Springboro School Board - Example of District Retaliation against Employee

[Bernie]

This is a disturbing event in this school district. This needs comment. Please watch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch...

[Springboro Neighbor]

Bernie wrote:

This is a disturbing event in this school district. This needs comment. Please watch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch...

I am a believer in there are two sides to every story. I would have to agree with Panther Parent from the other thread - not saying this isn't true, but what's the other side? My take on it is - when he discovered he was being laid off (which is exactly what everyone on this blog wants - the district to cut costs - isn't it?) he started thinking - hmm, why am I being laid off, but my superior isn't? He probably tried rattling his sabers to save his job and the admin reacted to that. It would be interesting to see or know just how he tried to "point out" some ways the district could save money (other than laying him off). My guess is, it wasn't quite as calm as he makes it out to be. Again, could be wrong though. Would like to hear the other side.

[Bernie]

Springboro Neighbor wrote:

<quoted text>
I am a believer in there are two sides to every story. I would have to agree with Panther Parent from the other thread - not saying this isn't true, but what's the other side? My take on it is - when he discovered he was being laid off (which is exactly what everyone on this blog wants - the district to cut costs - isn't it?) he started thinking - hmm, why am I being laid off, but my superior isn't? He probably tried rattling his sabers to save his job and the admin reacted to that. It would be interesting to see or know just how he tried to "point out" some ways the district could save money (other than laying him off). My guess is, it wasn't quite as calm as he makes it out to be. Again, could be wrong though. Would like to hear the other side.

First I think on everyone wants cost cutting, well yes. But what or whom you cut is important to. Blanket cuts is not the answer.

For him to "point out" ways the district could save money, at a meeting would take up a great deal of time. I would like to know too. These meetings though can take up to 3hrs or more.

If you were being laid off would you not rattle some sabers to protect your job? Look at his credentials, would he put his family up for ridicule if he did not have a point to stand on? He is former military. It is not common to question authority in the military.

Frankly if history would be the judge the district is not standing on good footing at this time.

[Truth]

Frankly, if you knew him as an employee you would understand why he was let go.

[a call for the truth]

Truth wrote:

Frankly, if you knew him as an employee you would understand why he was let go.

If that is the case, why has he been on PAID administrative leave since Feb. 2009?

[BoroLivin]

A call for the truth, you have a good point.

If a school employee is grossly violating laws, student teacher boundaries, or school policy, it's usually a big deal, news articles TV crews, and termination almost immediately. I can't think I've ever heard of a major violator being on paid adminstrative leave for months on end.

However, according to some teachers I know in other districts around ohio, paid administrative leave is the preferred weapon of choice by district officials to 'sweep under the rug' something that the board doesn't want the community to find out about.

I applaud the gentleman for standing up at the meeting and reading his remarks. Again, I'm ashamed of the board...

[hello]

Does anyone know how to spell his last name - I think we need to have him join us - on this blog.

[Janet]

I understand that cuts are needed. Executives of large corporations are taking big pay cuts, some as low as a dollar a year in salary. I also understand that our superintendent is also retired from another position with over $100,000 in retirement. If he really wants to help cut cost, why doesn't he take a $1.00/yr salary until things turn around, Getting rid of custonions and lower paid administrators is not the answer, START AT THE TOP

[hopeful1]

A 5% cut in pay across the board was suggested by some of the support staff, but as usual our suggestions were not welcome.

[Yea]

hopeful1 wrote:

A 5% cut in pay across the board was suggested by some of the support staff, but as usual our suggestions were not welcome.

are you a teacher or support person and how long have you been in the district?

[Speak truth to truth]

Truth wrote:

Frankly, if you knew him as an employee you would understand why he was let go.

Sounds like you have an ax to grind. What is your problem?

[hopeful1]

I am a support person and have been employed over 10 years.

[Hey Truth]

Truth wrote:

Frankly, if you knew him as an employee you would understand why he was let go.

Easy to speak from anonymity. This guy put his name out there and now you take a cheap shot at him. How about doing the same by putting your name out there too so others can do the same and while we're on it, lets ask the school administration to do an open survey (that would be a first) of the school staff (support and teachers) so that we can see what they say about his work.

