Teaching Fired for a Tweet...

[n_huffhines]

You and yours have tried to take religious stuff out of school for a while now under the guise of separation of church and state ignoring freedom of speech and freedom of expression. But the leftist are ok with advancement of the religion of lbgtq

No I haven't. I don't even care if public schools do a section on creationism.

Weird that you ignored the part about religious Christmas songs still flying.

 

[NurseGoodVol]

Garcetti’s Impact on Teachers ✦ OnLabor

Not entirely correct. If what you said was true ... then we couldn't have cops like Frank Serpico, publicly exposing police corruption.

Garcetti v. Ceballos did not overturn Pickering v. Board of Education ... it just made it more difficult to invoke. This is where the question of whether or not the teacher was acting as "a citizen upon matters of public concern" is critical.

If yes, then the court proceeds to balance the employee's free speech interest against the government employer's interest in efficiency and stability.

If not, then when employees speak "pursuant to their official duties," they don't speak as "citizens for First Amendment purposes", and thus lack Constitutional protection.

It is complicated ... but I believe that she was discussing a matter of public concern.

However, as what I just posted says ... when applied to public education, the teachers usually lose.

I want to see this go to court. Alot of what’s been said is guesswork without facts in hand. I would like to read the communications between her and admin.

 

[CobbVol]

She is definitely not a whistleblower.

 

[UT-Rex]

I want to see this go to court. Alot of what’s been said is guesswork without facts in hand. I would like to read the communications between her and admin.

"Superintendent James Sebert said at the time that the decision to pull the song was based on "whether it was appropriate for the age and maturity level of the students" and because of "social or personal impacts" on them." Waukesha coalition calls on superintendent to be investigated (jsonline.com)

Here, in the context of the song's lyrics, M.Cyrus says "politics always drives my music" ; seems like the SB decided her political message was inappropriate for these students (which, interestingly, seems to actually fit what BowlBrother said) /// it looks to some observers as though the SB has a strong case.

i.e. if BowlBrother is correct, then the teacher should be focusing on cirruculum-performances that the students can understand (<< this seems to be the Super's position, to ban the song in the first place as "(in)appropriate for the age and maturity level of the students" ).

Yeah ... thinking about it more. It is just over a song that the kids might not even understand the meaning of. It probably won't go her way.

When I was a kid, I used to think that Y.M.C.A. by The Village People was about the fitness center chain. I was well into my 20's by the time someone clued me in that they were talking about a gay night club in NYC.

 

[UT-Rex]

The issue at hand is more complicated than that ....

Pickering v. Board of Education

Who is this guy? LOL.

Yeah ... thinking about it more. It is just over a song that the kids might not even understand the meaning of. It probably won't go her way.

When I was a kid, I used to think that Y.M.C.A. by The Village People was about the fitness center chain. I was well into my 20's by the time someone clued me in that they were talking about a gay night club in NYC.

Yeah, I got to thinking more about what you said -- "a song that the kids might not even understand the meaning of" -- in context of your citing past court cases :

"Superintendent James Sebert said at the time that the decision to pull the song was based on "whether it was appropriate for the age and maturity level of the students" and because of "social or personal impacts" on them." Waukesha coalition calls on superintendent to be investigated (jsonline.com)

it seems,

a. in context of the song, it seems the lyrics are political-based (Ms. Cyrus stated "politics always drives my music")
b. the school board reviewed the option to include or ban the song (from the concert), where upon review of lyrics
c. apparently, the board decided the song was not "appropriate for the age and maturity level of the students" in the same context as you're claiming it is "a song that the kids might not even understand the meaning of" (in political arena)

d. then, ^^ if you're correct, some observers might easily conclude that the parents need to really consider the intent of why the teacher would have students perform "a song that the kids might not even understand the meaning of" << i.e. who was the message for ???

 

[Orangeslice13]

Who is this guy? LOL.

You have no idea.
I play a game. He will quote you over and over if you really get under his skin. My record is 9 Rex responses to one post.

 

[Majors]

Replace the songs they sang with hymns and see how things change.

Yahtzee! And we know how that ends.

 

[allvol123]

Whistleblowing often does involve the reporting of crimes, but it doesn't necessarily have to involve criminal activity.

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence defines whistleblowing as :

Revealing information about activity within a public or private organization that is deemed illegal, immoral, unsafe, or fraudulent.

That definition touches nothing that happened here.

 

[BowlBrother85]

She is definitely not a whistleblower.

She's not a whistleblower ... but she could still be addressing a matter of public concern. Although, more context would be needed to make that determination.

I tend to agree that she made a big deal out of something which should not have been that important. However, teachers should have the right to be publicly critical of school administrators when they believe the best interests of the school children are not being well-served.

The part that bothers me about this, is the school board defending it's decision with "This was bad for the school district." What they are really saying is "Whatever is bad for the school board is bad for the school district," ... and that is horse $hit.

They just didn't like being criticized.

