NW Current Article - SWW Principal Hiring Wife to run FS in merger- Nepotism Anyone?

[Anonymous]

Just picked up a copy of The Economist. Headline: Send in the clowns. Think the article is about this.

Seriously, what hope is there for this school system? My DS is a candidate. I am already anxious after talking to SWW parents about what is in store for students with the merger.

[Anonymous]

"If you were me and you didn't have anybody to work with on this at the elementary level, who would you turn to if you were living with a person with that kind of experience," Richard said.

Really? There was no one else qualified at the school you could work with? No one else in the entire school system with experience?

[Anonymous]

Is this a joke?

[Anonymous]

No- it's not a joke. It's actually happening.

[Anonymous]

Suddenly the SWW parents/teachers have gone silent.....

[Anonymous]

“Government employees are public servants and guardians of the public trust,” Mayor Gray said. “This pledge outlines and underscores my administration’s commitment to ethical and conscientious government.”

The pledge includes commitments that Cabinet members will:

· Avoid misuse of office for personal gain or the benefit of friends and family members;

I guess principals and DCPS employees are not public officials?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Am I the only one outraged to find out the new assistant principal of FS in the merger with SWW will be none other than the SWW principals' wife? According to the article, the principal cleared it with DCPS but DCPS won't confirm they approved the hiring. His wife is currently a teacher at Hardy MS with no administrative experience. The principal sees no issue with this hiring.........is it me? Doesn't DCPS have rules about nepotism? Maybe DCPS doesn't know what that word means...........

Will the SWW principal be her boss? Or will she just be the assistant principal at the school that is merging with SWW?

If he's not her boss there really isn't much of an issue.

The truth is that it's not uncommon for spouses and relatives to work within the same company or school system. It only becomes an issue if they work in the same school building as supervisor/direct report.

All of this is my humble opinion.

There was no-one within DCPS with administrative experience? Seriously?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Suddenly the SWW parents/teachers have gone silent.....

Not sure what you mean by this? Walls parents and teachers have been anything but silent about this merger. This principal / assistant principal issue just confirms the poor decision making in this whole process.

[Anonymous]

I understand they're filming a sequel in Washington: "Back to the Future DC Style.". Mayor Gray morphs into Mayor for Life Marion Barry. It starts to feel like the 1980s all over again in the DC government, including DCPS, and nepotism and pay to play return with vigor!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Suddenly the SWW parents/teachers have gone silent.....

Not sure what you mean by this? Walls parents and teachers have been anything but silent about this merger. This principal / assistant principal issue just confirms the poor decision making in this whole process.

I would like to hear them up in arms about this like they are about how SWW will receive no benefit from the FS merger.

But wait....this is their beloved Principal after all.

[Anonymous]

Ok- I think I am misunderstanding what is happening with the SWW and SF. I thought they were sharing the building, not administration? If they are sharing the building then he will not be supervising her? I work in a law firm and I know we have had a couple associates marry- basically they said they could not work in the same practice group. I have to agree with the poster that it is not uncommon, but if it happens should have some very clear rules and not direct reporting lines.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ok- I think I am misunderstanding what is happening with the SWW and SF. I thought they were sharing the building, not administration? If they are sharing the building then he will not be supervising her? I work in a law firm and I know we have had a couple associates marry- basically they said they could not work in the same practice group. I have to agree with the poster that it is not uncommon, but if it happens should have some very clear rules and not direct reporting lines.

Right! It's just like teachers within the same school building being married. No problem!

But there should not be a teacher married to an assistant principal within the same building...assistant principal married to the principal, etc...DCPS is INSANE!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"If you were me and you didn't have anybody to work with on this at the elementary level, who would you turn to if you were living with a person with that kind of experience," Richard said.

Really? There was no one else qualified at the school you could work with? No one else in the entire school system with experience?

Richard sounds like a fukkin IDIOT who lacks the integrity and decision-making ability to run a freakin' lemonade stand much less a school.

I'm certain the Mrs. is not the only person in the school system with experience at the elementary level.

I'd love to hear Chancellor Henderson's justification of this BAD move.

Just when I started giving DCPS the benefit of the doubt under her reign, the DCPS leadership team pulls this boneheaded move.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Suddenly the SWW parents/teachers have gone silent.....

Not sure what you mean by this? Walls parents and teachers have been anything but silent about this merger. This principal / assistant principal issue just confirms the poor decision making in this whole process.

I would like to hear them up in arms about this like they are about how SWW will receive no benefit from the FS merger.

But wait....this is their beloved Principal after all.

The article just came out today, so not sure how many SWW parents knew about it before. They were not at the FS PTA meeting where his wife announced her new position. I'm sure once they hear of the hiring arrangement, they will be vocal. It just shows how there is no thought at all to this merger.

And I don't think beloved is how many would describe the Principal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ok- I think I am misunderstanding what is happening with the SWW and SF. I thought they were sharing the building, not administration? If they are sharing the building then he will not be supervising her? I work in a law firm and I know we have had a couple associates marry- basically they said they could not work in the same practice group. I have to agree with the poster that it is not uncommon, but if it happens should have some very clear rules and not direct reporting lines.

The 2 schools are not sharing a building. SWW HS has its own campus, so does FS (preschool-8). The two schools are sharing a principal and he is moving to FS. His wife would be his assistant principal and report directly to him. In turn, he would supervise her. I'm pretty sure law firms don't run that way.