[An Observation]

Shouldn't the school board, at the next Springboro school board meeting on May 12th, 2009, explain why this person was intitially placed on paid administrative leave, and continues to remain on paid adminstrative leave till his layoff on June 30th? It seems that the school board has a responsbility to explain the action that the school administration took against this person. Am I the only one who thought it was odd that the school board said nothing about this, especially in light of this persons remarks at the beginning of the last school board meeting on April 28th? It does seem that the ball is in the school boards court.

[Bernie]

An Observation wrote:

Shouldn't the school board, at the next Springboro school board meeting on May 12th, 2009, explain why this person was intitially placed on paid administrative leave, and continues to remain on paid adminstrative leave till his layoff on June 30th? It seems that the school board has a responsbility to explain the action that the school administration took against this person. Am I the only one who thought it was odd that the school board said nothing about this, especially in light of this persons remarks at the beginning of the last school board meeting on April 28th? It does seem that the ball is in the school boards court.

It could be tricky with liability and the like. It is public knowledge now though since it has been broadcast on tv so it maybe can be disscussed.

[The Truth]

Springboro Neighbor wrote:

<quoted text>
I am a believer in there are two sides to every story. I would have to agree with Panther Parent from the other thread - not saying this isn't true, but what's the other side? My take on it is - when he discovered he was being laid off (which is exactly what everyone on this blog wants - the district to cut costs - isn't it?) he started thinking - hmm, why am I being laid off, but my superior isn't? He probably tried rattling his sabers to save his job and the admin reacted to that. It would be interesting to see or know just how he tried to "point out" some ways the district could save money (other than laying him off). My guess is, it wasn't quite as calm as he makes it out to be. Again, could be wrong though. Would like to hear the other side.

Response... the other side from someone who happens to know a bit... his speech is exactly what it is. Please do not include guesses in your responses. By saying "probably" you are setting the stage of presuming things that just aren't true. This can really hurt someone. The "superior" you mentioned above has nothing to do with the situation. It is a simple case of getting the most for your economic dollar. The mentioning of other employees and their pay in his speech was a method to point out that laying him off did not result in great savings for the district and his productivity was greater than that of some of his peers who had greater pay. The result there was to suggest that he was layed off with unjust reasons. To my recollection, cutting cost ideas never involved cutting jobs or pay. They were simple helpful tasks that were ignored. The cost cutting ideas came before the lay off warning - not the other way around. So, pointing out anything to help your community save money was done out of concern, respect and loyalty to the district. He approached with concern and calm. But seemingly did rattle cages. But who has something to fear, than those who are doing something wrong? So, the question to ask is why "shut him up?"...Because the truth hurts. The actions taken by the district were unjust. This is a man who loyally served your schools because of his love for his job. He happened to get caught up in the politics and was unjustly hurt as a result.

[The Truth]

Truth wrote:

Frankly, if you knew him as an employee you would understand why he was let go.

Frankly, this sounds like a petty attempt to return to poor immature high school behavior. If you did really know him, you'd know about his loyalty to his job and to his employers, the people of your city. You would know about his dedication to finding ways to cut costs that everyone could do. He was a sharp employee who knew about the financial struggles your community faced and was looking to help. If you had individual personal disagreements, you are only one person. But to suggest that your personal feelings are reason for his unjust release from his job, and unjust paid admin leave has planted a seed in my mind and now I wonder just how far someone would go to hurt another person for personal reasons. A man's livelyhood has been hurt. And not just his, but his family's. Have you thought about the pain this has all caused? Can you imagine struggling to find a job in this poor economy because someone had personal issues with you even though you put your heart into your job and worked well and hard to do the right thing? No "Truth"... you do not know him.

[novoter]

Just found this website. A good one to keep up with the goings on at Springboro. I was ridiculed by a teacher in the Dayton Paper because I voted AGAINST the levy. Said my grammer revealed why I voted no. Wanted me to come join her for a day at school to see what she went through. I agree to that for any shool day in July. Wait, she is off in July and I am still paying her!

[Response to the truth]

"THE TRUTH"...you are probably him, someone in his family, or one of his friends...guarantee it.

[Richard Saunders]

Just to bump this thread back to top, I reposted the video of the employee speaking in front of the board.(Without his name and with his face blacked out as he requested) And I never did figure out exactly why youtube took down the original video -- if it was the guy in the video or the school district.

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

I also posted another good clip of Debtwiler calling out people who blog and visit topix. During a presenation discussing parts of the performance audit, the treasurer said for "..people to call the school to get the 'real facts' and don't blog or visit topix..."

http://www.youtube.com/watch...