Stacie Halas, a.k.a. “Tiffany Six,” was removed from her teaching post when her employment as a porn star became public knowledge at her middle school.
Halas’ attorney, Richard Schwab (identified by one letter as “our attorney” by a local teachers’ union, leading me to wonder if the union was assisting her defense) claimed during the hearing that Halas’ teaching career and porn career never intersected, characterizing her actions as “in the past.” But according to The Smoking Gun:
I would think that she has an excellent grounds for a lawsuit against the school system. She broke no laws, and frankly, how was her ability to teach impaired by her past employment?
Gerry Spence should take this case.
I’ve never understood the conservative predilection to underpay teachers, yet hold them to a higher moral standard than anyone else. Remember the good ol’ days when teachers weren’t even allowed to marry?
Once these things are known, you lose the respect of everyone you work with. Students, parents, teachers, administrators. You can’t put it back and pretend it never happened. While I think our society takes sexual topics far too seriously, this is one area where it simply wouldn’t work for her to go back to teaching.
I’m curious as to why you would think it odd that a union help defend one of their members who was fired. Even if they were fired for cause, the union should be acting as defense counsel and ensure the district prove their case, rather than just stand idly by.
Ludovic and RitterSport (and anyone else willing to chime in), I am simply curious as to Bricker’s reasoning to declare the firing justified. I do not want to speculate on potential reasons and I may find myself agreeing with him. However, he started this thread with a bit more than a link and “Discuss,” but not with much more, and I am curious about his reasoning.
“Although her pornography career has concluded, the ongoing availability of her pornographic materials on the Internet will continue to impede her from being an effective teacher and respected colleague,” Cabos-Owen said in the 46-page decision issued Friday by the Commission on Professional Competence.
I guess. But would you feel the same way if she did something that caused her to loose the respect of her community that wasn’t porn? What if she just slept around a lot, or an angry boyfriend posted obscene pictures of her on the web, or she was caught in the middle of executing some really weird (but legal) fetish.
I think pictures of her in some weird furry gangbang taken without her knowledge would cause an equal loss of respect from her students and peers. Would you support her firing then?
the decision is based on the idea that she has created a permanent distraction within and outside her class and therefore cannot function as a teacher. It’s a reasonable decision. every kid in her class is going to have video’s of her on their phone and pictures of her in their folders. It was a reasoned decision.
For the record, while I think the word “justified” is a bit odd, most school districts have some sort of “community standards/moral turpitude” clause, and working as a sex worker is generally seen as being against community standards. I don’t think that’s necessarily a good interpretation of the policy, or that sex work should be seen as being in violation of community standards, but as a teacher it’s hardly shocking or unexpected to me.