Mad at the Board

[Anonymous]

There will be a long line of qualified candidates for the position. It’s pays $342,544 a year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There will be a long line of qualified candidates for the position. It’s pays $342,544 a year.

Ummm. That’s probably what it pays in half a year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There will be a long line of qualified candidates for the position. It’s pays $342,544 a year.

Ummm. That’s probably what it pays in half a year.

The salary is closer to 800k a year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:God, this was exhausting (and unenlightening) to read.

1. My child is at the school. I am not on the board. I am not invested in the board. I am not invested in Dennis, either way.
2. Half the people on this thread are trolls or have personal scores to settle. (Give it a rest, Whittle person. You are not relevant.)
3. The school is not coming apart. Parents are not at one another's throats, and the teachers are pretty good. The financial side seems competently managed in general.
4. There is an issue to talk about. The Dennis hire was a pretty serious failure. Objectively. Nobody wanted this to be a 3-year gig. Personalizing that is not the answer, but neither is not talking about it. If an organization has a major failure, figuring out what went wrong and how to do it better next time is important.
5. It is also important that the process be transparent enough to get broad buy-in from the community. The board is not the constituency here, and saying "we can't talk about it and we'll get back to you" is not the answer. My concern is that the board seems to be circling the wagons instead of saying "ok, what can we learn?"

It's not that deep.

Ironic, that was another exhausting post complaining that the thread is exhausting…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There will be a long line of qualified candidates for the position. It’s pays $342,544 a year.

Ummm. That’s probably what it pays in half a year.

AI
The compensation for the Head of School at Maret School varies depending on the specific period and individual. Based on recent data from tax filings, the compensation figures are as follows:
Mary Josephine Talbott (Head of School, term ended 6/30/23) received $589,242 in compensation plus an additional $40,614 in other benefits for the relevant fiscal year. In a previous filing, her compensation was listed as $623,888.
Dennis Bisgaard (current Head of School, hired 7/1/23) received $342,544 in compensation plus an additional $31,066 in other benefits for the same fiscal year.
These figures represent the total compensation reported in the school's public tax filings, which are available on the ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer. Dennis Bisgaard officially became the Head of School in July 2023.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There will be a long line of qualified candidates for the position. It’s pays $342,544 a year.

Ummm. That’s probably what it pays in half a year.

AI
The compensation for the Head of School at Maret School varies depending on the specific period and individual. Based on recent data from tax filings, the compensation figures are as follows:
Mary Josephine Talbott (Head of School, term ended 6/30/23) received $589,242 in compensation plus an additional $40,614 in other benefits for the relevant fiscal year. In a previous filing, her compensation was listed as $623,888.
Dennis Bisgaard (current Head of School, hired 7/1/23) received $342,544 in compensation plus an additional $31,066 in other benefits for the same fiscal year.
These figures represent the total compensation reported in the school's public tax filings, which are available on the ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer. Dennis Bisgaard officially became the Head of School in July 2023.

That was the transition year where the compensation corresponds to 6 month of work for them. So in 2023 the annual salary was close to 700k for the new head of school. You have to be really incompetent to hire the wrong person at that salary.

[Anonymous]

And yet they’re in charge of funding the next one….

[Anonymous]

I don’t think it’s a big deal that he was fired. Sometimes you hire someone and, for various reasons, he or she does not perform well. That happens. What I do think is that you have to be utterly incompetent to fire someone and then let them continue working for an additional eight months. Most likely, they didn’t want to break the contract, but when you fire someone, you do it immediately so as not to disrupt operations. The board is completely unable to make sound managerial decisions. A better approach would have been to fire the HoS in July and appoint an interim HoS for this year. As it stands, the school is effectively headless. This does not give a good impression at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think it’s a big deal that he was fired. Sometimes you hire someone and, for various reasons, he or she does not perform well. That happens. What I do think is that you have to be utterly incompetent to fire someone and then let them continue working for an additional eight months. Most likely, they didn’t want to break the contract, but when you fire someone, you do it immediately so as not to disrupt operations. The board is completely unable to make sound managerial decisions. A better approach would have been to fire the HoS in July and appoint an interim HoS for this year. As it stands, the school is effectively headless. This does not give a good impression at all.

