I must be naive

[Loo]

So I've been having an argument. I'll preface this by saying I'm a writer, so obviously I'm very, very big on people's rights and protecting those rights up to a certain point (I usually agree with the ACLU, but the fact that they protect the KKK and other groups like that is disgustingly pathetic). Just for some background info.

Apparently, there's a teacher in my home town school district--not sure if it's high school or middle school, or even the gender. I do know that he is at least 21 years old. I'm going to assume it's a male, just for the sake of his post.

Said teacher is apparently very personable, and is friends with many of his students on Facebook. On this page, there are pictures of him drinking with his friends--all of which are over the age of 21. There are no pictures of him drinking with his students or even other members of the faculty.

One of the students, for whatever reason, reported this to the district. The teacher was fired a couple days later.

Maybe I'm an idiot, maybe I don't have all the facts--but I was outraged when I heard this, and called it BS. My knee-jerk reaction was court. If I'm that teacher, I'd be seeing red and looking for reimbursement and my job back.

They fired a teacher because he was doing something legal on a Friday night. That's unbelievable.

Yeah I understand that teachers can get fired over almost anything, so maybe I'm just arguing over how things "should" be and not that something was wrongfully done here. But to me, that's a disgrace.

Thoughts?

[mswerb]

In this day and age, we all have to watch what is posted on-line.
Maybe there was something else that prompted his firing. I find it hard to believe that no warnings were handed out before a firing. My wife has used facebook posts to track some of her fellow employees activities, such as posting that you are out and about for a few days without contacting your workplace.

[FUDU]

It is already common for employers to do searches for prospective and current employees on such social networking sites. It is becoming more common for these searches to result in certain judgments taking place in the work environment. IMO it crosses a line and there is zero way to keep things objective, subjectivity takes over.

My advice is for anyone using these social networking sites to not put out all of your personal info on these sits, maybe even avoid putting up pictures as well. I would definitely suggest against putting up much employment information. There are many ways to filter searches on these sites one of them being by employer, very easy for employers to find their people that way.

[exiledbuckeye]

What kind of idiot must that teacher be to "friend" his students on Facebook?

[Ziner]

What kind of idiot must that teacher be to "friend" his students on Facebook?

+1 I know a lot of teacher and not one friends any of their students. Make everything private and then only the people you want to see it sees your stuff. It isnt really that difficult.

[swerb]

What kind of idiot must that teacher be to "friend" his students on Facebook?

+1 I know a lot of teacher and not one friends any of their students. Make everything private and then only the people you want to see it sees your stuff. It isnt really that difficult.

Exactly. I'd fire him just on that poor decision making alone. Recipe for disaster. Then to post pictures of you drinking?

Stupid enough to do something like that, too stupid to be handling kids.

[Loo]

I understand looking at prospective employees' pages.

This is unreal. A guy can't teach kids because he goes out with friends on a Friday night and has a couple beers? Three of my buddies are education majors, and all returned with the same comment--"Being a teacher in Ohio sucks--no rights, no protection."

[swerb]

I understand looking at prospective employees' pages.

This is unreal. A guy can't teach kids because he goes out with friends on a Friday night and has a couple beers? Three of my buddies are education majors, and all returned with the same comment--"Being a teacher in Ohio sucks--no rights, no protection."

No - he can't teach kids cause he's stupid enough to friend his students on Facebook, then post pictures of him drinking on his Facebook page.

The act of drinking? Obviously fine. Posting pictures of you and some buds slammin a couple cold ones on FB? Fine as well. Unless you are a teacher that friends your students on FB. Or an airline pilot.

And BTW, I have several teacher friends here in OH. The benefits are excellent, as is the retirement deal where you can retire after 25 years and get like 65% of your salary for the rest of your life. I'm glad the state does that. We need to incent as many good people as humanly possible to become teachers. Nothing more important than the people teaching our youth.

When I was younger - salaries/benefits for Ohio teachers sucked compared to where they are now. It's one thing it appears this state has actually done right. I'm a small government guy, but I'll always support any law that makes it more beneficial to be a soldier, teacher, or police officer.

[Orenthal]

Naive is the right word. People can be pretty stupid when it comes to social networking. I can not fault an employer for making judgements based on a canidates FB page or even their credit score. The company is making an investment in that person, and should have, what I consider to be reasonable information.

