Here we go again: someone else decides to write about the Absent Teacher Reserve (ATR) without having the slightest idea about what it is.
This time it was a site called bed-stuy.patch.com. Instead of suffering through their errors, let's just see how they were refuted by good ol' Joseph Moses (one of my aliases).
Your discussion of the Absent Teacher Reserve (ATR) is full of inaccuracies.
1) Not all teachers who are excessed are "senior teachers" with six-figure salaries. Excessing frequently affects teachers who have worked only a year or two and who are earning far below six figures.
2) Teachers are not excessed due to poor performance. The DOE states that excessing can take place for one of the following reasons: a) grade reconfiguration; b) reduction in student enrollment; c) school phase-out; d) program change.
3) Excessed teachers were never assigned to the "Rubber Room." That heaven-on-earth was reserved for teachers who had been accused of misconduct and were awaiting a hearing (click here for more information).
4) ATRs did not begin to fill in for teachers on sabbatical or maternity leave "following last year's hiring freeze," nor will the new budget herald in an era in which ATRs begin to serve as day-to-day substitutes. I was excessed three years ago. For the first month, I filled in for a teacher on maternity leave; after that, I was sent to another school where I worked as a day-to-day substitute.