tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29571009.post8351069102043487774..comments2022-03-02T17:47:57.151-08:00Comments on Edmonds School District Weblog: Superintendent's "Open Door Policy" is a sham.ESD15.orghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13226260553219032275noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29571009.post-72496231123905630412008-10-22T19:56:00.000-07:002008-10-22T19:56:00.000-07:00Having been a part of a union Labor Mgment Committ...Having been a part of a union Labor Mgment Committee I know that members will not come forward because they don't trust that their name won't be used. I know that sometimes HR ask who the person is so they can deal with the issue directly with the employee. So to be annoymous in the LMC is not always the way to go. I would not use those groups for anything that I consider could lead to me being dismissed from my job. I know that our committee did not give out names at all. The union repres. used our names so the member would not be damaged in any way. I worry about how that will go with new union leadership and very green and easily swayed. She already gave away work that went from OP group to the Prof. Tech. group and did it without thinking of how it afffects our members.<BR/><BR/>Through the eyes of Linda HAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29571009.post-32163588302855380782008-10-22T19:24:00.000-07:002008-10-22T19:24:00.000-07:00OK. An employee who works in their own office or ...OK. An employee who works in their own office or cubicle would be expected to be productive during the time of their work day, right? General standards of work ethics applying, doesn't it make sense that anyone, in any job, would see it upon their duty to fulfill the expectations of the job by performing at levels that bring success for the institution for which they work? Bear with me, please. I understand that we are all unique individuals that bring strengths and weaknesses to our positions--with an overall effect of working towards the greater good for all. I'm confused as to the fairness being applied to educators in our buildings across the district. During "professional development days" (otherwise known as non-student days), the educator's classroom turns into a location for expected productivity during individual time granted by the contract between the district and the union. Why then, does it seem that some educators feel that they can leave after the building time is over and go home at noon--without notifying their immediate supervisor, in this case, the principal? Wouldn't any employee in any situation be required to notify their supervisor of the desire to leave before the end of the work day? I remember reading a list of activities that were considered viable options for use of individual time and agreed upon by the district and union. I want clarification about that list. I also understand if someone chooses to work extra hours before school or after school and then, proceed to ask their principal if they could leave early on an individual day because of long hours that particular week. The key point being the notification to the principal happening. So....<BR/>I want to try the open door policy by letting my union president know of my concern. I think that the use of individual time varies greatly across our district and principals are not holding their staff members accountable to the agreed upon list of activities set forth in the past. Listen, I just want clarification so we all know what is OK and not OK in regards to the use of individual time. I trust that my union president will discuss this matter with all building representatives--but would also like this to be discussed at the principal/superintendant meeting held once a week. We need answers.<BR/>I will be satisfied when I see a memo from the district with support from the union--in agreement--on how individual time should be used. We all work hard so let's all play by the rules we agree upon. I love working for the Edmonds School District--always have--but, lately, it seems my confidence is shaken due to "double-speak" on many issues that affect the morale of us all.<BR/>Hope to hear from the district on this issue.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29571009.post-9970202193403951552008-10-22T15:29:00.000-07:002008-10-22T15:29:00.000-07:00Currently, I'm in Minneapolis holding my brother's...Currently, I'm in Minneapolis holding my brother's hand as he dies from cancer. Otherwise, I'd be standing outside his door tomorrow morning. But then again, we haven't been "anonymous" since June 2005. They ignored us then, they'll continue to do so now; he and his staff have had many opportunities to "do the right thing." It just isn't in their collective interest to do so. No reason to hold your breath waiting.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29571009.post-78973674619003395282008-10-22T12:11:00.000-07:002008-10-22T12:11:00.000-07:00The way I read this is; a concerned citizen asked ...The way I read this is; a concerned citizen asked a valid question of Nick and the Board members; Nick chose not to respond with a clear answer. How does one get answers when the Superintendent can't help? Perhaps these questions should be forwarded to Olympia to Terry Bergeson, who may be able to help the concerned citizen get an answer and then ask the Superintendent if he needs help in responding to citizens and taxpayers. Nick's "open door policy" is a "JOKE" - it just sounds good.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com