Big reason why I have no FB page, it would take a swerb leak of my identity for people to see how truly f'd my opinions are...

Cannot have all this right wing hate speech if I am going back to work for the feds, now can I...

[Fire Marshall Bill]

The biggest assumption here as I see it is that all teachers are smart

The reality is that the education system is full of dumbasses like this one

Its just too easy to get a teaching degree and too hard to get rid of the crap

My sympathies tho to the good apples thrown into the same barrel but, you are what you unionize .... : )

[FUDU]

Naive is the right word. People can be pretty stupid when it comes to social networking. I can not fault an employer for making judgements based on a canidates FB page or even their credit score. The company is making an investment in that person, and should have, what I consider to be reasonable information.

Big reason why I have no FB page, it would take a swerb leak of my identity for people to see how truly f'd my opinions are...

Cannot have all this right wing hate speech if I am going back to work for the feds, now can I...

Really, a credit score?

Have to say I completely disagree with that.

[swerb]

Naive is the right word. People can be pretty stupid when it comes to social networking. I can not fault an employer for making judgements based on a canidates FB page or even their credit score. The company is making an investment in that person, and should have, what I consider to be reasonable information.

Big reason why I have no FB page, it would take a swerb leak of my identity for people to see how truly f'd my opinions are...

Cannot have all this right wing hate speech if I am going back to work for the feds, now can I...

Really, a credit score?

Have to say I completely disagree with that.

The credit score thing is a very touchy subject right now in employment circles. It's an argument I can see both sides of the fence on. I think, like with most things, you have to apply common sense if you are going to use credit score as part of the criteria by which you judge potential applicants by.

For example, to have a practice say where you will not hire anyone with a credit score below 640, is insanity. Some employers do that. You need to see the context. For example, if someone's credit score got dragged down by an unexpected medical expense, a bad divorce, or maybe something on the credit report they are disputing ... that's a totally different ball of wax than the guy that was employed, making 50-60k a year, and paid his $1000 mortgage payment late 5x in the last year.

I'm not hiring the latter guy. On the former, I want to talk to the candidate, hear their side of it, and use my brain ... not a FICO score to make the decision.

Here's the thing though. 11-12% unemployment in OH, there are so many GD applicants for almost every job out there. A lot of employers are using credit score to thin the herd of applicants before they start seriously considering candidates and bringing them in for second interviews.

Buddy of mine, recently got his teaching degree. Smart dude, I'd hire him to teach my kids in a second ... despite the fact he got a DUI recently. But that DUI ... man is it gonna screw him. Gonna be tough for him to even get considered, cause so many teachers are applying for every opening out there.

[FUDU]

The credit score thing a very touchy subject right now. It's an argument I can see both sides of the fence on. I think, like with most things, you have to apply common sense if you are going to use credit score as part of the criteria by which you judge potential applicants by.

For example, to have a practice say where you will not hire anyone with a credit score below 640, is insanity. Some employers do that. You need to see the context. For example, if someone's credit score got dragged down by an unexpected medical expense, a bad divorce, or maybe something on the credit report they are disputing ... that's a totally different ball of wax than the guy that was employed, making 50-60k a year, and paid his $1000 mortgage payment late 5x in the last year.

I'm not hiring the latter guy. On the former, I want to talk to the candidate, hear their side of it, and use my brain ... not a FICO score to make the decision.

Here's the thing though. 11-12% unemployment in OH, there are so many GD applicants for almost every job out there. A lot of employers are using credit score to thin the herd of applicants before they start seriously considering candidates and bringing them in for second interviews.

Buddy of mine, recently got his teaching degree. Smart dude, I'd hire him to teach my kids in a second ... despite the fact he got a DUI recently. But that DUI ... man is it gonna screw him. Gonna be tough for him to even get considered, cause so many teachers are applying for every opening out there.

My biggest problem with the credit score thing Rich is its relevance to somebody being able to perform the job at hand, and do so well. Context is key as you mention, but at the EOD it is still an individual's private matter, not to mention how credit is used and needed by companies to execute their daily business, pretty hypocritical IMO.

