Nepotism on Fox schoolboard
Sam Ferry

United States

#1684 Apr 17, 2013
Albert wrote:
The previous maintenance people are grandfathered in, so no deminished pay. And no he was not a full time employed sub. Even if that were true which it's not, how would he even be considered the best candidate over 10 plus year custodian when the position was supposedly custodial 8 out of 12 months?
Hate to be a stickler, but before I drop the hammer here I just want to be sure I am correct.

Most if not all custodians have no desire to be a mower,(unless of course it is actually maintenence pay)so it is possible that no one with alot of years even gave a damn.

Didn't you or someone say earlier that it was originally posted as a drop in pay?
Albert

United States

#1685 Apr 17, 2013
It was posted as a single classified pay position, and unequivocally people with Years of experience applied....and then poof it turns into two positions and so on.....
Your

Saint Louis, MO

#1686 Apr 17, 2013
Sam Ferry wrote:
<quoted text>
Hate to be a stickler, but before I drop the hammer here I just want to be sure I am correct.
Most if not all custodians have no desire to be a mower,(unless of course it is actually maintenence pay)so it is possible that no one with alot of years even gave a damn.
Didn't you or someone say earlier that it was originally posted as a drop in pay?
Right. A lot of custodians passed up the job because it was the dreaded grass cutting at Custodial pay grade. They would have been thrilled to earn more money on Maint pay grade, and stated as such. So now, it has possibly been upgraded and given to a relative? That is wrong; but realize it is just hearsay at this point.
duh!

Fenton, MO

#1687 Apr 17, 2013
huh wrote:
<quoted text>Aren't all of the Salsman clan NEA?
Administrators cannot belong to a teachers union bonehead. They aren't teachers.
Sam Ferry

United States

#1688 Apr 17, 2013
Your wrote:
<quoted text>
Right. A lot of custodians passed up the job because it was the dreaded grass cutting at Custodial pay grade. They would have been thrilled to earn more money on Maint pay grade, and stated as such. So now, it has possibly been upgraded and given to a relative? That is wrong; but realize it is just hearsay at this point.
I do realize that it is hearsay and that is the problem. Is there something fishey, yeah I actually think there is. First if he was a sub and there was any other employee that wanted the job then it should have been theirs. After all even if it is not maintenance pay it is a daytime position. Secondly my son was supposed to train the guy to take his spot at Fox Elementary, which also could have been a coveted daytime position for many nightime custodians. Usually you don't train people for that job unless they are staying but at the last minute that switched. Wierd.
Tim

Brighton, MO

#1689 Apr 17, 2013
Sam, the focus should also be on how the position turned into two, and where the extra money came from to fund that position.
Sam Ferry

United States

#1690 Apr 17, 2013
Tim wrote:
Sam, the focus should also be on how the position turned into two, and where the extra money came from to fund that position.
Okay I really do not get this at all. I am sure that I am just stupid but why is that such a big deal? Maybe something changed? And why in God's name don't you just ask Todd Scott or somebody that would know?
Tim

Brighton, MO

#1691 Apr 17, 2013
Obviously I have a relative employed that prevents me from speaking directly to HR. you seem to have a following and some access to the truth. My point is if they don't have money for enough computers, books, etc. how can they justify this. I'm going by what I've heard , and read on here that this hiring stinks. They way I understand it is this, previously grass cutting was high pay, part time and no benefits. Then this year a relative wants a district job with benefits, and bam now he has a job coveted by other classified staff, and the best part taxpayers are holding the bag. If you add salary, benefits, pension for two people instead of one this bests the Nash hire. Also I believe you seem to have the morals to go after the wrong that is being done, when others cannot .
Sam Ferry

United States

#1692 Apr 17, 2013
Tim wrote:
Obviously I have a relative employed that prevents me from speaking directly to HR. you seem to have a following and some access to the truth. My point is if they don't have money for enough computers, books, etc. how can they justify this. I'm going by what I've heard , and read on here that this hiring stinks. They way I understand it is this, previously grass cutting was high pay, part time and no benefits. Then this year a relative wants a district job with benefits, and bam now he has a job coveted by other classified staff, and the best part taxpayers are holding the bag. If you add salary, benefits, pension for two people instead of one this bests the Nash hire. Also I believe you seem to have the morals to go after the wrong that is being done, when others cannot .
Dude, it is not obvious to me that you are related to someone, I'm sorry. I was just telling my son as you posted this last post that I have got to find out what the H this is all about. I do not believe the previous job was part time, it was at a higher rate of pay......before the turf. I think something is not right but it may not be as cut and dry as we think.

