Arlene Ackerman, Ex-Philadelphia Schools Chief, Defends Unemployment Application

PHILADELPHIA — The ousted former head of Philadelphia's public schools says she's only taking what's rightfully hers by applying for unemployment benefits after receiving a $900,000 contract buyout.

Arlene Ackerman tells WCAU-TV she received about $400,000 after taxes and lawyer fees as part of the severance package settled on in August.

The former superintendent is eligible for the state maximum of $573 a week, based on her former salary of about $350,000.

Ackerman told WCAU ( ) she "didn't win the jackpot" by collecting the severance package. She said it was money she was entitled to because the district broke a contract that would have paid her through 2014. http://bit.ly/uuvkFm

Ackerman's leadership saw increased test scores and graduation rates but also clashes with community members, the teachers' union and elected officials.

___

Information from: WCAU-TV, http://www.nbc10.com

Read more:

• Arlene Ackerman Dares Commission To Fire Her
• Ackerman Leaving Post Under Agreement
• Ackerman Receives Full Buyout From District, Donors Back Out
• Arlene Ackerman Applies For Unemployment

Comments

[jonr14]

10:07 PM on 01/06/2012

She has been pushed out of every district she has worked for. I hear that San Francisco is still paying her medical insurance. Look into all other districts she has messed up!!!! She also does contracting with other districts while she earns these salaries.

[Help USA Taxpayer]

09:58 PM on 12/11/2011

she was horrible --- insisted on hiring minority Contractors who where not qualified and did not complete work paid for at schools ---------------------- bullying in Philly is going to the hospitol and police station and each forced to return to same school

[SeptimusDSX]

10:27 AM on 12/10/2011

As long as she is not scamming, what is the problem? Don't you pay into it? I agree that this looks very weird, but I don't think there is anything illegal going on.

[mrskorn]

09:57 PM on 12/10/2011

So you also agree then, that the super rich should take advantage of all possible loopholes to pay little if no taxes? It's not illegal....

[climbing panda]

03:27 PM on 12/12/2011

correct which is why the tax code should be simplified to eliminate those loopholes and the overall rate reduced.

[OCerInTN]

01:45 AM on 12/11/2011

Actually, individual workers do not pay into unemployment. It is a tax paid by employers based on total payroll.

[dropthedh]

02:01 PM on 12/12/2011

Employees do pay into the fund also.

[climbing panda]

03:29 PM on 12/12/2011

even if that were true it doesn't invalidate her right to collect.

[GlennWatson]

09:29 AM on 12/10/2011

Some people have no shame at all.

[bruninyc]

08:09 AM on 12/10/2011

ok, so she's an unlikable person. But, for all of you who think she hit the big times with her package, you are wrong. It is expensive to "retire" these days, and her money is not going to carry her that far. As for her collecting unemployment, as sour as it tastes, it is her right.

[cmel57]

08:58 PM on 12/09/2011

350K per year? No wonder the school systems are suffering across the country. What a waste of taxpayer dollars. Her salary should have maxed out at 125K. Can you imagine how many more teachers could have been hired?

[BabaLou7]

02:52 PM on 12/13/2011

I agree completely.

[peeowedaboutit2]

08:17 PM on 12/09/2011

While I agree that it is undignified for her to file for unemployment, it still is her right because she was forced to pay into it. As a business owner actively working in my business, my state forces me to pay into the unemployment compensation fund for myself. The problem is, I own 2 businesses, so if I had to "lay myself off", I could not collect because I would still have income from the other business.
If the state wants to force a professional to pay into the system, they'd better be prepared to equally pay out under those same rules. I don't have a problem with it.

[mrskorn]

10:04 PM on 12/10/2011

Then the rich, who use legal loopholes, should get away with paying little income tax? No problem right, it is their right.

[peeowedaboutit2]

09:26 AM on 12/11/2011

I don't believe I said that and no, I don't agree with the loopholes either.
Let me try to explain it this way; We both have to cross a toll bridge in our cars, so we both have to pay the toll. Are you going to tell me I can't cross after I paid the toll simply because I'm driving a Mercedes and You're driving a Hyundai? We both paid the toll, so we are both entitled to cross that bridge. That's my point.

[kmhjbh]

05:53 PM on 12/09/2011

I am confused. Was she fired, terminated or removed from her postion? I always understood that if you were fired from a job for cause you could not receive unemployment benefits.

[BabaLou7]

02:53 PM on 12/13/2011

As I understand it, delicately removed.

[empress trudy]

01:29 PM on 12/09/2011

The first lesson of education: Work The System for All It's Worth

[sibyl9]

01:18 PM on 12/09/2011

How undignified.

[stopnlisten]

01:15 PM on 12/09/2011

She isn't breaking the law. If the law is bad, fix it.

[Mochilero]

12:46 PM on 12/09/2011

Legal entitlement does not make something right. Our species is hard-wired into this specious mode of being, and we are swiftly succumbing to The Tragedy of the Commons.

[peeowedaboutit2]

08:19 PM on 12/09/2011

Legal entitlement goes right along with forced participation.

[Robert SF]

12:34 PM on 12/09/2011

Well, on the one hand, she is right. On the other hand, she illustrates the pervasive grab-what-you-can attitude too many Americans have. See, because if she's right, then the CEO dragging home $50 million is also right. He earned it just as legally as she did. And yet, when everyone acts like her and the CEO, it damages society.

[deanleto]

11:43 AM on 12/09/2011

Part 1:
wonderful to hear all this hate coming from people about educators in particular and public workers in general.

we live in the free market...

Administrators are NOT in the union, therefore they get to negotiate, just like anyone else in America who has an education and does not have to work for slave wages...

So now, America, home of the free, unless you work for the government....

So government oppression is ok when you work for the government.... sorry, you do not lose your rights as an American because you work for the government.

When did we come to the conclusion that even when we pay public workers the money doesn't really ever belong to them.... the idea is sickening.....And folks after you pay your taxes, the money no longer belongs to you.... And when she is paid, the money now belongs to HER, and none of you get to decide otherwise....

MANY people make more than the president. If your argument is that no public worker is more important than the president, and shouldn't be paid more, then you lose the argument, because there is not one CEO who is more important than the president, therefore they shouldn't be making more either...

it seems most angry people here are so, because their level of education leaves them frustrated, as they cannot explain nor understand the way things are....

[Anita Brady]

09:10 AM on 12/09/2011

Just do NOT fall in the trap to believe that this woman represents the teaching profession.

She certainly does not.