Or…. He resigned. And… you have no idea what a head of school does day to day, for which even an outgoing head is needed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think it’s a big deal that he was fired. Sometimes you hire someone and, for various reasons, he or she does not perform well. That happens. What I do think is that you have to be utterly incompetent to fire someone and then let them continue working for an additional eight months. Most likely, they didn’t want to break the contract, but when you fire someone, you do it immediately so as not to disrupt operations. The board is completely unable to make sound managerial decisions. A better approach would have been to fire the HoS in July and appoint an interim HoS for this year. As it stands, the school is effectively headless. This does not give a good impression at all.

Or…. He resigned. And… you have no idea what a head of school does day to day, for which even an outgoing head is needed.

Yeah right, he resigned in the middle of the school like all the faculty that had mysteriously resigned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think it’s a big deal that he was fired. Sometimes you hire someone and, for various reasons, he or she does not perform well. That happens. What I do think is that you have to be utterly incompetent to fire someone and then let them continue working for an additional eight months. Most likely, they didn’t want to break the contract, but when you fire someone, you do it immediately so as not to disrupt operations. The board is completely unable to make sound managerial decisions. A better approach would have been to fire the HoS in July and appoint an interim HoS for this year. As it stands, the school is effectively headless. This does not give a good impression at all.

It is weird to have a lame duck head. But what weirder is the board being like, “nothing to see here!”🙄

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think it’s a big deal that he was fired. Sometimes you hire someone and, for various reasons, he or she does not perform well. That happens. What I do think is that you have to be utterly incompetent to fire someone and then let them continue working for an additional eight months. Most likely, they didn’t want to break the contract, but when you fire someone, you do it immediately so as not to disrupt operations. The board is completely unable to make sound managerial decisions. A better approach would have been to fire the HoS in July and appoint an interim HoS for this year. As it stands, the school is effectively headless. This does not give a good impression at all.

It is weird to have a lame duck head. But what weirder is the board being like, “nothing to see here!”🙄

And you have no clue how many responsibilities a head of school actually has from day-to-day whether they’re under contract for the next year or not.
To me the weirdest thing is how obsessed some of you Maret people are that the board is lying to you, and that you just can’t accept that Dennis didn’t want to negotiate a renewal. It’s hard to blame him. I mean, judging by the way some of you show up with the anonymous vitriol here it does look like there’re a lot of crazies at that school. I certainly wouldn’t want that job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think it’s a big deal that he was fired. Sometimes you hire someone and, for various reasons, he or she does not perform well. That happens. What I do think is that you have to be utterly incompetent to fire someone and then let them continue working for an additional eight months. Most likely, they didn’t want to break the contract, but when you fire someone, you do it immediately so as not to disrupt operations. The board is completely unable to make sound managerial decisions. A better approach would have been to fire the HoS in July and appoint an interim HoS for this year. As it stands, the school is effectively headless. This does not give a good impression at all.

Or…. He resigned. And… you have no idea what a head of school does day to day, for which even an outgoing head is needed.

Yeah right, he resigned in the middle of the school like all the faculty that had mysteriously resigned.

🤦‍♂️

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think it’s a big deal that he was fired. Sometimes you hire someone and, for various reasons, he or she does not perform well. That happens. What I do think is that you have to be utterly incompetent to fire someone and then let them continue working for an additional eight months. Most likely, they didn’t want to break the contract, but when you fire someone, you do it immediately so as not to disrupt operations. The board is completely unable to make sound managerial decisions. A better approach would have been to fire the HoS in July and appoint an interim HoS for this year. As it stands, the school is effectively headless. This does not give a good impression at all.

Or…. He resigned. And… you have no idea what a head of school does day to day, for which even an outgoing head is needed.

Yeah right, he resigned in the middle of the school like all the faculty that had mysteriously resigned.

🤦‍♂️

Suddenly, everyone at Maret seems to have an urgent need to leave voluntarily, except the board members. Pretty impressive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think it’s a big deal that he was fired. Sometimes you hire someone and, for various reasons, he or she does not perform well. That happens. What I do think is that you have to be utterly incompetent to fire someone and then let them continue working for an additional eight months. Most likely, they didn’t want to break the contract, but when you fire someone, you do it immediately so as not to disrupt operations. The board is completely unable to make sound managerial decisions. A better approach would have been to fire the HoS in July and appoint an interim HoS for this year. As it stands, the school is effectively headless. This does not give a good impression at all.

It is weird to have a lame duck head. But what weirder is the board being like, “nothing to see here!”🙄

They are very good at taking an ostrich approach.