When I left the work on the athletic fields they replaced me with two guys....paid them both maintenance pay, and increased the pay to two other mowers to maintenance pay to help those guys with the fields as well as other work. I did the math on it once, it cost them at least an extra 65,000 to do the job I did for custodial pay. That was after looking me dead in the eye and telling me they could not increase my pay. Four years later, when I was fired, I reminded Dr. Critchlow in my email what a slap in the face that was to me and yet me calling John Hanson a feline was enough to end it. No one knows better than me how backwards it all is!

A note on the athletic fields position. There was a maintenance guy that did the job before me that also did it for custodial pay. I have always respected him because of his work ethic, he literally did the work of two men and then some! props to him!
Tim

Mount Vernon, MO

#1693 Apr 17, 2013
Thank you for understanding my dilemma, now just so I'm clear the people doing the athletic fields are still doing maintenance on the turf apparently it has to be maintained constantly just like the grass. The positions I'm talking about go around and cut perimeter grass at all buildings.
Sam Ferry

United States

#1694 Apr 17, 2013
Tim wrote:
Thank you for understanding my dilemma, now just so I'm clear the people doing the athletic fields are still doing maintenance on the turf apparently it has to be maintained constantly just like the grass. The positions I'm talking about go around and cut perimeter grass at all buildings.
Okay. Those perimiter mowers used to be payed custodial originally. That changed to maintenence pay right after I left the groundskeeper position. I remember a couple of them thanking me. Maybe,(and this is a huge maybe) they decided to drop the pay back down to custodial and it allowed them to essentially create two positions for nearly the same cost?

Whatever the case I am going to do some asking around and see if it can be clarified.
huh

United States

#1695 Apr 18, 2013
[QUOTE who="duh!"]<quote d text>Administrators cannot belong to a teachers union bonehead. They aren't teachers.[/QUOTE]
They aren't all administrators, douche
no, duh

United States

#1696 Apr 18, 2013
[QUOTE who="duh!"]<quote d text>Administrators cannot belong to a teachers union bonehead. They aren't teachers.[/QUOTE]

Effective leadership is fundamental to great public shools
Effective leadership is fundamental to providing a great public school for every child. School administrators perform key functions in the maintenance and development of schools, their faculty and their students. They manage school policies, regulations and procedures and also serve as key liaisons in their communities.
NEA supports these educational leaders to ensure that:

Curricula are effective
Students are learning and achieving in safe environments
School employees and teachers are nurtured, mentored, and qualified to lead the next generation
Administrators across the country are seeking professional compensation and development as well as support through collective bargaining.

NEA membership is open to administrators employed by public school districts. Active administrator members can serve as voting delegates to the Representative Assembly and hold elective and appointive positions in the Association.

Visit NEA Member Benefits for more information or contact the NEA affiliate in your state to become a member.
Albert

Mount Vernon, MO

#1697 Apr 18, 2013
Sam Ferry wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay. Those perimiter mowers used to be payed custodial originally. That changed to maintenence pay right after I left the groundskeeper position. I remember a couple of them thanking me. Maybe,(and this is a huge maybe) they decided to drop the pay back down to custodial and it allowed them to essentially create two positions for nearly the same cost?
Whatever the case I am going to do some asking around and see if it can be clarified.
Glad to see other people know what is going on, stacking the deck so to speak for positions and creating some for relatives. Disregarding senior employees, shame on Fox again.
Reality dog

United States

#1698 Apr 18, 2013
Come on people. Don't you remember the song ?
You deserve a break today from McDonald's
The kids can now supersize
Sam Ferry