IE: you work at the PD, as a writer or even in an editing job, how on God's green Earth does your good or bad credit score relate to you being able to put out good material, or spell check it?

[Erie Warrior]

"Being a teacher in Ohio sucks--no rights, no protection."

That's the job. Not just in Ohio, everywhere. You are expected to lead by example, all the time. Students don't need any more friends, that's not the relationship that teacher needs to be building.

A litigious society has changed the rules for every public employee. Always be careful of what you say and do, you never know who is watching.

[swerb]

My biggest problem with the credit score thing Rich is its relevance to somebody being able to perform the job at hand, and do so well. Context is key as you mention, but at the EOD it is still an individual's private matter, not to mention how credit is used and needed by companies to execute their daily business, pretty hypocritical IMO.

IE: you work at the PD, as a writer or even in an editing job, how on God's green Earth does your good or bad credit score relate to you being able to put out good material, or spell check it?

My thing with it is this. If someone has the capacity to pay their bills, yet still consistently does not on time, to me ... that's a factor. It does say something about that person. Maybe not their ability to perform a certain job, but just about them as a person. I will pass on that person every time.

Again, medical collections, divorce, extenuating circumstances, disputed claims on the credit report - all a different story to me. I am talking about the person that has a debt to income ratio of 40% or lower, yet pays their bills consistently late. To me that speaks to their responsibility and value system. Or possibly means they have some serious not credit report expenses going on in their life.

[jb]

Naive is the right word. People can be pretty stupid when it comes to social networking. I can not fault an employer for making judgements based on a canidates FB page or even their credit score. The company is making an investment in that person, and should have, what I consider to be reasonable information.

Big reason why I have no FB page, it would take a swerb leak of my identity for people to see how truly f'd my opinions are...

Cannot have all this right wing hate speech if I am going back to work for the feds, now can I...

Really, a credit score?

Have to say I completely disagree with that.

The credit score thing is a very touchy subject right now in employment circles. It's an argument I can see both sides of the fence on. I think, like with most things, you have to apply common sense if you are going to use credit score as part of the criteria by which you judge potential applicants by.

For example, to have a practice say where you will not hire anyone with a credit score below 640, is insanity. Some employers do that. You need to see the context. For example, if someone's credit score got dragged down by an unexpected medical expense, a bad divorce, or maybe something on the credit report they are disputing ... that's a totally different ball of wax than the guy that was employed, making 50-60k a year, and paid his $1000 mortgage payment late 5x in the last year.

I'm not hiring the latter guy. On the former, I want to talk to the candidate, hear their side of it, and use my brain ... not a FICO score to make the decision.

Here's the thing though. 11-12% unemployment in OH, there are so many GD applicants for almost every job out there. A lot of employers are using credit score to thin the herd of applicants before they start seriously considering candidates and bringing them in for second interviews.

Buddy of mine, recently got his teaching degree. Smart dude, I'd hire him to teach my kids in a second ... despite the fact he got a DUI recently. But that DUI ... man is it gonna screw him. Gonna be tough for him to even get considered, cause so many teachers are applying for every opening out there.

In PA , any misdemeanor conviction makes you ineligible. Period.

Open container at a college aprty when yer 20? Change your major. Done.

Keep in mind that both W and Cheney had DUI convictions.

So you can be POTUS and VPTUS but not teach.

Moronic.


Oh, and what OJ said about FB. nailed it.

[Loo]

I understand looking at prospective employees' pages.

This is unreal. A guy can't teach kids because he goes out with friends on a Friday night and has a couple beers? Three of my buddies are education majors, and all returned with the same comment--"Being a teacher in Ohio sucks--no rights, no protection."

No - he can't teach kids cause he's stupid enough to friend his students on Facebook, then post pictures of him drinking on his Facebook page.

The act of drinking? Obviously fine. Posting pictures of you and some buds slammin a couple cold ones on FB? Fine as well. Unless you are a teacher that friends your students on FB. Or an airline pilot.

And BTW, I have several teacher friends here in OH. The benefits are excellent, as is the retirement deal where you can retire after 25 years and get like 65% of your salary for the rest of your life. I'm glad the state does that. We need to incent as many good people as humanly possible to become teachers. Nothing more important than the people teaching our youth.

