Washington Post article about Former Farquhar Administrator

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes absolutely names will be redacted. But I will still be interested to see how many of the MCPS offices had input during the interview and vetting process, or lack thereof, and whether any of them were against the promotion.

Names are not always redacted and to do so wouldn’t be transparent. For example, Letters to the Community go out all the time with MCPS employees named. The BCC teacher is an example. MCPS has referred to Biedleman by name in correspondence and at news conferences. The two Transportation Department employees who were fired by MCPS were also publicly named.

The public has a right to know who specifically in MCPS knew about the complaints from over 18 victims, why they did nothing, why the usual procedures for hiring a principal was not followed, and why Biedleman was promoted. Releasing an unredacted copy of the Jackson Lewis report would show transparency by MCPS. Disciplinary action against responsible employees would show accountability that both Dr. McKnight and the Board promised.

I think the difference is, Engel outted himself with his lawsuit, MCPS did not. Once the employee outs themselves, then MCPS will name them.

But MCPS is notorious for not getting into personnel specifics IF the employee in question is going to remain an MCPS employee. If they decide to fire an employee, then they might name names, but MCPS almost never fires people. They shift them around to a special assignment status and wait for the heat to die down, or they hope the employee in question resigns on their own.

Isn’t that practice potentially a core part of the problem with the Biedleman case? Move a horrendous Principal to a new school and give him a promotion so he accepts the transfer?

Keeping bad employees on staff brings down the whole school system. Giving him the promotion over a deserving applicant was wrong. Transparency and accountability is needed to weed out these types of practices in MCPS.

No disagreements from me! I think poor performers should be fired without hesitation. But I know that doesn't happen in MCPS and honestly, most government agencies, due to those entities having a conservative approach to personnel issues to mitigate wrongful termination lawsuits from the fired employees.

MCPS and the Board of Education have a legal responsibility to protect staff and students from abusive employees who sexually harass and bully others. Now they face the potential of multiple lawsuits and penalties for multiple Title IX violations not to mention the loss of the public trust in their institution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes absolutely names will be redacted. But I will still be interested to see how many of the MCPS offices had input during the interview and vetting process, or lack thereof, and whether any of them were against the promotion.

Names are not always redacted and to do so wouldn’t be transparent. For example, Letters to the Community go out all the time with MCPS employees named. The BCC teacher is an example. MCPS has referred to Biedleman by name in correspondence and at news conferences. The two Transportation Department employees who were fired by MCPS were also publicly named.

The public has a right to know who specifically in MCPS knew about the complaints from over 18 victims, why they did nothing, why the usual procedures for hiring a principal was not followed, and why Biedleman was promoted. Releasing an unredacted copy of the Jackson Lewis report would show transparency by MCPS. Disciplinary action against responsible employees would show accountability that both Dr. McKnight and the Board promised.

I think the difference is, Engel outted himself with his lawsuit, MCPS did not. Once the employee outs themselves, then MCPS will name them.

But MCPS is notorious for not getting into personnel specifics IF the employee in question is going to remain an MCPS employee. If they decide to fire an employee, then they might name names, but MCPS almost never fires people. They shift them around to a special assignment status and wait for the heat to die down, or they hope the employee in question resigns on their own.

Isn’t that practice potentially a core part of the problem with the Biedleman case? Move a horrendous Principal to a new school and give him a promotion so he accepts the transfer?

Keeping bad employees on staff brings down the whole school system. Giving him the promotion over a deserving applicant was wrong. Transparency and accountability is needed to weed out these types of practices in MCPS.

No disagreements from me! I think poor performers should be fired without hesitation. But I know that doesn't happen in MCPS and honestly, most government agencies, due to those entities having a conservative approach to personnel issues to mitigate wrongful termination lawsuits from the fired employees.

MCPS and the Board of Education have a legal responsibility to protect staff and students from abusive employees who sexually harass and bully others. Now they face the potential of multiple lawsuits and penalties for multiple Title IX violations not to mention the loss of the public trust in their institution.

If anyone brings a suit.

[Anonymous]

Isn’t the possibility of law suits why MCPS hired Jackson Lewis to do their “independent investigation”? Look at the history of that particular law firm.

