Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Extras | All Access e-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

CVCS’ DiDomenico on paid leave of absence, return date unknown

November 15, 2013

SINCLAIRVILLE — For the foreseeable future, the Cassadaga Valley Central School District will operate without a full-time middle/high school principal....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(16)

uhgtbk

Nov-15-13 11:02 PM

She should not be in a tenure situation..... So they should be able to just boot her out! No fault, no harm, no foul. And, evidently not a good moral example. My fear is that they are going to set precedent by giving her tenure as part of her "deal". That would be a horrible blow to taxpayers across the state!!!!

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DKexpat

Nov-15-13 6:49 PM

These days, “cautious terminations” are the name of the game to avoid a lawsuit. People agree to resign with a severance package – instead of being fired unceremoniously and then threatening the employer with a wrongful termination lawsuit.

Layoffs are handled somewhat similarly: “We’ll give you x dollars as severance if you sign this five-page agreement that includes giving up all rights to sue us for ageism, racial bias, etc.”

It’s not right, but it’s the cost of doing business in our litigious society...

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

czychrab

Nov-15-13 6:22 PM

Wow. All of us would know enough to be hunting a new job - across the state.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

joew

Nov-15-13 3:59 PM

I agree Darkstar,kind of reminds me of the IRS babe,different circumstances of course but tax payer dollars for sure!PS Hello from the "Windy City"!

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DarkStar

Nov-15-13 3:54 PM

He's a question, we've reached the point where most companies have insurance to protect them in just such a case. So any award would come from that policy, but the LOA pay comes from the taxpayer.

But I'm sure to the BOE it's not really money because it's only tax dollars.

Personally I think the taxpayers have the right to know EXACTLY why they are being forced to pay someone full salary and benefits while they are not working.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Captain

Nov-15-13 3:30 PM

kcw007: sorry, but I just don't see it that way. I believe it's a matter of being practical, not game over, or the BOE had no choice.

Without knowing what the actual charge(s) was, or the evidence, I presume the BOE merely weighed the cost of litigation over a buyout. Keep in mind, if the BOE didn't have a solid case, Smith wouldn't have resigned. Like I said, I really don't care what he did, but cases like this angers me b/c they do something wrong and the public has to pay!!??

It's perfectly legal for the BOE to hide behind a confidentiality clause to withhold the reason why it asked for Smith's resignation, but it absolutely MUST disclose how much the separation agreement cost the district.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

kingsofcass

Nov-15-13 2:41 PM

So now you can do drugs, sleep with the boss AND get paid!! What the hell!1 my tax dollars should NOT be going to this ********!! I am NOT happy

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

NurseNell

Nov-15-13 2:27 PM

She has an affair with her boss, he's out of his job and she gets paid to stay home and not come to work. She didn't learn that at D'Youville College. She needs to return to school and retake Ethics 101 because she has none.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

kcw007

Nov-15-13 12:07 PM

Employers don't make this sort of deal unless they find themselves with their backs solidly up against a legal wall. There's little doubt that the school district's legal eagles advised the BoE to take this deal, doing otherwise likely posing an unreasonable potential of even more extreme financial distress upon the district. As an administrator she knew how to amass evidence against the board and in her favor. Evidently the board viewed their position as being one of, "GAME OVER".

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DarkStar

Nov-15-13 11:18 AM

Only in government would someone get allowed to take up paid leave for an indefinite period of time.

Of well it's only tax dollars, by the way schools need more money.... FOR THE CHILDREN! What a crock!

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Captain

Nov-15-13 9:41 AM

bob: I'm not "guessing" at anything, and I don't care who's doing what with who, provided it doesn't involve any school kids. When public funds are being spent on a settlement for a public employee who's been accused of engaging in an inappropriate or terminable offense, then those who are being forced to pay the cost have the absolute right to know how much. If you don't care how or where your tax dollars are being spent, that's your choice, but it sure as*****isn't the norm.

6 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

bulldog10

Nov-15-13 8:56 AM

Seems like a lot of problems with school superintendents in Chautauqua county. Cass Valley, Clymer, Westfield, etc.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

commentor

Nov-15-13 8:48 AM

Taxpayer money they have a right to know. Maybe this was an affair gone bad and not sexual harassment. They are an example for children they don't deserve privacy. Whatever happened should be exposed.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

bob1957

Nov-15-13 8:39 AM

HERE WE GO. Bloggers of the world babbling on and GUESSING. All with the sole purpose of taking taxpayer dollars. Who doesn't pay taxes, everyone pays some tax that is accounted for in NYS General Fund, ohhh the almighty taxpayer. How about CITIZEN or is every thing in the world Republican?

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rumblefish

Nov-15-13 7:44 AM

innocent till proven other wise, till then get out the big broom and sweep it under the carpet, and take a don't ask don't tell stance..

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Captain

Nov-15-13 6:08 AM

She looks like actress Fran Drescher (with blonde hair). ;)

Taxpayers have an absolute right to know how much money it'll cost them for the deal the BOE made with Scott Smith. The BOE may prefer to withhold the reason behind Smith's resignation (and DD's paid leave), but since the deal likely involves a significant amt of cash (benefits?), how can the BOE explain w/o justifying it?

Allegations against Smith & DD have not been proven in court, and legal action is costly, so obviously this is the cheaper way to go. But if the BOE has proof of why it felt Smith's resignation was warranted, and could successfully defend his termination if Smith had refused to resign, then why give him (and her) the courtesy of privacy?

No doubt DD is looking for a new job right now (at taxpayers' expense), and no record to harm her chances.

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 16 of 16 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web