One Example of When We Failed and What Happened Next.

On Behalf of WEA’s More Conservative Members #17 One Example of When We Failed and What Happened Next 5.13.20 When a local association became embroiled in a legal controversy, the local president and the association’s UniServ Rep engaged in what one could only call “witness tampering”. The matter was being handled through legal channels and three of the association’s teachers were told by the association president that their future membership in the association depended upon what they said when they testified. I know what your thinking right now. How does he know? That’s a fair question, but I’ll not be revealing names of people or the association. Suffice it to say I knew all three of those teachers personally and was a spectator in the entire process. The testimony was given before a hearing officer and the matter at issue was decided. But the act of “witness tampering” still remained, although it had not influenced the outcome because the teachers testified exactly as they had planned. The experience had been hard for those teachers and the whole episode left a bad taste in my mouth. I requested and received a personal meeting with the WEA president, who included WEA’s legal counsel in the meeting. I made clear that I had questions for them about the process and, if I wasn’t satisfied with the answers, I’d be taking a New Business Item (NBI) before the next WEA RA to generate protocols that would prevent this from ever happening again. If it went before WEA RA, it essential went public. When the meeting finished, all three of us had agreed that the process for dealing with this whole issue had been poorly handled by the local and by WEA. It was agreed that WEA would review the process and recommend changes to prevent further episodes. Leadership had listened to me, the evidence was considered, and a worthwhile outcome was achieved. Since then, I’ve never heard of any such episode taking place. And I didn’t have to take an NBI to WEA RA. How did I manage to get a personal meeting with the WEA President? Not because I went ballistic and caused a stink. I had already worked within WEA for fifteen years and was a known commodity. I helped get things done that I believed were appropriate and had campaigned for many of the folks who were in leadership. When I had a complaint, they listened. ------------ Ken Mortland is a member of WEA-Retired, continuing a long career of activism in WEA/NEA. He is also a lifelong Republican and a member of Mainstream Republicans of WA Board.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Sec. of State Handles Calls for Help from Other States

On Behalf of WEA’s More Conservative Members #60 Examples of Sec. of State Wyman’s Media Appearances #3 - NBC - Coronavirus 'worst-case scenario': Could the presidential vote be done by mail? 3/26/2020 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/coronavirus-worst-case-scenario-could-presidential-vote-be-done-mail-n1168151 8.24.20 This series is in response to WA State Democratic Party Chairperson’s claiming Sec. of State Kim Wyman has not been “championing vote by mail across the country” . •Wyman said she's been inundated with calls from colleagues in other states seeking advice. •"The first thing I say is people need to understand the context," she said. "I am probably the biggest champion of vote by mail in the country, but it took us five years to move from polling places to vote-by-mail." •Every state that isn't used to voting primarily by mail will have to prepare for a huge increase in volume. •Voters need to be told not only how to v
Read more

ARE THE ATTACKS ON USPS AN ATTACK ON THE CONSTITUTION?

SERIOUSLY! ARE YOU KIDDIN’ ME!! #10 ARE THE ATTACKS ON USPS AN ATTACK ON THE CONSTITUTION? Aren’t These People Supposed to Know Better? 8.26.20 -The US Postal Service was created by an enabling act in the US Constitution. (Article I, Section 8, Clause 7). -Under the Tenth Amendment to the US Constitution, election protocols are the responsibility of the States, subject to the US Constitution. (The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.) It is, therefore, my opinion that the recent actions taken by Pres. Trump’s recently appointed Postmaster General Louis DeJoy constitute a double assault on the US Constitution. Furthermore, the timing and targeting of mail sorting and delivery capabilities are clearly intended to disrupt the upcoming General Election and set the scene for a refusal by Pres. Trump to honor the results of the election, should he be defeated.
Read more

The Righteous US v. The Evil Them

Could This Be the Beginning of a Trend? #15 The Righteous US v. The Evil Them 7.8.20 There’s a great line, spoken by Ben Franklin, in the stage play/movie “1776”. I’m paraphrasing here, but it goes something like this…. “Revolution in the first person, our revolution, is always good. It’s only bad in the third person, their revolution.” As I look at the text of President Trump’s Mt. Rushmore speech, I see this concept in the form of an effort to emphasize an “US v. Them” scenario. On the Fourth of July, I would imagine a speech would emphasize the “WE”, but that does not seem to be the case. For example: "Our nation is witnessing a merciless campaign to wipe out our history, defame our heroes, erase our values, and indoctrinate our children." To start with, I’m struck by the scenario of “our nation”, not theirs; the “our history”, not theirs; “our heroes”, not theirs; “our values”, not theirs; and “our children”, not theirs. It implies “they” are not p
Read more