, they work on weekends and holidays, and forego their lunch breaks as needed. They go un/underpaid to coach sports and advise clubs and activities.

And that is their choice.

But now they are waking up and responding to texts and emails before or during their breakfast, long before the "start" of the school day. They are doing the same during lunch, and dinner, and instead of relaxing in the evening and watching their favorite movie or show.

This is who they are by nature.

But the emails and texts and phone calls continue long past the school day, and well into holidays and weekends.

These compassionate, selfless teachers who used to be able to manage their job as well as their own children (whose education they now need to supervise), pets, and household are suddenly on call 24/7.

Last time I checked, being "on call" only applied to doctors (who are paid considerably more than teachers).

Now there is a growing vocal minority screaming to "defund" the schools, because "if schools don't reopen, then teachers don't need to be paid".

Seriously? If they don't need to be paid, then stop calling and texting and emailing, and complaining if you don't get an immediate response.

Dust off your own skills and sit down at the kitchen table with your children and teach them yourself. 

Make sure you get copies of all the state tests that your children are expected to pass so that you can bring them up to standards as the teachers are expected to do (most states require that homeschooled children pass state tests).

Not interested? Well then stop the nonsense and realize that we are in unprecedented times.

Pretend that we are back in a time (less than a year ago) when teachers weren't available at your text and call (and email and ping on MS Meetings or Zoom).

Request an appointment within the "school day" or soon after to discuss your concerns.

But most of all, realize that reopening schools may be necessary so that our society doesn't bleed out teachers who are rapidly burning out.

All the student educational issues aside, there are serious mental/emotional health ramifications occurring for teachers that need to be addressed.

Help them set boundaries by setting them for yourself.

And when schools reopen, those teachers that don't feel comfortable returning to work can be reassigned to providing the online education for those students whose parents keep them on remote instruction.

If "it takes a village to raise a child", prove that we aren't living in a village of opportunistic, self-centered, ego-driven adults who will sacrifice others for their own benefit.

Give teachers the respect for their dedication that you are now realizing they deserve.

CRITICAL UPDATE: Vote by Mail? Three Strikes and You Failed!

Trust issues.

Verifiable trust issues.

Why do many people not want "Vote by Mail"?

When you can prove that your local elections office doesn't even follow the rules and laws, why would you believe that a "fair and impartial" election will take place with a whole new element?

This morning (July 29, 2020) I completed my New York State Absentee Ballot Application.

When I ventured on to the interwebs and Googled "Jefferson County NY Board of Elections" to ascertain the correct mailing address, I was pleasantly surprised to find the following:

Look at that final sentence in the first paragraph: " Applications for absentee ballots may be made by mail, email, fax or in person."

Fax? I can do that!
Email? Hallelujah!

So I promptly took advantage of both options (making sure that I specified that I had done each), just in case a catastrophic technological failure should occur. After all, redundancy is good operating policy.

And then I prepared to file away my paperwork with a note to double check receipt in a few weeks.

Much to my astonishment, a new email appeared in my inbox in response to my application! 5 minute response time? Such rapid service! I felt all warm and fuzzy about the immediate personal attention!

Until I read the email.

"Good morning Elizabeth,

Unfortunately we cannot accept a copy of your application. If you will mail us the original we can process your request and will mail your ballot when it becomes available. Please let me know if you have any questions.

Have a great day and be safe!"

POOF! Like that, the warm fuzzies disappeared!

Apparently the employees don't read their own website or the ever increasing spewing of Executive Orders from the state leadership.

More to the point, the title under the signature gave me even more reason to be frustrated: 

"Deputy Democratic Commissioner"

Last time I checked, this was not the political party in which I was registered to vote.

I responded with a link to the county's own website with a direct quote regarding the stated ways in which I might apply for my absentee ballot.

I also took a screenshot (see above) of the website as it existed at the time of my submission.

It has now been over thirty minutes since I replied with the information.

Apparently rapid response only applies to denying an absentee ballot application duly submitted under published guidelines.

Strike one: Publishing Absentee Ballot Application guidelines which are de facto false;

Strike two: Rejecting Absentee Ballot Application submitted under those guidelines;

Strike three: Failing to respond to a reminder of the published guidelines.

Voting by mail? Not just no, but HELL NO!

When I have first-hand documentation of how just one county is unable to adhere to local and state guidelines for "well established" Absentee Ballot procedures, why would I feel that they could successfully manage an entirely new process?

So take the concept of voting by mail off the table - it WON'T work!

********************
Update: I finally received a response to my email indicating that "there was a mistake on the website" and the Executive Order in question had "expired".

Not only were there multiple fails during the process, there was an additional one in this agency being negligent in keeping updated voter information on their website.

So I am back to once again submitting an application by mail.

The irony? I am currently in one of those states on the governor's "list"...and now my local board of elections would like me to mail in an application that has been in prolonged exposure with this environment?

Kinda makes you wonder, doesn't it?
********************
CRITICAL UPDATE:

This is the email that I had to send tonight:

On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 I emailed and faxed my absentee ballot application in to your email address as well as the listed fax number, in accordance with the information that was posted on the Jefferson County, NY Board of Elections website.

I received a response from Michelle LaFave stating that the provisions on the website were erroneously still posted and had expired on June 23, 2020, and that I would need to mail in my completed application.

