An Auckland teacher is working as a prostitute to get extra cash. This should be entirely unnecessary as teachers are paid reasonably well anyway in my opinion, but that is not the issue. This is obviously entirely inappropriate behaviour for a teacher, who should be a role model for students.
However, with prostitution being legal now, the board may struggle to find legal grounds to dismiss her, even though most people would probably consider that to be the best thing to do.
The simplest option as I see it if they cannot dismiss her would be for the board to tell all the parents. The parents then refuse to send their children to school. The teacher has no students so is made redundant. The parents then send their children back to school. Suddenly there are all these students to teach and they need to hire a new teacher…
Hat tip: Family First
Samuel Dennis 
September 25, 2008 at 10:45 am
Great Idea – for the teacher!
She would get about three years pay out of that idea, most of the school board would be fired and the school would have to pay court and compensation costs which would result in they having to lay of other staff!
Sb
September 25, 2008 at 10:58 am
Good point. They’ll have to get some good legal advice on how to get rid of her if that is what they decide to do (and I can’t see what else they could decide).
September 25, 2008 at 12:20 pm
“and I can’t see what else they could decide”
How about ignore it. Cheap, effective, nobody gets fired, remind the teacher that her other business stops at the school yard gate.
98% of people will have forgotten it in a week.
Its a primary school so in a couple of years the whole school list will have turned over.
What ever they do they must not leak the teachers name because if they do (even by accident) then all hell will break lose as she sues their pants off.
Sb
September 28, 2008 at 9:04 am
Couldn’t agree more with Sb.
I wonder what Christ himself would have said…..something like …”Let him that hath NO sin cast the first stone”
September 29, 2008 at 2:30 pm
Point taken Mike, but we aren’t talking about stoning her. We are talking about whether it is appropriate to have a prostitute teaching our children. If I knew I certainly wouldn’t want my son being taught by her. It is not the example I would want my son to be taught.
On the other hand, if someone was talking about firing a checkout chick for working as a prostitute to get extra cash, I would fully agree with you. There is not the same conflict of interest between those jobs.
The key issue isn’t whether what she is doing is right or wrong, although that is of course a big issue it is not necessarily one to fire her over. The key issue is whether it is appropriate for her to be teaching children, which is entirely different.
September 29, 2008 at 3:26 pm
So let’s get this right, or should it be righteous? One of the schools dads spots a lady he’s engaged on a perfectly legal commercial basis, and then drops an anonymous tip to the board (thus implicating every father at the school as a frequenter of prostitutes) So up to the point it is public knowledge that Madam X is a prostitute in her spare time, she is considered an able teacher. It’s only when she is outed, her part-time job becomes an issue. Samuel I see your father was a founding member of The Christian Heritage Party, which using the rational you employ with this teacher, means he must have been in cohorts with the bloke who lead that party and resides in your electorate, behind bars, right? Of course this wasn’t the fact and the link is tenuous, the same link you attempt to make with prostitution being unappropriate. Her interests outside the school walls are not your business or mine, it’s her ability to teach, which has never been in dispute. What by the way is appropriate behaviour for teachers in their spare time, Sam? Sunday School Teaching? Going to the pub and getting pissed? Cage fighting? Swim-suit Modeling? Working in a Gay Bar? Where do you and your Party want to draw the line on a teachers legitimate extramural activities? I hope she gets to sue the school board frankly, and all this publicity helps gain her some new clientele. I also hope (if there is a God, which there isn’t) the father who spilled the beans on her, catches the pox off the next whore he visits.
September 29, 2008 at 4:31 pm
Paul, my father had nothing to do with Christian Heritage, read more carefully, but that is a minor detail.
She may well be a very good teacher. But if she feels it is appropriate to be a prostitute, she may impart views to students that their parents would strongly disagree with. If you feel it is fine for your children to be taught by a prostitute, that is entirely your decision as a parent. Parents need to be in charge of their children’s education. But I would prefer to keep my son out of her class.
With regards to your Sunday School teacher analogy, I would also support your right to withdraw your child from a class taught by a Sunday School teacher if you wished. That is up to you. The Family Party supports funding following the child to make such decisions even easier for parents.
September 30, 2008 at 2:55 pm
Dear oh dear, Sam, I’m sure Christ didn’t expect educated people to take his words literally
However, if that’s the way you like it, how about “Judge not lest ye be judged”!?
On my part, Sam, all my children are now well grown up but if this lady were teaching my daughter Math for example and if she were good at that and my daughter was learning well, that would be fine by me. If, on the other hand, this teacher were shoving her personal beliefs and values down my daughter’s throat, then I wouldn’t call her a good teacher for a start and would certainly have problems with that no matter what those opinions and values were. In much the same way, when politicians and aspiring politicians do likewise, I completely loose respect for them.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion but not to force that opinion on others
In this particular case, if you would take your son away from the school to make your point or for whatever reason, then that is your right to do so. Just don’t expect others to join you just because you recommend that course of action.
September 30, 2008 at 3:06 pm
You do make some good points Mike, I don’t think I’ll be quite as hasty on this sort of issue in future.
October 1, 2008 at 5:54 pm
Lets say the teacher liked to go out on the weekend, every weekend, get drunk and sleep with random males, but recieved no form of payment.
It has no effect on her students?
Would this be any worse of a situation?
October 2, 2008 at 8:05 pm
Interesting discussion, but you are overlooking the fact that – care of the new curriculum – teachers are expected to “”teach and model those positive values which are widely accepted in society and encourage learners to apply them and critically appreciate their significance.” Churches may once have taken the lead on teaching values but they stuffed up on modelling and have lost people’s respect as a consequence. I reckon Kiwis prefer to be lead by those who lead by example. Anyway, the issue comes down to what are the ‘positive values that are widely accepted in society’ – despite being decriminalised, I wouldnt describe prostitition as one. It does mean that teachers are expected to be role models for values, a big ask. As a secondary school teacher, the staff I work with are reminded that we must behave outside of school. I think my pay is OK but then I recall one of our much higher paid news presenters once justifying her pay by saying: “Well we may only be onscreen a few minutes, but we are role models and the payment reflects the fact that we are therefore on good behaviour duty 24/7.”