Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Public employees do not have that right. As part of being a public employee, you have to accept that you do not have the same first amendment rights as everyone else.
Right.
School administrators especially have highly political jobs and they know it. In most states they can be reassigned even without reason or cause.
Alberto Iber, the Miami-Date principal, was reassigned, not fired. It goes with the job. When I taught public school, my beloved principal got herself caught in a political snafu and she was reassigned to a school librarianship job, with no loss of pay. I was more upset than she was, she understood that's what she had signed up for when she moved into admin. Mr. Iber likely does too. I wouldn't be surprised if he is also able to keep his pay. That's how it goes.
edit to add, the Miami Herald is one source that says he was reassigned, here's the quote:
Quote:
In a brief statement, the district said employees are required to conduct themselves, both personally and professionally, in a manner that represents the school district’s core values. The district said a replacement would be named shortly and that Iber would be reassigned to administrative duties.
Last edited by biscuitmom; 06-11-2015 at 10:35 PM..
I feel torn about this, as #1. the principal has a right to his opinion, why should he get fired for his opinion? ...
There's a difference between having an opinion, and having what is obviously a WRONG opinion. Especially if you're in a publicly funded job that pays you to know right from wrong. Not to mention not being smart enough to keep this kind of controversy off Facebook. The police officer himself has resigned. He admitted his actions were out of line and he has apologized. So he didn't need anyone defending actions that were inappropriate for an officer of the law.
If, indeed, this principal is in charge of a school that educates 98% minorities (as someone else posted here), then this particular wrong opinion outed him as inappropriate for his job, also. This is the way he thinks unruly teenagers should be dealt with? I'm not a minority but if I were I wouldn't want my child in a school led by a person who believes drawing a firearm on an unarmed teenager is A-OK ... and lacking the foresight to keep his dumb thoughts to himself.
The school superintendent hit the nail on the head when he said that parents should have the "expectation of common sense behavior that elevates the dignity and humanity of all, beginning with children.”
Last edited by Jukesgrrl; 06-12-2015 at 03:10 AM..
The Latino population is really growing, gaining wealth and strength. They're no longer just the guys at Home Depot asking to do your deck.
As it becomes obvious they are successful, they will no longer be considered Latino by the media. Anytime something happens, they will be referred to as white (which you could technically say they are) and be labeled as racists.
The cop pulling the gun acted appropriately to what he perceived as a threat. The cop that threw that girl to the ground may have been excessive but let's see what comes out in the investigation.
White people across the country are paying for the actions of our fathers from generations before. Right or wrong, it's too late to change the momentum because its here to stay. I feel the John Travolta movie from the 1990s accurately depicts the future of white people.
I don't know if he's white, Hispanic, or white-Hispanic, or non-white Hispanic. Whichever ...
in a school that's 85% black, it's dumb to publicly support a white cop, if you want to keep your job.
Keep in mind this is the same school district and superintendent that keeps crimes committed by black students within the school's PD instead of the sending it to the regular Miami-Dade PD.
Like I said before, I think an employer should have the right to fire an employee for ANY reason; therefore, I don't object to his removal.
For public employers, the 5th amendment applies to actions against employees (see the Loudermill Case). While you might believe that an employer should have the right to fire an employee for any reason, they don't. We place numerous restrictions on private employees (e.g. you cannot fire someone solely because of their race), but the Constitution itself binds public employers and they must give 5th amendment compliant due process to public employees, or else be liable for takings on the employee's property interest in continued employment.
(All employees, not just public employees, have a property interest in continued employment. But that property interest is protected by the 5th amendment when the government is the one who wants to take away that property interest without due process of law.)
Some really good reading here: http://law.justia.com/constitution/u...e-process.html
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