 

[BowlBrother85]

That definition touches nothing that happened here.

I didn't say she was a whistleblower. She's not ... but it could be interpreted that she was addressing a matter of public concern = the best interests of school children.

... and in that same sense, she is not committing insubordination - as is also true of whistleblowers.

 

[UT-Rex]

She's not a whistleblower ... but she could still be addressing a matter of public concern. Although, more context would be needed to make that determination.

I tend to agree that she made a big deal out of something which should not have been that important. However, teachers should have the right to be publicly critical of school administrators when they believe the best interests of the school children are not being well-served.

The part that bothers me about this, is the school board defending it's decision with "This was bad for the school district." What they are really saying is "Whatever is bad for the school board is bad for the school district," ... and that is horse $hit.

They just didn't like being criticized.

I didn't say she was a whistleblower. She's not ... but it could be interpreted that she was addressing a matter of public concern = the best interests of school children.

... and in that same sense, she is not committing insubordination - as is also true of whistleblowers.

You have "matter of public concern" backwards (otherwise: source?) --

"of public concern" is from the School Board's perspective (not the teacher's / / in this case, it is not the teacher's prerogative to rule her desires (of having her class perform a song that the SB deemed inappropriate for the age group) as a matter public concern) --

source: ""Tempel's actions caused 'substantial disruption and safety concerns,' district officials said""
Waukesha teacher who criticized 'Rainbowland' ban has been fired (jsonline.com)


"The school's "controversial issues" policy defines controversial issues as any topic "on which opposing points of view have been promulgated by responsible opinion; which may be the subject of intense public argument, disagreement or disapproval; which may have political, social or personal impacts on students and/or the community; and which is likely to arouse both support and opposition in the community."

"Superintendent James Sebert said at the time that the decision to pull the song was based on "whether it was appropriate for the age and maturity level of the students" and because of "social or personal impacts" on them."

 

[UT-Rex]

I didn't say she was a whistleblower. She's not ... but it could be interpreted that she was addressing a matter of public concern = the best interests of school children.

... and in that same sense, she is not committing insubordination - as is also true of whistleblowers.

According to the following source, she created what you're referring to as "matter of public concern" (i.e. the School Board deemed the song a "safety concern" (regarding the age-appropriateness of its political or other messages) --

source: ""Tempel's actions caused 'substantial disruption and safety concerns,' district officials said""
Waukesha teacher who criticized 'Rainbowland' ban has been fired (jsonline.com)


Where are you getting "a matter of public concern" ?

 

[allvol123]

I didn't say she was a whistleblower. She's not ... but it could be interpreted that she was addressing a matter of public concern = the best interests of school children.

... and in that same sense, she is not committing insubordination - as is also true of whistleblowers.

Wrong and wrong. She was doing nothing but avoiding the proper channels for her grievance and airing them in a completely inappropriate channel.

Good riddance.

 

[clarksvol00]

Interesting dichotomy here. Seems like some of the "twitter can't ban me, my employer can't make me get the shot" crowd have gone over to the "business makes the rules" side.

 

[PEPPERJAX]

No I haven't. I don't even care if public schools do a section on creationism.

Weird that you ignored the part about religious Christmas songs still flying.

I will cling to jingle bells for as long as it takes.

 

[clarksvol00]

I will cling to jingle bells for as long as it takes.

Clinging to your jingle bells seems kind of infantile.

 

[UT-Rex]

Interesting dichotomy here. Seems like some of the "twitter can't ban me, my employer can't make me get the shot" crowd have gone over to the "business makes the rules" side.

So, you're saying it's case by case. All 3 of these issues are not identical.

Regarding this case (the teacher could have appealed the early-decision, prior to voicing her concerns publicly) --

"He told the music teacher that his concern with the song by Miley Cyrus and Dolly Parton stemmed from Cyrus, who he said has previously promoted content inappropriate for young children. Schneider approved the song "Rainbow Connection," a sing-along from Kermit the Frog. He noted that rainbows were "not at all" a concern.

"If the students are Googling or researching one of the artists, some inappropriate images or videos could appear. I just felt there were better options for a first-grade concert," Schneider said, referring to Cyrus."

Waukesha teacher who criticized 'Rainbowland' ban has been fired (jsonline.com)

 

[BowlBrother85]

Wrong and wrong. She was doing nothing but avoiding the proper channels for her grievance and airing them in a completely inappropriate channel.

Good riddance.

We don't know that she hadn't exhausted every option towards reaching her desired resolution. That is something that would be established through discovery, if there is a law suit filed.

.... and I can't help but believe that the right wing echo chamber here would be more sympathetic to her, and stand a little more firmly behind the First Amendment, if she had been fired for posting tweets which were critical of her school board for mandating masks during the COVID pandemic in 2020.

Hell, in a case such as that ... there be nothing but First Amendment squawking on here. It's what this teacher was complaining about that bothers you. Of course, I don't expect any of you to be honest enough to admit that.

