Moxie Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 One of the favorite teachers at the Catholic school my kids attend was let go today because she moved in with her boyfriend. On one hand, I get it and it was in her contract. On the other hand, she is a great teacher and we know many people who are living together. It isn't a big deal anymore. I'm bummed. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SparklyUnicorn Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 :huh: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marbel Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 Just 'cause many people are living together doesn't mean the school shouldn't expect the teacher to fulfill the terms of her contract. Apparently it is a big deal to some people; those running the school, at least. 20 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SparklyUnicorn Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 Although how do they know this information? 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anne in CA Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 That is rough. I'm sorry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selkie Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 She must have known she'd be fired if it was in her contract, so keeping her job must not have been important to her. It's too bad for her students, though. 11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MomatHWTK Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 Yeah, I'd think if a guy was worth getting fired over he'd be worth marrying. 23 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farrar Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 Obviously it's within their rights to do it, but what a cruddy decision. I can't even imagine thinking that way. I know a lot of people on this board care, but I can't imagine caring. Keep it consensual. Otherwise, it's no one's business. 18 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FriedClams Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 I wouldn't call it drama. She made a decision knowing what the consequences would be - both to her and her students. She didn't fulfill a contract and was terminated. I don't see any drama in that. I am impressed the school stood by its statement of faith. 26 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 I wouldn't call it drama. She made a decision knowing what the consequences would be - both to her and her students. She didn't fulfill a contract and was terminated. I don't see any drama in that. I am impressed the school stood by its statement of faith. The drama is that she is a favorite teacher and lots of people disagree with this decision. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kitten18 Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 That's a bummer, I can definitely see why you're disappointed. 🙠Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catwoman Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 Although how do they know this information? That's what I'm wondering, too. If I was doing something that I knew could get me fired, I would be very careful to keep it very quiet. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catwoman Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 The drama is that she is a favorite teacher and lots of people disagree with this decision. If she knew it was in her contract and she signed the contract, there is no drama. People can disagree all they'd like, but if she signed the contract and the school chooses to enforce the rule, the only one at fault is the teacher for violating the terms of her contract. 24 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 They know because she is under 30 and social media exists. Everyone knows everything about her. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alte Veste Academy Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 If she knew it was in her contract and she signed the contract, there is no drama. People can disagree all they'd like, but if she signed the contract and the school chooses to enforce the rule, the only one at fault is the teacher for violating the terms of her contract. I agree. And I "lived in sin" with DH for years before we got married. LOL Living together before marriage doesn't bother me in the least. She signed the contract. If she violated it, she should have resigned, not have waited to be "let go." That's the only drama I can imagine about the whole thing. It's a Catholic school with traditional values. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catwoman Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 One other thing -- if this is a known restriction that is placed on the teachers, there may be plenty of parents who are pleased that the school fired the teacher, and it could even be a reason why they decided to enroll their children in that particular school. Some people still oppose the idea of couples living together before marriage. Personally, it doesn't matter to me, but if it did, I would want that teacher fired because she signed that contract. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alte Veste Academy Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 Obviously it's within their rights to do it, but what a cruddy decision. I can't even imagine thinking that way. I know a lot of people on this board care, but I can't imagine caring. Keep it consensual. Otherwise, it's no one's business. A cruddy decision to have the policy or a cruddy decision to enforce it? If the former, I might agree if it weren't a traditional Catholic school. If the latter, I disagree based on the contractual obligation which she knowingly created. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catwoman Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 They know because she is under 30 and social media exists. Everyone knows everything about her. Well, then perhaps she should be a little smarter about what she posts online. She doesn't sound too bright if "everyone knows everything about her." 10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MercyA Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 (edited) She should have been fired. Good for them for upholding their standards. Edited March 11, 2017 by MercyA 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catwoman Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 She should have been fired. Good for them for upholding their standards. :iagree: I'm never happy to hear when anyone loses their job, but in this case, she should have been prepared -- particularly if she was advertising her living arrangements on social media when she knew she was in direct violation of her contract. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 Agreed. I'm sorry you're losing a favorite teacher, but those were the rules she agreed to. If it was an emergency housing situation I would expect that she could have notified the school and waived the living requirements for a month or two, but this sounds like a premeditated and intentional choice to violate her contract. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maize Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 The drama is that she is a favorite teacher and lots of people disagree with this decision. People disagree that the school should abide by the terms of the contract the teacher signed? Or that the teacher should abide by the contract? What do they think a contract is? This is a religious school, with specific religious standards that it apparently values. The teacher presumably read and understood the contract before signing it. I see no cause for drama here. 15 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JudoMom Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 If anything, people should be upset with the teacher. She knew what was in her contract, and she knew she was teaching at a Catholic school. If she cared about her students, she could've waited until the end of the school year so the school wasn't put in the position to fire her. 14 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadrunner Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 I am trying to picture a contract. What exactly did it say? No male roommates? Or no premarital sex? Or no male roommates if you are in love with them? I have had plenty of male roommates and no physical relationship with any one of them. I simply shared rent. She could claim they are sharing rent but no physical relations. I am assuming installing cameras in her bedroom is not in the contract. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farrar Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 A cruddy decision to have the policy or a cruddy decision to enforce it? If the former, I might agree if it weren't a traditional Catholic school. If the latter, I disagree based on the contractual obligation which she knowingly created. A cruddy decision to place such a value on that over quality of instruction. Obviously, if you send your kids to Catholic school or work there, then you open yourselves to it though. So in that sense, it's all kosher. I do wonder if they've ever fired a male teacher for a social media post. Sigh. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DawnM Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 Drama is my co-worker who was punched in the face by an angry student. If there is any drama in the situation you are mentioning, the teacher created it. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 Drama is my co-worker who was punched in the face by an angry student. If there is any drama in the situation you are mentioning, the teacher created it. Oh man, are they okay? That's awful :( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valley Girl Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 One of the favorite teachers at the Catholic school my kids attend was let go today because she moved in with her boyfriend. On one hand, I get it and it was in her contract. On the other hand, she is a great teacher and we know many people who are living together. It isn't a big deal anymore. I'm bummed. It's always sad when you lose a good teacher, but there's no drama here. She violated her contract, so losing her job is a self-inflicted wound in this case. If she was posting about it on Facebook, she was advertising her actions on top of it. Not much cause for sympathy here. People who disagree with the Church's stance are free to teach at any number of other schools if they're qualified. 10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farrar Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 People disagree that the school should abide by the terms of the contract the teacher signed? Or that the teacher should abide by the contract? What do they think a contract is? This is a religious school, with specific religious standards that it apparently values. The teacher presumably read and understood the contract before signing it. I see no cause for drama here. I haven't seen anyone in the thread disagree with the idea that they were within their rights and that they absolutely could fire her and that she should probably have expected the possibility - and maybe even planned for it by selling it as a "roommate" situation or not posting on social media. I think it's more that some of us feel it's unfortunate that so much emphasis is placed on a young woman's sexual and romantic choices in that contract instead of on her job performance. I know that's the way of most religions, but I think it's rather pathetic. 