When I was younger - salaries/benefits for Ohio teachers sucked compared to where they are now. It's one thing it appears this state has actually done right. I'm a small government guy, but I'll always support any law that makes it more beneficial to be a soldier, teacher, or police officer.

We will have to agree to disagree on the FB issue. If there were pictures of him smoking pot, that's different. Pot is illegal, drinking is not for those of age. He wasn't doing anything wrong. I understand that that's not what you're saying, just reiterating my point.

What if this guy was the best teacher in the world? What if he was "that" teacher that seemingly every person seems to have--the teacher who will go the extra mile to help mold you as a student and as a young person. Aka, the best kind of educators. What if that guy also liked to relax and drink with some friends on the weekend, who are all of age?

THAT'S a crime? And he can get fired for that? I understand that it's just how things are in that profession, and there's nothing he can do--but I'm outraged by this and I'd be pursuing any legal actions possible (if I had my way). Losing his job over this, in my honest opinion, is total BS.

For example, throughout my four years in high school, a teacher of mine became one of my most prominent mentors. He was always available for a call (for any of his students, not just me--that'd be almost weird), always there, took several students to Browns games, grill-outs and things of that nature.

Basically--the dude was always there. It was nice to have a teacher like that.

We all knew at least once a week he went out and drank like a fish.

That's fine, but because he has a Facebook page and adds some students--that's where the line is drawn? What's the difference between all of us students knowing the dude gets hammered every weekend, and seeing a picture of it?

[Erie Warrior]

a teacher of mine became one of my most prominent mentors. He was always available for a call (for any of his students, not just me--that'd be almost weird), always there, took several students to Browns games, grill-outs and things of that nature.

This would get you fired now. The way it is, ain't the way it was. I don't even give out my home phone number, and I wait a day to respond to most emails, so I can analyze my response. Personal life has to be completely separate from school life. HAS TO BE. Any allegations of improprieties will cost you your present job, and most likely any future jobs.

Say what you will about it being bogus, or even illegal, then wait a week and read the next news headline about a teacher banging a student, or buying them beer or taking pictures of them in the bathroom. I can't say I blame the principal, or the school board for firing the guy. Always CYA.

[Loo]

a teacher of mine became one of my most prominent mentors. He was always available for a call (for any of his students, not just me--that'd be almost weird), always there, took several students to Browns games, grill-outs and things of that nature.

This would get you fired now. The way it is, ain't the way it was. I don't even give out my home phone number, and I wait a day to respond to most emails, so I can analyze my response. Personal life has to be completely separate from school life. HAS TO BE. Any allegations of improprieties will cost you your present job, and most likely any future jobs.

Say what you will about it being bogus, or even illegal, then wait a week and read the next news headline about a teacher banging a student, or buying them beer or taking pictures of them in the bathroom. I can't say I blame the principal, or the school board for firing the guy. Always CYA.

Ok I was worried about this going down that road. Can we not turn this into a "Well when a teacher hangs out with a student, sexual intercourse or rape could take place." Please-- lets not just go down that road. Believe me, I have a story of this happening with another one of my high school teachers, but I'll save that for a rainy day.

If a teacher got fired for inviting some students to a grill-out in a public park (which was our case), I'm going to see red.

[jb]

Loo, it seems you want a rant thread about the injustice of the way things are in the modern litigeous world, and the rest are just sayin water is wet these days, whaddaya gonna do?

Its like mangina and shaun rogers walking by one another at a banquet.

[FUDU]

Loo, it seems you want a rant thread about the injustice of the way things are in the modern litigeous world, and the rest are just sayin water is wet these days, whaddaya gonna do?

Its like mangina and shaun rogers walking by one another at a banquet.

JB I think there is a relevant point in all this though, society now looks to judge one another by one example of our actions as an individual. It's as if society is just waiting for the chance to spot somebody doing anything remotely controversial to put a dent in their credibility, at the EOD it is all hypocritical BS.

The example provided above about now a days a teacher just cannot do that do to what it is they do and their relationship with children, OK I get it, there is some logic there. However let's take a look at another person in another profession, say a person working with others money like finance/banking. No offense to anybody who might do that. Let's say they go out drinking, say they hang with the guys and like to bet on sports or take part in forms of gambling, shouldn't the same type of accountability apply? Doesn't the follow up logic suggest their is at least a risk of conflict of interest there?

