The Rebbe’s Solution to the Teacher Crisis

From the Anash.org Inbox: As schools everywhere face a shortage of staff, a recently published letter of the Rebbe sheds light on what it takes to satisfy teachers: principals should give teachers autonomy over their classes and teachers should be paid proper salaries.

By Yosef B.

There is much discussion regarding the recent situation in which Mosdos are struggling to find suitable educators, and the staff they do have are looking at the door.

In a recently published letter from the Rebbe, one may be able to find a solution to this issue.

The letter is addressed to Hanholah of the Reshet of a certain town in Eretz Yisroel in response to complaints the Rebbe received regarding the behavior of Hanholah to their staff.

In the Letter the Rebbe points out:

• Even though staff needs to accept the authority of Hanhala, at the same time this is only for the initial interaction; however, on a day-to-day basis, the Hanholah has to consider and respect the opinion of the teacher and not impose on the teacher the Hanhola’s wishes on the basis of Kabolas Ol.

• The compensation should be similar to that of the average working Yid of that locality.

• Misconduct of the Hanholah with one teacher affects the overall name of the Mossad.

• At the same time, the Rebbe points out that the complaints the Rebbe heard were not directed at a specific member of Hanholah but rather as a matter of fact of what was going on.

It self understood that following these guidelines mentioned in this letter will foster a healthy relationship between staff and Hanholah, which will Bezh make staff happy to come and teach and which will invite more talented Yungeleit to join this vital and Heilige Shlichus

Here are the Rebbe’s words:

“Despite my inclination, I feel compelled to highlight something I have, until now, perhaps only hinted at subtly: For the success of the Oholei Yosef Yitzchak Lubavitch institution, it is crucial to have the satisfaction of Rabbi …, and it is understood that this cannot be achieved by coercion but rather through acceptance of the yoke and voluntarily. Of course, including the study of Tanya, which, although accepting the yoke is the beginning, essence, and root of service etc., it must initially involve effort and then must also include an aspect of pleasure. 

“Despite the numerous objections to this approach, even though it’s emphasized that the objections are not personal but rather to the situation, this does not significantly impact the success of the mission. Since Divine Providence has placed him at the helm of the aforementioned institution within their territory, surely the capability was given to arrange matters so that those working in the sacred institution are satisfied, ensuring their livelihood is appropriate for their location among the Israeli residents there, their peers, and their community. This also necessitates that they should not feel disregarded in any matter, although I emphasize once again that in all their communications, it’s felt and stressed that their objections are not personal but to the situation.

“Furthermore, after the travels of … which some interpret here as a form of escape, and following past conflicts among Anash…, extra effort is needed to manage all matters smoothly etc. etc., as publicizing such issues within the core of Anash and certainly among those not aligned with Anash can lead to various interpretations, and changing a good name after it spreads is challenging. As I recall, Reb Bentzion Shemtov mentioned that in his time, he also spoke with him and his wife, may she live, about the necessary caution and conduct mentioned.”

*

The original letter in Lashon Kodesh:

למרות רצוני מוכרחני להעיר עוה”פ על זה שכתבתי כנראה רק ברמז קל עד עתה, שלהצלחת המוסד אהלי יוסף יצחק ליובאוויטש אשר…, מוכרח שתהי’ שביעות רצון של הרב …, ומובן שזה אי אפשר להעשות ע”י שמכריחים אותם ותובעים קבלת עול וביו”ב, וכמובן גם מספר תניא קדישא, שאף שענין קבלת עול הוא ראשית העבודה ועיקרה ושרשה וכו’, אבל היא ראשית והפעולה ואחרי כן מוכרח שיהי’ גם ענין של תענוג, ולהנ”ל כו”כ טענות, אף שבפירוש מדגישים שאין באים בטענה לאיש כי אם על המצב, אבל סו”ס להצלחת העבודה אין בזה נפק”מ כ”כ וכיון שהשגחה העליונה העמידתו הוא על הנהלת המוסד האמור במחנם הט’, בודאי שניתנה לו היכולת לסדר הענינים שהעובדים במוסד הק’ יהיו שבעים רצון יהי’ להם פרנסתם מתאים להמקום בו נמצאים וע”ד המצוע בבני ישראל הדרים שם, בני ישראל מחוגים שלהם ובסביבתם, והנ”ל מכריח ג”כ שלא יהי’ אצלם רושם שאין להם כל דיעה באיזה ענין שיהי’, אף שמדגיש הנני עוד הפעם, שבכל מכתביהם של הנ”ל נרגש ומודגש שאין להם טענה לאיש כי אם להמצב.

ועוד להוסיף שלאחרי הנסיעות של … שיש מפרשים אותה כאן כענין של בריחה, ולאחר בסכסוכים שהיו בעבר בין אנ”ש…, צריכים התאמצות יתירה, שיתנהלו כל הענינים בלי סרכות וכו’ וכו’, שהרי מפרסמים ענינים כגון זה בתוככי אנ”ש ועאכו”כ בתוככי אלו שאינם אוהדים לאנ”ש ומפרשים אותם באופנים שונים, והרי ענין דמוציא שם טוב קשה לשנות לאחרי שמתפשט קול, וכרשום בזכרוני סיפר הרב”צ שי’ שם טוב שבהיותו … דברו ג”כ עמו ועם זוגתו שתחי’ בהכרח זהירות והנהגה האמורה.