Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (5680)	2/14/2001 11:01:11 AM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

I didn't agree with the court ruling, BTW I could say I either agree or disagree, or don't know about the court ruling depending on what aspect you are talking about. I think the teacher should not have been fired for what he did esp. with no clear rule requireing teachers to inform in these situations. He did lie about the case but it wasn't like he was under oath or even being asked as part of a formal inquiry. Maybe he could get suspended or a letter or reprimand put in his record but firing him was probably too much in this case. In that sense I disagree with the ruling. I agree with the ruling in the sense that I do think it should be easier to fire teachers, without everything having to go through 6 levels of revue and then end up in court. I don't know about the ruling as a matter of law. I don't know the aplicable laws, regulations, and school district rules for public schools in Boston. I also don't know the details of the union contract that the teachers work under. Tim