11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluegoat Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 (edited) Yeah, I don't see this as something to get excited about. Maybe it's because there are a lot of Catholic schools that are more or less just like non-religious schools, but I can't imagine people would find it odd that there would be expectations at any other sort of orthodox school around basic lifestyle things. Even if the teacher him or herself didn't belong to the religion. Or, I suppose, a school that had a strong but non-religious perspective on something. I think if I were in a similar position, I'd have resigned. Edited March 11, 2017 by Bluegoat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DawnM Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 Oh man, are they okay? That's awful :( She was very upset, her husband showed up and told her she didn't have to put up with that, and so she quit. Right then. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 She was very upset, her husband showed up and told her she didn't have to put up with that, and so she quit. Right then. Honestly? Good for her. She shouldn't be made to feel unsafe doing her job. What a shame. That's scary for all the others teachers too I imagine! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-rap Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 Reminds me of when my high school biology teacher, "Miss XXXX" became pregnant. Whooee, that certainly created a lot of drama! But it was a public high school so she was allowed to stay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DawnM Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 Honestly? Good for her. She shouldn't be made to feel unsafe doing her job. What a shame. That's scary for all the others teachers too I imagine! Yeah, I felt so bad for her. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootAnn Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 My ex-SIL taught at a Catholic school. Her contract has some sort of morality clause in it. When she separated from my brother & had her boyfriend move in, my brother notified the school. (I'm not saying what he did was right. He is still hurting over her & has done a lot of stupid things.) They did not fire her, but they chose not to renew her contract for the following year. It caused less chaos for the kids to let her go at the end of the school year. I'm pretty sure it wasn't even Christmas when my brother went to see the principal. So, lots of the school year was left. Sad that the kids have lost a good teacher & have to deal with the transition to a new teacher (or long-term sub, more likely). I wonder if the teacher didn't think the school would actually enforce the contract provisions? I know my SIL didn't think her school would do anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wonderchica Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 I am trying to picture a contract. What exactly did it say? No male roommates? Or no premarital sex? Or no male roommates if you are in love with them? I have had plenty of male roommates and no physical relationship with any one of them. I simply shared rent. She could claim they are sharing rent but no physical relations. I am assuming installing cameras in her bedroom is not in the contract. This reminds me... many, many moons ago there was a girl on The Real World who went to Brigham Young University. They had a no-opposite-sex-roommates clause in their... morality contract? School standards? I don't know what they call it, but she was kicked out of school for going on the show and having platonic male roommates. I don't recall her doing anything risqué at all on the show, although a few years later she was on The Challenge version and was quite a nutter by then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marbel Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 I haven't seen anyone in the thread disagree with the idea that they were within their rights and that they absolutely could fire her and that she should probably have expected the possibility - and maybe even planned for it by selling it as a "roommate" situation or not posting on social media. I think it's more that some of us feel it's unfortunate that so much emphasis is placed on a young woman's sexual and romantic choices in that contract instead of on her job performance. I know that's the way of most religions, but I think it's rather pathetic. Why do you jump to the conclusion that male teachers don't have the same requirements in their contracts? There is nothing in the OP to indicate that. Some of the responses to this thread are rather puzzling. It seems some people would be OK with the teacher hiding the fact that she is living in violation of her contract. Do people really want that kind of duplicity in a teacher? Presumably people who go to the expense of sending their kids to Catholic school do so in part because they agree with the ethical and moral standards of the Church. So I'd think those parents would expect the teachers to also abide by them. If I was a parent at that school, I'd be angry if any teacher was found to be in violation of the contract and not fired. If not, what's the point of the contract? 17 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bambam Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 I also don't see any drama in this situation. Teacher signed a contract. Whether we agree with the terms of the contract is irrelevant. She freely signed a contract with certain terms and conditions. She later decided to violate one of those conditions. Her employment was terminated as a direct result of that. She has no reason to complain. And the issue should not be up for discussion. Period. People can complain all they want, but I think they should really mind their own business. The parents are the ones creating drama. Let them use this to teach their children a lesson about contracts and what can happen if you violate one. 12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barb_ Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 I'm going with she should have waited until the end of the term out of a sense of responsibility to her students. Or they should have let her finish the year before letting her go, again out of a sense of responsibility to the students. That said, it's a crappy contract and I would have a strong opinion if any of my kids wanted to work under those conditions. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farrar Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 Why do you jump to the conclusion that male teachers don't have the same requirements in their contracts? There is nothing in the OP to indicate that. Some of the responses to this thread are rather puzzling. It seems some people would be OK with the teacher hiding the fact that she is living in violation of her contract. Do people really want that kind of duplicity in a teacher? Presumably people who go to the expense of sending their kids to Catholic school do so in part because they agree with the ethical and moral standards of the Church. So I'd think those parents would expect the teachers to also abide by them. If I was a parent at that school, I'd be angry if any teacher was found to be in violation of the contract and not fired. If not, what's the point of the contract? I assume they do. But I do wonder if they're as enforced. For one thing, I'm guessing that most of the teachers are female. I heard about a situation like this at a school once where it didn't apply to other employees, who were mostly male - administrative staff and support staff. But only to teacher who were mostly female. For those of us who think that "living in sin" is an absurd thing to get worked up about or put in a contract, the duplicity is really not a big deal. I'm privileged enough not to have needed a job enough that I'd sign that clause in the first place because I find it offensive. But if I did, I wouldn't see the lie as a big deal. Definitely as a parent, it wouldn't bother me that she lied. I'd think, too bad she got caught. She was just trying to live her life. Having sex outside of marriage or living with a significant other is about as offensive as... eating green beans or going jogging or reading a book... not offensive or questionable in the least. It's the school putting the clause in that I would dislike. Not that I'm questioning that they can. They can. That's why I stand by my language that it's pathetic. And why organized religion is such a turn off. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catwoman Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 I'm going with she should have waited until the end of the term out of a sense of responsibility to her students. Or they should have let her finish the year before letting her go, again out of a sense of responsibility to the students. That said, it's a crappy contract and I would have a strong opinion if any of my kids wanted to work under those conditions. Your kids would be making an informed choice if they took a teaching job at that school, and if they disagreed with the conditions of the contract, they should not accept that job. You may not like the contract, but at least the school was upfront about their requirements and expectations. This particular teacher should not be at all surprised that she was fired. 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 (edited) Lots of corporations that having nothing to do with religion have morality contracts for the execs and C levels though. It's not just a church thing. They might not be dictating who you can live with, but you bet if you (or your spouse) cause a scandal to the company with shenanigans of any sort, they're going to ask you to step down at many of the more conservative corporations. If people don't want to deal with the rules, they shouldn't sign the contracts. Obviously for this teacher, she chose to work at a private school knowing this was their rule. It sounds like she basically thumbed her nose at them. If she didn't want to have a moral party to answer to, she should've gone to work at a public school. ETA: This is media centered, but interesting, and not much different than what I've seen dh have to sign. http://jipel.law.nyu.edu/vol-5-no-1-3-epstein/ Edited March 11, 2017 by texasmom33 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barb_ Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 Your kids would be making an informed choice if they took a teaching job at that school, and if they disagreed with the conditions of the contract, they should not accept that job. You may not like the contract, but at least the school was upfront about their requirements and expectations. This particular teacher should not be at all surprised that she was fired. That was the exact point I made. I think both parties could have behaved better and it seems like the students were lost in the kerfuffle. They were the real aggrieved party. And as an aside, the contract is stupid lol 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marbel Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 I assume they do. But I do wonder if they're as enforced. For one thing, I'm guessing that most of the teachers are female. I heard about a situation like this at a school once where it didn't apply to other employees, who were mostly male - administrative staff and support staff. But only to teacher who were mostly female. For those of us who think that "living in sin" is an absurd thing to get worked up about or put in a contract, the duplicity is really not a big deal. I'm privileged enough not to have needed a job enough that I'd sign that clause in the first place because I find it offensive. But if I did, I wouldn't see the lie as a big deal. Definitely as a parent, it wouldn't bother me that she lied. I'd think, too bad she got caught. She was just trying to live her life. Having sex outside of marriage or living with a significant other is about as offensive as... eating green beans or going jogging or reading a book... not offensive or questionable in the least. It's the school putting the clause in that I would dislike. Not that I'm questioning that they can. They can. That's why I stand by my language that it's pathetic. And why organized religion is such a turn off. Really? Wow. That blows my mind. So, it's OK to break a contract and lie about it if you disagree with the terms as long as you don't get caught? You'd tell your kids that that's an OK way to live? It doesn't matter if you (or I) consider people living together to be inoffensive. The people who hired the teacher consider it to be so and she agreed when she signed the contract. Either she wasn't too bright, and signed a contract without fully understanding it and its implications, or she doesn't really care about honoring her commitments. Either way, maybe not the best person to be in a teaching position. . 