I personally think that the Washington Post exposure of a public school administration that ignored 18 complaints for sexual harassment and bullying the biggest problem. Complainants came forward and were faced with retaliation and an employer who protected their abuser. The article exposed the lack of character of the people who are running our school system. If the complaints were withheld from the principal search process including the review by the Board of Education, that shows a high level of deceit by MCPS Central Office staff to cover up misconduct of one of their own.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes absolutely names will be redacted. But I will still be interested to see how many of the MCPS offices had input during the interview and vetting process, or lack thereof, and whether any of them were against the promotion.

Names are not always redacted and to do so wouldn’t be transparent. For example, Letters to the Community go out all the time with MCPS employees named. The BCC teacher is an example. MCPS has referred to Biedleman by name in correspondence and at news conferences. The two Transportation Department employees who were fired by MCPS were also publicly named.

The public has a right to know who specifically in MCPS knew about the complaints from over 18 victims, why they did nothing, why the usual procedures for hiring a principal was not followed, and why Biedleman was promoted. Releasing an unredacted copy of the Jackson Lewis report would show transparency by MCPS. Disciplinary action against responsible employees would show accountability that both Dr. McKnight and the Board promised.

I think the difference is, Engel outted himself with his lawsuit, MCPS did not. Once the employee outs themselves, then MCPS will name them.

But MCPS is notorious for not getting into personnel specifics IF the employee in question is going to remain an MCPS employee. If they decide to fire an employee, then they might name names, but MCPS almost never fires people. They shift them around to a special assignment status and wait for the heat to die down, or they hope the employee in question resigns on their own.

Isn’t that practice potentially a core part of the problem with the Biedleman case? Move a horrendous Principal to a new school and give him a promotion so he accepts the transfer?

Keeping bad employees on staff brings down the whole school system. Giving him the promotion over a deserving applicant was wrong. Transparency and accountability is needed to weed out these types of practices in MCPS.

No disagreements from me! I think poor performers should be fired without hesitation. But I know that doesn't happen in MCPS and honestly, most government agencies, due to those entities having a conservative approach to personnel issues to mitigate wrongful termination lawsuits from the fired employees.

MCPS and the Board of Education have a legal responsibility to protect staff and students from abusive employees who sexually harass and bully others. Now they face the potential of multiple lawsuits and penalties for multiple Title IX violations not to mention the loss of the public trust in their institution.

If anyone brings a suit.

Sadly it seems that suits are the only way things will change at MCPS. I don’t like the idea of it, but I hope, and will strongly support, the teachers and staff who experienced this will file. Enough is enough.

[Anonymous]

Given the number of complaints that were ignored by MCPS, couldn’t the staff members collectively file a class action lawsuit against MCPS and the Board of Education?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Given the number of complaints that were ignored by MCPS, couldn’t the staff members collectively file a class action lawsuit against MCPS and the Board of Education?

The women who were sexually harassed by Beidelman will get large payouts with NDAs. Beidelman will also receive a large severance should he agree to resign.
Bank on it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Given the number of complaints that were ignored by MCPS, couldn’t the staff members collectively file a class action lawsuit against MCPS and the Board of Education?

The women who were sexually harassed by Beidelman will get large payouts with NDAs. Beidelman will also receive a large severance should he agree to resign.
Bank on it.

If that’s true, it would be just another way MCPS tries to keep everyone quiet to cover up the full scope of who knew about the complaints and how he still was promoted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Given the number of complaints that were ignored by MCPS, couldn’t the staff members collectively file a class action lawsuit against MCPS and the Board of Education?

The women who were sexually harassed by Beidelman will get large payouts with NDAs. Beidelman will also receive a large severance should he agree to resign.
Bank on it.

Yes, this is the way. I remember when Democrats railed against NDAs being used to cover up egregious conduct by executives. Maybe someone in the state legislature should pass a law prohibiting the practice.

[Anonymous]

The BOE tweeted this summary

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The BOE tweeted this summary

Nice start- but where’s the full report?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The BOE tweeted this summary

Nice start- but where’s the full report?

Busy being redacted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The BOE tweeted this summary

Nice start- but where’s the full report?

For board eyes only

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The BOE tweeted this summary

McKnight is in trouble.

[jsteele]

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1155683.page