United States

#1699 Apr 18, 2013
Albert wrote:
<quoted text>
Glad to see other people know what is going on, stacking the deck so to speak for positions and creating some for relatives. Disregarding senior employees, shame on Fox again.
You give me credit I don't deserve. Although I agree 100% with all those points, and I think the problem runs so deep that it can't be fixed without "cleaning house". In this particular case I'm not sure he can be lumped in with some of the other hires. Athough he worked part time as a mower, and for a while for the summer only, he also worked as a custodial sub which essentially made him a full time employee. Then he became a full time custodial floater. I do not believe he ever made maintenance pay, but that I could be wrong about. The fact that he was going to take over the daytime at Fox tells me he was not at maintenance pay. The only thing that is not clear is if there were employees with good records that applied and were overlooked. Seniority alone is not enough. I worked with custodians who had been around alot longer than me that were overlooked for positions they apllied for because the spent half their time reading instead of working. In this case it's not an issue of qualifications, everyone that applied was most likely qualified. Time will bring the facts out.

If there is anyone tbat has some good information on this, or just wants to "set me straight" then drop me an anonymous letter @....
Concerned Citizens For Change
P.O. Box 390
Arnold,Mo 63010
Peter

Rising Sun, MD

#1700 Apr 19, 2013
Paul wrote:
If someone on a board votes no, they are automatically grandstanding in your opinion? That is a rather skewed view. Could that board member just disagree with the views of the others? Is the lone Supreme Court dissenting judge grandstanding? Board members need not give the reason why they vote the way they do, maybe his questions had been answered and he had no comments he chose to make. That sounds reasonable to me.
No not automatically but when you are new on the BOE you do not even know where the bathrooms are yet. So yes this was grandstanding for show. A lone supreme court judge gives a "desenting" reason for his/her actions and trys to convince the others his view is the right one prior to the vote so your analogy is not good here. If you are voting NOT to hire new people then it is your obligation to explain to the people WHY you are voting no so others can have your insight and make the right decision (according to your views) for the school district.
Paul

Arnold, MO

#1701 Apr 19, 2013
There is no such requirement on a hire. These people are voting on behalf of the people, if one feels it is in the best interest of the people to vote against a hire, that IS his explanation.
Sam Ferry

United States

#1702 Apr 19, 2013
Peter wrote:
<quoted text>
No not automatically but when you are new on the BOE you do not even know where the bathrooms are yet. So yes this was grandstanding for show. A lone supreme court judge gives a "desenting" reason for his/her actions and trys to convince the others his view is the right one prior to the vote so your analogy is not good here. If you are voting NOT to hire new people then it is your obligation to explain to the people WHY you are voting no so others can have your insight and make the right decision (according to your views) for the school district.
I do not believe he was grandstanding. However you could just ask him. He has an email address at the district.

Actually he was better informed on the issues of that meeting than at lest 60% of the board. If you were there and payed attention you know that.

I bet anything he had already explained his veiwpoint to the rest of the board, he's not an idiot, he knows that right now there will be no swaying anyone.
hatred

Saint Louis, MO

#1703 Apr 19, 2013
The other night I was at the board meeting and saw the ex-Desoto Super there. Since then I can not get this HIRE out of my mind. I know it is old news,but the board voted to hire him as ASST. Super for FOX. I have tried to find anything positive about this man and can't. If this becomes a bad hire, CRICTHLOW and OLD BOARD should GO! If someone can explain the reason for the hire, please do so. Is he a relative of administration, friend or another bad decision by board. I guess time will tell.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Imperial Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Neighbors Fighting At Bottom of Hill on Carter (Oct '16) 1 hr Ricardo montobomb 77
~~15 Year Old Missing~~ 2 hr Izzy-_- 1
con artist beware 4 hr Melinda 3
Lindsay Owens (Jan '17) 5 hr Lindsays Man 3
Family of Bullies (May '16) 15 hr Sherminator 8
Questions == FOR ==== JOYCE == MEYER (Apr '13) 15 hr The Real Joyce Meyer 18
Is making your 4 year old son wear girls underw... Mon Sick 1

Imperial Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Imperial Mortgages