I mailed in my application, and have USPS delivery confirmation that it was received on August 6, 2020 by an individual at your office.

At that time, the website stated that I should receive my absentee ballot within 15 days of your receipt of my application.

As of today, it has been 26 calendar days and 18 business days since your receipt of my application and I STILL have not received my absentee ballot.

I visited the website tonight only to discover that apparently now I am able to apply online, via fax, and via email, as well as by regular mail, for my absentee ballot.

I applied online tonight, and have already applied via mail, fax, and email with my previous submissions which have been confirmed as received in your office. 

I have attached documentation to this email for my online application.

Consequently, I expect to see delivery of my absentee ballot within 15 days, or I will research further action to take.

I have a constitutional right to vote and have attempted three times so far to secure that right following the guidelines posted by your office.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Not only haven't I received my Absentee Ballot within the posted guideline of 15 days, it appears that Jefferson County NY is deliberately ignoring my application which has been submitted THREE TIMES according to the current guidelines.

If someone who legitimately is requesting an absentee ballot is being ignored, how well do you think that the proposal for "mail in voting" will go overall?

Time to seriously reconsider your position on the claims being put forward in the media!

Teacher, Teacher, Can You Teach Me?

Teacher, teacher, can you teach me?
Can you tell me if I'm right or wrong?
Teacher, teacher, can you reach me?
I want to know what's goin' on, oh


~"Teacher, Teacher", 38 Special

Enough already with the debate about whether or not to reopen schools!

I have taught in schools for over 31 years - more than half of my life. More than that, I have taught outside of a classroom for most of my life. So my voice matters and I would like to be heard.

We are irreparably damaging our children. Not just now, as a result of the pandemic closing schools, but by our use of public education as a resource for any "minority" group who wants to push their agenda.

Right now I want to expose the harm that is being done by leaving public schools closed.

I grew up in a small city (it was actually not even deemed a city until later) at a time when handicapped children in our town were "lucky" enough to have a facility that provided them what realistically was glorified day care.

The facility was actually started shortly before I was born, but in 1975 PL 94-142 (Education for All Handicapped Children Act) was passed, and just as I entered high school, a whole new world was opened up.

The disabled students that had previously been "out of sight, out of mind" at the local facility (for any of us who did not have a neighbor, friend, or family member with a disability) were now in our school building, and sometimes even in our classrooms.

In my school, there was a wing that led to the band/music/chorus/stage that held the classrooms for most of these students, but those of us who participated in those activities became familiar with many of the teachers and students.

What I have NOT seen raised as an issue at all during the school closings is a dialog about how disabled students are being affected by no longer having access to the school buildings.

You can NOT do PT (physical therapy - large movement skills such as walking) or OT (occupational therapy - fine motor skills like writing or turning switches) effectively over a Zoom interface. 

Speech therapy is also problematic and difficult under the best of conditions, and given all of the issues that can arise with connectivity, cameras, and microphones, it is not meeting the needs of these students. (I will discuss the "digital divide" more in a separate blog entry.)

Life skills such as laundry, cleaning, personal hygiene cannot be effectively taught without following the student around and observing them in action. And since most schools have barely been able to provide stationary technology for students, a portable camera interface is beyond budget.

Are schools able to provide an interface on their Zoom or Microsoft Meeting so that the teacher or aide for handicapped students has a private connection to deliver their supplementary instruction which they used to receive in the school building, if not in the actual classroom?

A physical school environment is so much more than learning academic skills (and I include the areas listed above as just a small sample of services provided for disabled students).

School is a medium for providing social skills for ALL of the students. And remote learning just does NOT compare.

When you are IRL (in real life) with a room full of classmates, there is "hands on" instruction in tone of voice, body language, and facial expressions that are kept to a minimum over electronic media. (Don't believe me? How many of you adults only "dress up" for the part that the camera has in view?)

There is observation of interactions between peers and adults that does not occur when people are no longer in the same room.

And there is exposure to a wide variety of individuals who are different from you, they look different, smell different, speak differently, and have different interests - and you learn how to interact with others who aren't just an extension of how you were raised.

Those are all critical educational skills, not only for disabled students, but all students, especially from an early age. 

How else do we expect our children to learn that there are people in the world who are not the same as them when they no longer encounter them, even if just casually walking past them in a school hallway?

If you read the link above about PL 94-142, the original provisions were for at least one free meal a day for handicapped students.

What is not being discussed is that often, the parents of disabled students are unable to provide for these students basic needs sufficiently - food being just the tip of the iceberg.

Yet now we have thrust them into the position of providing supervision of their child's educational program without providing them any training equivalent to even a teacher's aide.

Some of these children have behaviors which even trained professionals have difficulty managing, and that was with the "tag team" approach that gave both parents and teachers time away.

Now these students are full-time in a household that may not be well-equipped to provide a substitute for the public school academically, let alone behaviorally.

Over the past several months I have had conversations with parents of disabled students and they are frustrated and angry that the "remote learning" is not addressing the needs of their child.

Yes, we have a health crisis in our country. But if we allow our most vulnerable student population to become victims to educational malpractice, we are reverting to the "out of sight, out of mind" warehousing mentality that existed half a century ago.

Open schools with CDC guidelines. Give parents a choice if they feel their child is at health risk.

But allow our children to learn and grow in skills and behaviors and attitudes. All of our children, not just those capable of utilizing technology!