I would think Jimmy Conway would be pissed if his banker pulled into Jimmy's club with a brand new Pink Caddy.

[Ziner]

However let's take a look at another person in another profession, say a person working with others money like finance/banking. No offense to anybody who might do that. Let's say they go out drinking, say they hang with the guys and like to bet on sports or take part in forms of gambling, shouldn't the same type of accountability apply? Doesn't the follow up logic suggest their is at least a risk of conflict of interest there?

No. WTF man you tryin to get me fired? Back to the original story, do we know what the school's policy is concerning social media? He is dumb for doing what he did even in the absence of a policy, but the school would be fully with in their rights if they have a policy forbidding this. I would think by now many schools have a policy such as this. If they didnt have a policy, what was he paying union dues for then?

[FUDU]

If they didnt have a policy, what was he paying union dues for then?

To keep his job in case he lost it doing something within his rights?

Seriously Ziner, if you are in a field as I mentioned, do you or do you not think the same accountability should apply?

[Ziner]

Seriously Ziner, if you are in a field as I mentioned, do you or do you not think the same accountability should apply?

Eh, I think the key to this story is a teacher deals with children. Friending students on fb is starting to push the line of inappropriateness. Sharing pictures, late night chats, friendly "pokes", etc all at your finger tips. I think that is the biggest difference between the two situations.

I know at my office, even though they are technically forbid by our company, we run NCAA Pools, Fantasy Leagues, and Superbowl Squares, even the highest of our bosses participates. If they fired me for setting up the fantasy league I am not sure I would have a leg to stand on afterward, so I think in a way there is similar accountability. However those are on work hours, I would have to investigate to whether we have any policy forbidding gambling outside work, we do have a section on responsibilities outside work but I can't access it right now to read it.

Once again to me, this story is about children. This whole story comes down to the school's policy. Now a days a school HAS to have a policy forbidding this type of contact to cover their own ass.

[jb]

Loo, it seems you want a rant thread about the injustice of the way things are in the modern litigeous world, and the rest are just sayin water is wet these days, whaddaya gonna do?

Its like mangina and shaun rogers walking by one another at a banquet.

JB I think there is a relevant point in all this though, society now looks to judge one another by one example of our actions as an individual. It's as if society is just waiting for the chance to spot somebody doing anything remotely controversial to put a dent in their credibility, at the EOD it is all hypocritical BS.

The example provided above about now a days a teacher just cannot do that do to what it is they do and their relationship with children, OK I get it, there is some logic there. However let's take a look at another person in another profession, say a person working with others money like finance/banking. No offense to anybody who might do that. Let's say they go out drinking, say they hang with the guys and like to bet on sports or take part in forms of gambling, shouldn't the same type of accountability apply? Doesn't the follow up logic suggest their is at least a risk of conflict of interest there?

I would think Jimmy Conway would be pissed if his banker pulled into Jimmy's club with a brand new Pink Caddy.

No, it is all bullshit nonsense AFAIC. Men aren't allowed to be men and people are held to impossible hypocritical standards. It is politics aand celebrity shaping our lives in a negative deductive manner. If you could have 1962 without the sexism and racism, that would be fine by me. That's when grown ups were in charge and expectations of men were more realistic.

Unless you really are a molester or murdere, you oughtnot be trated as one (see also, our not infrequent drunk driving threads of guilty without an offense other than a trumped up yu MIGHT have hurts omeone logice).

[Loo]

Loo, it seems you want a rant thread about the injustice of the way things are in the modern litigeous world, and the rest are just sayin water is wet these days, whaddaya gonna do?

Its like mangina and shaun rogers walking by one another at a banquet.

I've said several times in this thread that I know nothing can be done, and that it's just the way things are.

I was looking for comments on right/wrong, was the firing justified, things of that nature. Which is what was happening.

[jb]

Loo, it seems you want a rant thread about the injustice of the way things are in the modern litigeous world, and the rest are just sayin water is wet these days, whaddaya gonna do?

Its like mangina and shaun rogers walking by one another at a banquet.

I've said several times in this thread that I know nothing can be done, and that it's just the way things are.

