15.08.2013 Views

ADVERSE EMPLOYMENT ACTIONS AND PUBLIC SCHOOL ...

ADVERSE EMPLOYMENT ACTIONS AND PUBLIC SCHOOL ...

ADVERSE EMPLOYMENT ACTIONS AND PUBLIC SCHOOL ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Conduct Unbecoming a School Administrator<br />

Maureen Booth was terminated from her position as principal of Sequoya Elementary<br />

School in Scottsdale Arizona. Ms. Booth was accused of altering test scores in order to secure<br />

incentive-based pay for her teachers. Booth vehemently denied these charges and went so far as<br />

to undergo and pass a lie detector test. It was, however, to no avail (Doherty, 2003). Behavior of<br />

this manner is certainly cause for adverse employment actions. Moreover, Sacken’s (1996) study<br />

primarily focused on those types of alleged misconduct that led to school administrators being<br />

demoted, reassigned, and/or terminated. To borrow from Sacken, this study created a portrait of<br />

the “explicit and implicit parameters of acceptable conduct” (p. 421). He did, however, point to<br />

adverse employment actions for fiscal prudence in his study. Sacken’s (1996) study is important<br />

as it helps to clarify the forms of misconduct that lead to adverse employment actions and<br />

ultimately litigation. Through his research of some 240 legal cases involving adverse<br />

employment actions against school administrators, Sacken identified five categories that led to<br />

adverse employment actions: fiscal exigency, ineptitude, outrageous conduct, self-destructive<br />

conduct, and poor institutional representation.<br />

Reductions in force are common place in most work environments, especially<br />

considering the current economic situation of the United States. Unfortunately, personnel choices<br />

that are based almost entirely on seniority are not always the soundest measure of decision<br />

making. Sacken (1996) explained that almost 10% of the legal proceedings he reviewed were<br />

squarely entrenched in the camp of adverse employment actions for fiscal exigency. Legal claims<br />

of demotion were generally unsuccessful unless a pay deduction was present. It was in Sacken’s<br />

opinion, however, a definite case of demotion in the eyes of the administrators adversely<br />

affected. He explains that “as long as administrators are financially rewarded at levels<br />

17

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!