“Going to”? That probably took about 3 hours, max.
Ha! Nailed it!
At first, I bored with her teaching. Then, I became intrigued. Soon, I became very, very interested. And then I lost interest.
(paraphrased from the Ladies Man)
A proctologist could render a medical opinion by viewing her pictures.
So employers or the government should have the power to enforce honesty regarding the details of one’s personal life?
You should write the panel that unanimously voted against her.
Out of curiosity, would you have agreed the firing was justified if the lie was about something more innocuous? Say if it was if she played poker or has ever worn a skirt that ended more than 3 inches above the knee?
What pathetic behavior on the part of the school.
As a broad proposition with no exceptions? No.
Under the particular circumstances in play here? Yes.
Yes, I think so. She may refuse to answer; she has no right to lie.
It would seem that the “being unable to effectively do her job” argument is a bit, ah, premature. Conjecture, even. What’s the harm in letting her continue until she actually* is* a distraction?
This is the same sort of nonsense that I heard so much of during the Clinton impeachment. “It’s not that he got a blowjob. It’s that he lied about it!”
Lying about something like that is just a polite way of saying “None of your goddam business.”
Children! Porn! Vaginas! Cell phones!
Did she lie? The lawyer in the article says she was unemployed when she was making films. The teacher might be dumb enough to lie about that, but I’d think the lawyer would be smart enough not to, since her employment history in public schools is presumably easy to check.
I think there is some ambiguity in this question. Is it:
[ul]
[li] If it were established that the teacher lied about playing poker/wearing a short skirt, and you were the deciding vote on the school board, would you vote to dismiss the teacher? (That is, do you think this dismissal is managerially justified.)[/li][li] If it were established that the teacher lied about playing poker/wearing a short skirt, and you were the judge reviewing the dismissal, would you sustain the school board’s decision? (That is, do you think the school board was legally permitted to dismiss the teacher — a question that does not reach the managerial wisdom of the policies whose violation led to the termination.) [/ul][/li]
A court ruling finding an employer’s action legally permissible is not necessarily an endorsement of that action’s wisdom. Employers are permitted to run their businesses sensibly or idiotically (with an outer bound of certain labor law and discrimination law caveats).
Fair enough. I think I agree regarding kids. If teachers, administrators, etc are keeping you from effectively doing your job based on your sexual history, then I disagree. Adults that can’t handle stuff like that professionally should be fired (or if they’re aggressive about it, sued for sexual harassment).
Obviously you can’t really expect kids to be professional in the same way, so in that case I agree its appropriate to fire her if it was demonstrably a problem.
Serious question that is not part of some ploy- she doesn’t have that right? Why not? Was she under oath at the time?
Not true. Certainly not in the Clinton case – when you are under oath, being asked questions in a deposition, you absolutely have no right to “politely” lie in an effort spare your questioner hearing the phrase, “None of your goddam business.”
And not true here either.
Granted, when I was that age handheld phones with pictures on them were the stuff of sci-fi fantasies, so I’m not sure what the current rules are, but aren’t kids supposed to not be looking at anything on the phones during class–whether gangbanged teachers, lolcats or the latest paparazzi stills from C-SPAN?
Even if I believed that, how is what you’re doing any better? How do you justify declaring the victim of objectification unfit to hold any job managed by a sufficiently puritanical asshole?
Yeah, I tend to agree with this. But, I can also see why a school administrator would rather not wait until it became a problem (which I am almost 100% sure it would). That said, it does set a pretty bad precedent wrt to sexual actions outisde of work. For example, could Kim Kardashian (whose voluntary sex tape was supposedly stolen and released), or Erin Andrews (of whom a naked video was taken without her knowledge) be fired because of their videos? What about if there wasn’t a video, but the teacher was known to sleep around with lots of (adult) people? Where do you draw the line?