Filipino teachers recruited to sell Mary Kay products
In yesterday's paper, I wrote about a Baltimore City principal who recruited several Filipino teachers to buy and then sell Mary Kay products. The teachers said they believed it would be in their best interest to purchase thousands of dollars in products, even though they knew they were not likely to resell the products. What discipline do you believe the principal should have received?






Comments
Why do they need to be disciplined? Having a second job or buying make-up? Neither is against any rule I know about.
Posted by: Mike Thompson | March 15, 2010 10:27 PM
What exactly constitutes an "appropriate response"? The public and employees of the system deserve more than a bureaucratic non-answer out of North Ave. Given that Alonso has bullied our city delegation and others in the General Assembly to NOT have an elected board, I think there needs to be a measure of accountability and transparency coming from them that is simply lacking given the dictatorial mandates spewing forth from the 4th floor.
If they demand accountability and transparency from us in the system, it only seems appropriate that they extend the same service/courtesy to the larger community in Baltimore.
Those of us who work in the city know there are old-time administrative bullies who think they can do anything without fear of retribution. They know protection is only as far as a phone call to North Ave. away. Clearly that continues. What would happen to a tenured teacher in this position?!? I would love to know the public relations response to that question.
How can we reasonably expect to hold the children accountable for their education if we fail to intervene in the bad behavior of adults who are guilty of exploiting and taking advantage of their positions of power for financial gain?
Posted by: David Ortiz | March 16, 2010 10:05 AM
I am suprised that there is not more outrage about this situation. In the business world this individual would be fired. it is not ethical
Posted by: PT | March 16, 2010 12:23 PM
This whole scandal is outrageous. So it's okay for principals to bully staff members? So much of that goes on in this system, and it's part of the reason for high staff turnover. I've spoken with so many teachers who feel persecuted, not supported by the admins. Our kids are the ones who suffer when good (and still growing) teachers leave the system because they are tired of being treated like crap. The frustrating thing is that the Mary Kay scandal is just the tip of the iceberg, both at IBE, and system-wide. While I understand that there should be privacy in personnel issues, the board and North Ave need to figure out a way to respond. Letting this go without an explanation sends the message to principals that they can do whatever they want, and sends the message to staff that abuses of power are tolerated, staff is not valued, and there is no use in speaking up for yourself.
Posted by: Nadine Von Canstricus | March 16, 2010 1:08 PM
I honestly don't know the rules. I thought that teachers weren't supposed to hold second jobs, but I've never read it in a contract or anything else. At the very least though, the story does say
"In addition, the city's school board rules state that 'principals shall devote themselves exclusively to the work of the school during office hours.'"
Clearly this principal was using her power over her teachers to influence (or bully) them in to making purchases. It seems fairly obvious that this principal should have been fired, and clearly she has not been, so I'm concerned that BCPSS feels that this has been handled. Obviously there's implicit pressure to do what your principal asks you to do. A principal who has an agenda unrelated to the good of the school and students and uses her power as a principal to pursue that agenda should be immediately dismissed.
Posted by: Anonymous | March 16, 2010 3:30 PM
@ PT - the lack of outrage may be due to the fact that Liz had an article about this situation in the Sunday edition. There were/are many responses that were posted there. It may also be because those of us who work in the system have become far too accustomed situations like this. It's truly only the tip of the iceberg.
@ anonymous - Teachers ARE able to have second jobs. In fact, many, many of us do.
Posted by: avalon | March 16, 2010 4:44 PM
This is another sad case covered up by the high school office and the school system. IBE, gangs recruiting in schools and other dirty moves by unethical and questionable administrators. IBE has been a horrible mess for the last few years, partially because MaryKay is on the mind of the principal more than the reality of the school.
Mr. Japzson (sp?) should be commended for stepping forward, but his day is coming now. He will be gone before Mrs. Williams. He broke the City Schools code of lies, and silence. His school community better circle the troops, here come the audits and "visits".
Liz don't let them off so easy, Duke is just giving the company line. Obviously the victims aren't satisfied.
Did it strike anyone strange that the victims and principal were brought together in Oct? ugly, just straight ugly.
Posted by: Stu | March 16, 2010 9:52 PM
"Scandal" and "outrage" seem a little much in this case.
The notion that these women were in fear of being deported has been mentioned. If it is true it is unfortunate. But it is only an issue if a threat was made or implied by the principal. Otherwise it is not an issue.
PT, I don't agree that if this happened in the business world that the person would have been fired. I have worked in many venues where employees sold Mary Kay or Avon. It is usually tolerated. It does become problematic if it is a supervisor. But it would be a rare case where it would be cause for immediate dismissal.
In the business world termination is a last resort and second chances are the rule, rather than the exception.
There is too much vindictiveness in the world already. It is best to resist it.
Posted by: Dana LaRocca | March 17, 2010 8:35 AM
"The notion that these women were in fear of being deported has been mentioned. If it is true it is unfortunate. But it is only an issue if a threat was made or implied by the principal. Otherwise it is not an issue."
It is an issue if the teachers PERCEIVED it to be an issue. That is the bottom line. A supervisor should never, ever put subordinates in that kind of situation. She may never have intended for the teachers to feel intimidated, but a good manager would understand that she placed them in an uncomfortable position and she placed herself in a precarious one.
Stu is absolutely correct that Mr.Japson will certainly now be a target. There is a very sick, very active omerta in BCPSS and he has violated it. I would not want to be him right now. People on the outside have no idea what really goes on in this system. Too many good people have either been pushed out for being honest, or have left because they can't bear to be a party to what's going on. We'd hoped that the culture of corruption would be dismantled by Dr. Alonso, but that is not the case. It is alive and well.
Posted by: avalon | March 19, 2010 5:54 PM
read www.pinktruth.com and you will see this is nothing new to the Mk world. this the way they do business.
Susan
Posted by: Susan Jeffers | July 27, 2010 6:46 PM