ADVERSE EMPLOYMENT ACTIONS AND PUBLIC SCHOOL ...

This category reiterated the middle management notion that was espoused at the very
beginning of the research study. The administrators identified in Table 41 were ensnared by
strife on one of two fronts and both in some instances. The administrators were either
experiencing strife with their followers (faculty, staff, school community), superiors (principals,
superintendents, school board), or both.
Interpersonal Strife with followers was the largest vein of cases as seen in Table 41.
Twelve cases were identified from the 21 marred with interpersonal strife.
Table 42
Interpersonal Strife--Failed Relationships with Followers
Case Year State Action PP
Lomas v. Bd. of School Dir. of Northwestern Lehigh School
Dist.
1982 PA R S
Alabama State Tenure Comm. v. Phenix City Bd. of Educ. 1985 AL R S
Spurlock v. Bd. of Trustees 1985 WY T SPLIT
Desoto Co. School Bd. v. Garrett 1987 MS NR E
Peterson v. Unified School Dist. 1989 KS NR S
Terry v. Woods 1992 WI R S
Brown v. Bd. of Educ. 1996 KS NR S
Howard v. Columbia Pub. School Dist. 2004 MO NR S
Reed v. Rolla 31 Pub. School Dist. 2005 MO NR S
Woods v. Enlarged City School Dist. 2007 NY T S
King v. Charleston Co. School Dist. 2009 SC R S
Herbert v. City of New York 2010 NY D SPLIT
The cases listed in Table 41 all share the description of interpersonal strife, but the
impetus for the interpersonal dilemmas varied somewhat and led to the distinction of three
causes for strife with followers.
First, administrators experienced interpersonal strife with followers in situations when
new programs were instituted or previous programs were modified to the dislike of the faculty,
362