The plaintiff was allegedly encouraged to resign due to a questionable posting on

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "The plaintiff was allegedly encouraged to resign due to a questionable posting on"

Ralf Walters
5 years ago
Views:

1 Running Head: CASE STUDIES A-B 1 Case Studies A-B EPDS 553 Daniel Jay Cottell Case Study A: Payne v. Barrow County School District Date: August 2009 Plaintiff: Ashley Renee Payne Defendant: Barrow County School District Summary: The plaintiff was allegedly encouraged to resign due to a questionable posting on Facebook and sued the school district for violation of state labor law. Ashley Renee Payne posted pictures holding drinks while on vacation in Europe and added a post with inappropriate language. After being called in to a meeting with no warning of the content; she alleges to have been wrongfully coerced (Storrs, 2009, p. 4) to resign without being informed of her legal rights. Suspension was identified as the alternative to the resignation and it is alleged that her future teaching opportunities were threatened as well, should she have chosen the suspension. The school principal claimed to be acting in response to a parent complaint which was later determined to be from an anonymous source. The plaintiff noted that her security settings were high and her Facebook page was private. She had no students or parents added as friends which would have granted them access to postings. There were fellow staff members as Facebook friends and it is suspected that a fellow teacher made the complaint. The head of the Professional Standards Commission is noted to have said that an anonymous complaint would not have been investigated (Downey, 2011). There is also no mention of previous disciplinary action of any nature and no other complaints are stated in the teacher s record. Shortly after tendering a resignation letter that was drafted with the administrator s assistant, in the same room and on the same day that the resignation was given; the plaintiff s

2 Running Head: CASE STUDIES A-B 2 counsel submitted a request for the case to be heard as required by the Georgia Fair Dismissal Act. Along with this request was a motion for Payne to have her resignation rescinded. This request was denied and no hearing was offered. The plaintiff escalated the action to the case being discussed and her lawyer makes a good argument in the submission. Payne s resignation is identified with referral to her being constructively terminated (Storrs, 2009, p. 5) and every attempt is made to identify the resignation as being obtained illegally. There are three actions sought by the plaintiff: 1) the Barrow County School District will provide notice of charges against Ms. Payne 2) the Barrow County School District will compensate Ms. Payne under the terms of her contract until she is provided with a hearing to address the charges 3) that Ms. Payne be reimbursed for all legal fees incurred Decision: The judge found that the denied appeal for a hearing was within the school district s legal right as Ms. Payne was not actually terminated and no charges for misconduct were brought forth. He could not support a rescinded resignation due to the fact that the contract that was in place at the time had expired by the date of court appearance. Ms. Payne s attorney noted the decision was expected given the time taken but noted that monetary damages will be sought in further claims. An apparent issue is with Georgia law in that a forced resignation doesn t equal an involuntary termination (Downey, 2011). A blog I read around the time of the initial occurrence is very supportive of Ms. Payne and suspects other teacher(s) of inappropriately finding a way to get her fired. Within two hours of the superintendent getting the anonymous , Ms. Payne s career was effectively over (Downey, 2009).

3 Running Head: CASE STUDIES A-B 3 Case Study B: Rubino v. City of New York Date: May 2013 Plaintiff: Christine Rubino Defendant: City of New York Summary: This appeal is brought forth by the New York City Department of Education in order to dispute a lower court decision (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department). The decision from the original case ruled that a teacher s termination was to be overturned and she was reinstated. The plaintiff in this case was fired for posting an inappropriate Facebook comment that alluded to a potentially convenient death for her Grade 5 students which contained in the post a declaration that I HATE THEIR GUTS and They are the devil s spawn (Milam-Perez, 2013). The death of a student from another school occurred the day before at a local beach and Rubino posted how a class visit to the beach would be a good idea. This was followed with the comments mentioned above. It was a friended teaching colleague that brought the post forward to school administration and thus began the investigation. The comments in question were deleted three days after the original post. Interestingly, when Rubino was first questioned about the post; she lied and said that a friend had posted when she had left her account open on her computer. The friend backed this claim and when questioned in a hearing and faced with potential incarceration for perjury, she then told the truth.

4 Running Head: CASE STUDIES A-B 4 Decision: The teacher in this case, Christine Rubino; was vindicated in both the initial and the appellate court decisions in that the termination was declared to be unwarranted and the Department of Education was directed to impose a lesser penalty. This determination was based on a number of factors. Rubino was seen to be venting after a frustrating day and expressed sincere remorse while recognizing the inappropriateness and offensive nature of the comments. A reasonable presumption of comments made being for private eyes only was also noted in the courts decision and her unblemished record of 15 years was also taken into account. Rubino s Facebook settings were high and she had not friended any students or parents as it was a colleague who brought the post forward. The lies that were initially told to cover up the post were overlooked in the decision as Rubino was seen to be afraid for the loss of her livelihood and not conducting actions through a premeditated plan (Milam-Perez, 2013). This decision of the appellate court upheld a lower court order setting aside the termination and sending the case back down for imposition of a lesser penalty (Yip, 2013).

5 Running Head: CASE STUDIES A-B 5 Comments We have heard in our own program of administrators dictating parameters for teachers after hour s activities. We can all agree that teachers should not be drinking excessively in their home communities in a public location and a DUI would likely/potentially incur further action by the school board. A simple photo with a beverage should not have been taken to this degree of action (Case A). I have seen one of my division s administrators on the front page of the sports section holding a beer at a CFL game. I personally host wine tastings through our local library. How can we have such a different standard when it comes to implied consumption? Some photos do much more damage than others but simply holding a drink cannot be this serious. Comments posted on Facebook or through any other means cannot be made in haste when judgment may not be at its best. The nature of the comments made in Case B makes me think that the courts got this one wrong. Teachers cannot be this naïve when using social media and the attempt to cover the post up make it appear twice as bad, regardless of her record of employment and the expression of remorse. Social media must be engaged in with extreme caution and teachers must recognize that they are always in the public eye. What goes on Facebook stays on who knows how many servers and privacy in a digital age is an illusion.

S17Y1593. IN THE MATTER OF JOHN F. MEYERS. This disciplinary matter is before the Court on the report of the Review

In the Supreme Court of Georgia Decided: December 11, 2017 S17Y1593. IN THE MATTER OF JOHN F. MEYERS. PER CURIAM. This disciplinary matter is before the Court on the report of the Review Panel, which recommends