I was looking for comments on right/wrong, was the firing justified, things of that nature. Which is what was happening.

Awe ite jus trying to bridgewhat I thought was a gap & be Martin. Fuck it. Stupid mofo tard Cyber socializing with minor students & no good comes of it for the district. If he's that damn dumb in this day & age he's too damn dumb to teach. Boo hoo

I think Burger King assistant managers & fry cooks can facebook whoever the fuck they want and be tagged doing keg stands. Now he can find out.

[peeker643]

Awe ite jus trying to bridgewhat I thought was a gap & be Martin. Fuck it. Stupid mofo tard Cyber socializing with minor students & no good comes of it for the district. If he's that damn dumb in this day & age he's too damn dumb to teach. Boo hoo

I think Burger King assistant managers & fry cooks can facebook whoever the fuck they want and be tagged doing keg stands. Now he can find out.

Pheeew... thought for a minute that John Updike or Mark Bowden had stolen JB's laptop. Not the case. Appears JB wrestled it away from one of those two guys.

[Commodore Perry]

My thing with it is this. If someone has the capacity to pay their bills, yet still consistently does not on time, to me ... that's a factor. It does say something about that person. Maybe not their ability to perform a certain job, but just about them as a person. I will pass on that person every time.

I think you're going to far in judging a person's worth based on their credit score. If someone has money and doesn't pay their bills on time, it means they have some bad habits with money that they need to correct. It doesn't make them a bad person. It doesn't mean their irresponsible in other parts of their life. It doesn't mean they would be a bad hire.

There isn't a single applicant that isn't going to have a flaw in their personal life, there just won't always be some kind of score to quantify it for you.

[Orenthal]

My thing with it is this. If someone has the capacity to pay their bills, yet still consistently does not on time, to me ... that's a factor. It does say something about that person. Maybe not their ability to perform a certain job, but just about them as a person. I will pass on that person every time.

I think you're going to far in judging a person's worth based on their credit score. If someone has money and doesn't pay their bills on time, it means they have some bad habits with money that they need to correct. It doesn't make them a bad person. It doesn't mean their irresponsible in other parts of their life. It doesn't mean they would be a bad hire.

There isn't a single applicant that isn't going to have a flaw in their personal life, there just won't always be some kind of score to quantify it for you.

All must die below 690. It is a factor, not the only factor. I think many things can be deduced from a low credit score, then it is on the potential employer to decide how far to utilize the score.

[Fire Marshall Bill]

No, it is all bullshit nonsense AFAIC. Men aren't allowed to be men and people are held to impossible hypocritical standards. It is politics aand celebrity shaping our lives in a negative deductive manner. If you could have 1962 without the sexism and racism, that would be fine by me. That's when grown ups were in charge and expectations of men were more realistic.

Racktasticable!

This country is full to the brim with far too many metro-sexual candy asses caught up in desperate futile attempts to be perfect. Dweebs.....its an imperfect world

...and panty-waist lawyers. Far too many freaking lawyers flexing their lips

In any event, I'm glad I'm self employed and not caught up in this corporate bullshit

I'm hearin all the reasons but I'm agreeing with none of them.

You can basically be punished by not gaining a position if you had some hard times but you'll not be offered the opportunity to advance your career with 'our' company because of it?

What fucking nerve imo

[Cerebral_DownTime]

Couldn't agree more.

Any employer that would X out someone because they've struggled is maybe the most backwards stupid thing i've ever heard. That employer can eat shit and die. If they can do the job you fucking hire them.

And wouldn't someone who has money troubles maybe be a person that will worker harder? You know, cuz they have debt?

Credit score is just another way for those who have it all to control those who have nothing. It's just an empty number. Nothing more.

[Fire Marshall Bill]

Thats another thing

If you are going to be so impersonal and pry into peeps finacial backgrounds and base a hiring on someone's credit report, why wouldn't their "risk factor" be more important than credit score?

Show me someone who hit rock botton yet still paid all his debts and I'll show you someone I'd hire in NY Minute

[Cerebral_DownTime]

You shouldn't be allowed to look at peoples' credit report. Criminal check? Fine. But keep your nose out their finances. None. Of. Your. Fucking. Business.