Principal Misconduct?

[EducLawHelp]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? New Jersey

Can a principal be fired for having a blog on which he writes an article about a book he read about hiring ***holes and one line in his article states "as we lovingly call all the parents ***holes?

[Zigner]

Originally Posted by EducLawHelp

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? New Jersey

Can a principal be fired for having a blog on which he writes an article about a book he read about hiring ***holes and one line in his article states "as we lovingly call all the parents ***holes?

Maybe. Depends on his contract I suppose.

[vollbree88]

What a teacher/principle does in their free time they are free to do. Read up on Pickering Vs. The Board of Education. I'm not saying that applies to this situation, but it very well may.

Teachers are free to express their opinions--and yes they blog too. I'm not condoning what this Principle may or may not have done, but you'll have to give more information. Really, what someone does on their free time is merely their choice. They are free to give their own opinions as a regular citizen of your county rather than that of Principle.

[perroloco2]

Originally Posted by vollbree88

What a teacher/principle does in their free time they are free to do. Read up on Pickering Vs. The Board of Education.

I disagree that Pickering v BOE provides a blanket statement that whatever a teacher or principal does on his free time cannot result in termination.

School employees who engage in illegal behavior outside of school are certainly subject to termination.

Part of the decision in Pickering was based on the belief that Pickering's letter did not affect the best interests of the school, nor was it "detrimental to the efficient operation and administration of the schools of the district" as the Board stated. If the US Supreme Court had found otherwise, I believe the decision would have been different.

Teachers are free to express their opinions--and yes they blog too ..... Really, what someone does on their free time is merely their choice. They are free to give their own opinions as a regular citizen of your county rather than that of Principle.

If you read the footnotes of the decision, I think you'll find that this simply isn't always true. Teachers and principals can, and have been, dismissed as a result of something that was said or done on their free time. If it affects the operation of the school or the employee's role in the school, then the termination will probably be upheld.

The principal's comment about parents (as we lovingly call all the parents ***holes) is one of those actions that may certainly result in his dismissal, especially if parents find it and complain (and the termination is supported by state code).

[EducLawHelp]

Originally Posted by perroloco2

I disagree that Pickering v BOE provides a blanket statement that whatever a teacher or principal does on his free time cannot result in termination.

School employees who engage in illegal behavior outside of school are certainly subject to termination.

Part of the decision in Pickering was based on the belief that Pickering's letter did not affect the best interests of the school, nor was it "detrimental to the efficient operation and administration of the schools of the district" as the Board stated. If the US Supreme Court had found otherwise, I believe the decision would have been different.



If you read the footnotes of the decision, I think you'll find that this simply isn't always true. Teachers and principals can, and have been, dismissed as a result of something that was said or done on their free time. If it affects the operation of the school or the employee's role in the school, then the termination will probably be upheld.

The principal's comment about parents (as we lovingly call all the parents ***holes) is one of those actions that may certainly result in his dismissal, especially if parents find it and complain (and the termination is supported by state code).

The main blog was about a book that was written called the No A**Hole Rule. Basically it was the principal's take on how he interpreted the book and how he was going to use what he learned in the book when it came to hiring his staff. The last line said it will teach you how to deal with the pesky, pernicious parents whom we lovingly call in the copy room "A**holes.

[cbg]

CAN he be fired for this? Unless his contract specifically says otherwise, yes.

MUST he be fired for this? Unless his contract specifically says otherwise, no.

[tranquility]

There are all kinds of ways to do things. Even if the cited case applies, that could not be the reason if things are worded correctly. A principal should not anger the parents if he wants to maintain his job.