skevinp Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 25 minutes ago, HockeyDad said: You don't know what you're talking about Most people don't, including me. Perhaps you could identify and explain what criminal laws Morrison broke so that we may better understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 6 minutes ago, MikeD said: Thanks! I had no idea of the history. The change is better, if not perfect. Of course, in that policy...Moody WAS the Asst Director I think. Which is exactly why the P&P manual should stipulate that a non-executive be responsible for collecting comments and complaints. Preferably someone disconnected from day-to-day operations (like a board member). Hopkins case examples one circumstance where this is valuable, and Moody illustrates the other. If someone has a complaint about the person charged with collecting the complaints, then the inquiry should go to the board chair. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim K Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 30 minutes ago, Eleran said: Really? The initial 3 or so female allegations against Hopkins occurred when he was 23 and an Assistant Director The admitted actions by Moody happened when he was 31 and the student's band director. How is that merely "immaturity" and "unprofessional" and how is it NOT abuse of power?!? Furthermore, I have significant concerns over whether all the facts ever came out. The police did not investigate because no victim lodged a complaint; the school board cut off their investigation because he resigned; and his licence was not revoked following a complete investigation, but he agreed to a 5 year suspension. Some of the texts certainly implied that more may have been going on than simply sexting. Come on, I never said “MERELY” and questioning the maturity of an adult is not excusing his behavior. Adults who lack maturity should not be around young people. Also, I have never suggested that either should remain in their positions nor am I defending either party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigW Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 4 hours ago, BRASSO said: Actually though, the political bent of a region, state, city is irrelevant to any of this I'd say, being a pretty conservative guy, this issue crosses political lines. Everyone from any political affiliation with a lick of decency wants everyone to be treated right and with respect. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MusicManNJ Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 35 minutes ago, HockeyDad said: You don't know what you're talking about Please define - in a factual way - what it is that Mr. Morrison did that is a CRIMINAL (your word) offense if you are so certain you know what you are talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.E. Brigand Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 14 minutes ago, skevinp said: Please give the politics a rest. Politics are indeed verboten here, but to be fair to Jeff, there's nothing expressly political about the case he cited as a comparison: A senior manager makes repeated sexualized comments to an employee. She complains. He fires her. She sues. The company settles for $84,000. Shareholders (i.e., you and me) only learn about the whole case years later when it appears in the press. Another employee alleges similar behavior by the manager. The manager announces he will retire in a year. He also promises to pay back the company for the settlement. Three months later he resigns. Then he immediately gets a job for another company, one that regularly does business with his old firm: he's hired because of his many contacts at his former employer, whose decision-making his new boss is counting on him to influence. And then he says he won't pay back the settlement after all. There are a several points in that affair that are reminiscent of DCI's scandals. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 (edited) 5 minutes ago, N.E. Brigand said: Politics are indeed verboten here, but to be fair to Jeff, there's nothing expressly political about the case he cited as a comparison: A senior manager makes repeated sexualized comments to an employee. She complains. He fires her. She sues. The company settles for $84,000. Shareholders (i.e., you and me) only learn about the whole case years later when it appears in the press. Another employee alleges similar behavior by the manager. The manager announces he will retire in a year. He also promises to pay back the company for the settlement. Three months later he resigns. Then he immediately gets a job for another company, one that regularly does business with his old firm: he's hired because of his many contacts at his former employer, whose decision-making his new boss is counting on him to influence. And then he says he won't pay back the settlement after all. There are a several points in that affair that are reminiscent of DCI's scandals. This. is. brilliant. (Kudos, knucklehead. I get it.) "Senior manager"! Ha! Edited May 18, 2018 by garfield Because N.E. is a funny, funny guy. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 8 minutes ago, garfield said: Which is exactly why the P&P manual should stipulate that a non-executive be responsible for collecting comments and complaints. Preferably someone disconnected from day-to-day operations (like a board member). Yes, the new policy shows BOD member Maureen Morrison first, followed by a person named Chelsea Sternet, an operations assistant, and then Fred as people who should be contacted for an incident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 15 minutes ago, BigW said: I'd say, being a pretty conservative guy, this issue crosses political lines. Everyone from any political affiliation with a lick of decency wants everyone to be treated right and with respect. 10 minutes ago, N.E. Brigand said: Politics are indeed verboten here, but to be fair to Jeff, there's nothing expressly political about the case he cited as a comparison: A senior manager makes repeated sexualized comments to an employee. She complains. He fires her. She sues. The company settles for $84,000. Shareholders (i.e., you and me) only learn about the whole case years later when it appears in the press. Another employee alleges similar behavior by the manager. The manager announces he will retire in a year. He also promises to pay back the company for the settlement. Three months later he resigns. Then he immediately gets a job for another company, one that regularly does business with his old firm: he's hired because of his many contacts at his former employer, whose decision-making his new boss is counting on him to influence. And then he says he won't pay back the settlement after all. There are a several points in that affair that are reminiscent of DCI's scandals. I should have known you'd get his reference, considering your conservative nature. N.E. is nuttier than a fruitcake, but he's as funny as Red Skelton sometimes. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.E. Brigand Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 Just now, garfield said: N.E. is nuttier than a fruitcake, but he's as funny as Red Skelton sometimes. That's fair. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts