Sullivan: Let the administrators do their job
May 26, 2021 | By Dan Sullivan As a district resident who has coached hundreds of children and a father of four students, I feel compelled to comment about the Harwood Unified Union School Board’s recent discussions and actions regarding the former Harwood Boys Hockey coach.
The board has set a poor and expensive precedent by voting to investigate a matter of employment termination. Having this topic on an agenda was alarming given that minors were involved. Simply put, matters of at-will employee terminations are 100% the responsibility of our administrators, and far outside the purview of what a school board should discuss in public. People who are fired are never happy and this sets a precedent that all such complaints need to be investigated.
The decision to investigate calls into question many issues, among the more obvious:
The principals involved in this decision are having their professional knowledge and judgment questioned by the very board that hired them a year ago. Their resumes are far superior to that of any board member; they have extensive training in determining appropriate action when someone files a serious and formal complaint. Put yourself in the shoes of the administrators – they have to decide in real time if the actions of an employee pose any form of threat to a student. A parent felt compelled and concerned enough to lodge a complaint with the administration, it was not something the administration sought out.
Anyone who has coached children in the last ten years, especially those who hold high level coaching licenses, are aware that zero tolerance is a common concept throughout coach training. Zero tolerance means exactly that for any matter of abuse – and the scope of what is considered abuse is broad. There is nothing written about ‘“almost zero tolerance,” where, if you are a popular male coach backed by the community, you are held to a lesser standard.
Safe sport policy on electronic communication from coaches to players requires parents to be copied. It should be constructive and appropriate for the players and their development on the team. An email or text to players is going to be held to a higher level of scrutiny than a fiery locker room speech.
What is the threshold for when the board gets involved in a matter of employee termination? Is it only an issue for the board if the employee is a popular male coach who is able to garner community support and petition? Bias can now be argued for any at-will employee termination that is not investigated. This has created a liability for the district.
How does spending upwards of $30,000 of taxpayer money to investigate this matter benefit my children who attend district schools? None of them are ice hockey players. It sure would be great if we spent this money in a way that benefits all students. Or are we so robust in funding that the board is not concerned with the expense of this investigation?
It’s been noted that the board is behind schedule on the long awaited high school bond. But they’ve spent hours discussing a topic outside their purview. This will consume more time at future meetings. Our high school has water leaking through the roof and being collected in trash buckets, but the board feels compelled to spend precious time in areas outside its scope?
What will the board do with the conclusions found in the investigation? What can it do with them? Will there be a public discussion about the parent and students involved? Will the board discuss the reasons for the coach’s firing? The investigation will only cause more harm in this entire matter. The board should have listened to its members who rightfully said “case closed.”
A few board member comments have stood out. One felt the employee had no voice, and no opportunity for recourse. There absolutely is recourse – take the employer to court. If the former coach feels he was wrongfully terminated, he can file a lawsuit and have a court of law decide the merits. District taxpayers should not have to foot the bill of this investigation.
Please make the students of our district the focal point of board work. Just a hint…combining our two middle schools (that are five miles apart) into one robust middle school and promoting a bond to upgrade our circa 1965 high school are the real issues facing our district.
In revisiting the motion – at the unanimous request of the district’s administrative team – the board has the opportunity to correct this mistake and protect the liability of the district. Please do just that – listen to your administrators and put the matter to rest.
Dan Sullivan lives in Waitsfield.