 

[BowlBrother85]

Interesting dichotomy here. Seems like some of the "twitter can't ban me, my employer can't make me get the shot" crowd have gone over to the "business makes the rules" side.

Exactly my point in my post up above ... The right wing echo chamber here only cares about the First Amendment when it involves the speech of a conservative.

 

[UT-Rex]

We don't know that she hadn't exhausted every option towards reaching her desired resolution. That is something that would be established through discovery, if there is a law suit filed.

.... and I can't help but believe that the right wing echo chamber here would be more sympathetic to her, and stand a little more firmly behind the First Amendment, if she had been fired for posting tweets which were critical of her school board for mandating masks during the COVID pandemic in 2020.

Hell, in a case such as that ... there be nothing but First Amendment squawking on here. It's what this teacher was complaining about that bothers you. Of course, I don't expect any of you to be honest enough to admit that.

We do (but if they want to file "a law suit" (your wording) to dispute the jsonline's reporting / to divulge the "hundreds of "threatening" emails) , it's their right) --

"Rather than speak with Mark Schneider directly, Ms. Tempel took to a widespread media campaign challenging the district's motives, misrepresenting the facts of her lying motivations to further her own interests rather than those of her students," Katt said in her opening statement.

Tempel's actions caused "substantial disruption and safety concerns," Katt said, which necessitated an increased security presence at Heyer Elementary and diverting district resources to respond to media inquiries. She said the school received "hundreds of emails, calls, voicemails, many of which contained vulgar, obscene and threatening language."

"This continued to build during the week of the school's spring break. Mr. Schneider will tell you he was concerned for the safety of the students and staff at the school, and he worked with Sebert and then Waukesha School District deputy superintendent Joe Koch to have an increased police presence at the school," Katt said.
Waukesha teacher who criticized 'Rainbowland' ban has been fired (jsonline.com)

 

[BowlBrother85]

We do (but if they want to file a law suit to dispute the jsonline's reporting, it's their right) --

"Rather than speak with Mark Schneider directly, Ms. Tempel took to a widespread media campaign challenging the district's motives, misrepresenting the facts of her lying motivations to further her own interests rather than those of her students," Katt said in her opening statement.

Tempel's actions caused "substantial disruption and safety concerns," Katt said, which necessitated an increased security presence at Heyer Elementary and diverting district resources to respond to media inquiries. She said the school received "hundreds of emails, calls, voicemails, many of which contained vulgar, obscene and threatening language."

"This continued to build during the week of the school's spring break. Mr. Schneider will tell you he was concerned for the safety of the students and staff at the school, and he worked with Sebert and then Waukesha School District deputy superintendent Joe Koch to have an increased police presence at the school," Katt said.
Waukesha teacher who criticized 'Rainbowland' ban has been fired (jsonline.com)

Dude, I think you're kind of weird ... which is fine ... but I'm not going to be responding to your posts (after this one).

 

[UT-Rex]

Dude, I think you're kind of weird ... which is fine ... but I'm not going to be responding to your posts (after this one).

The subject teacher and counselor likely think the same thing about the School Board (and as I understand it, we are not required to be responding to any others' posts).

 

[allvol123]

We don't know that she hadn't exhausted every option towards reaching her desired resolution. That is something that would be established through discovery, if there is a law suit filed.

.... and I can't help but believe that the right wing echo chamber here would be more sympathetic to her, and stand a little more firmly behind the First Amendment, if she had been fired for posting tweets which were critical of her school board for mandating masks during the COVID pandemic in 2020.

Hell, in a case such as that ... there be nothing but First Amendment squawking on here. It's what this teacher was complaining about that bothers you. Of course, I don't expect any of you to be honest enough to admit that.

You are so lost.

What this teacher is complaining about is that she didn’t get her song and she didn’t get her song based on some anti alphabet mindset. And you and your ilk fall lock step right in behind her.

Her boss made a decision to change songs. Normal people experience this scenario all the time. Only dumbasses then take to social media to disparage their employer for not getting their way over such an inconsequential decision.

 

[85SugarVol]

Interesting dichotomy here. Seems like some of the "twitter can't ban me, my employer can't make me get the shot" crowd have gone over to the "business makes the rules" side.

Twitter can absolutely ban you.
And your employer can fire you for refusal to jab.

And private business absolutely makes the rules. Or at least should.

My only concern here is that she was a government employee.

 

[BowlBrother85]

You are so lost.

What this teacher is complaining about is that she didn’t get her song and she didn’t get her song based on some anti alphabet mindset. And you and your ilk fall lock step right in behind her.

Her boss made a decision to change songs. Normal people experience this scenario all the time. Only dumbasses then take to social media to disparage their employer for not getting their way over such an inconsequential decision.

I have said her complaint is trite ... but a teacher does have First Amendment protection when they are being publicly critical of their administration over matters concerning the best interests of children ... because that is of public concern.