20 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sdel Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 Hmm...I can understand why this particular religious school has the morality clause and fired the teacher. For the record, my former employer was a Catholic hospital and they have morality clauses. Here locally, the religious schools are as much about teaching the tenets of their faiths as they are about academics. In a religious school they are not just teachers but agents of the faith. But you know, around here private school teacher pay is considered lacking....maybe the teacher wanted an excuse to get fired.... Stefanie 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frances Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 I assume they do. But I do wonder if they're as enforced. For one thing, I'm guessing that most of the teachers are female. I heard about a situation like this at a school once where it didn't apply to other employees, who were mostly male - administrative staff and support staff. But only to teacher who were mostly female. For those of us who think that "living in sin" is an absurd thing to get worked up about or put in a contract, the duplicity is really not a big deal. I'm privileged enough not to have needed a job enough that I'd sign that clause in the first place because I find it offensive. But if I did, I wouldn't see the lie as a big deal. Definitely as a parent, it wouldn't bother me that she lied. I'd think, too bad she got caught. She was just trying to live her life. Having sex outside of marriage or living with a significant other is about as offensive as... eating green beans or going jogging or reading a book... not offensive or questionable in the least. It's the school putting the clause in that I would dislike. Not that I'm questioning that they can. They can. That's why I stand by my language that it's pathetic. And why organized religion is such a turn off. As someone who wouldn't sign such a contract and who also has lots of issues with organized religion, I disagree. To me, her lying is actually the biggest problem, even bigger than violating the contract. She signed a contract of her own free will and knowingly broke it. The only way I would see the lying as not an issue is if she signed the contract knowing she would likely break it in order to take a moral stand, but was willing to accept the consequences. I've actually known two Catholics who did this with Catholic institutions. One was gay and planning to get a civil marriage and knew that would violate the school's policy. The other was a university nurse who knew she would very likely violate the school's prohibition on counseling on birth control options. She felt the policy endangered students' health and was willing to challenge it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catwoman Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 That was the exact point I made. I think both parties could have behaved better and it seems like the students were lost in the kerfuffle. They were the real aggrieved party. And as an aside, the contract is stupid lol I'm not sure how the school could have behaved better. The teacher is the only party at fault here. She violated the terms of her contract, and she was fired as a result. There is no reason for the school to have done anything differently. 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barb_ Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 I'm not sure how the school could have behaved better. The teacher is the only party at fault here. She violated the terms of her contract, and she was fired as a result. There is no reason for the school to have done anything differently. They should have put the needs of the students first. Disrupting the school year in March seems unnecessarily vindictive. They could have waited until June and then put out a statement, "We regret to inform you that Ms X will not be returning next year due to a violation of her contract. We made the decision to allow her to finish out the year because we believe the education of your children is paramount." Etc. They are acting like she was found with a stash of child porn or something. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sdel Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 You know, we're all reading a lot into this.....maybe the living with the boyfriend was just the tip of the iceberg, the excuse, or the public statement. We don't know exactly what may have been going on between the teacher and admin regardless of how much the students and parents love the teacher and vice versa. Maybe she'd been fixing the standardized testing results? Maybe she let some credentials lapse? Maybe she got caught with drugs? Who knows.... Stefanie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barb_ Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 You know, we're all reading a lot into this.....maybe the living with the boyfriend was just the tip of the iceberg, the excuse, or the public statement. We don't know exactly what may have been going on between the teacher and admin regardless of how much the students and parents love the teacher and vice versa. Maybe she'd been fixing the standardized testing results? Maybe she let some credentials lapse? Maybe she got caught with drugs? Who knows.... Stefanie Eh, maybe so but for the sake of discussion I think we have to take it on face value. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.