The Region One Report broke the news of the Region One Board Of Education denying the Level 3 Grievance against Pam Vogel. In response to that news story, Marshall Miles received two responses from Region One Board Of Education members.

Comment one was from past Chairman, and current Kent member of the board Jonathan Moore, his condescending comment:Babble, babble.

Comment two from Sharon representative to the board Bob Whelan, his comment:

Bob Whelan’s response to my story: If one reviews all the documents presented, it is clear that:

1- The complainant did not present any evidence other than hearsay from ostensibly a witness that was not even in the room.

2- The witness, a person who ‘overheard’ the conversation did not even present an affidavit to validate the claim.

3 – Describing that someone is or was out on ‘medical leave’ is not a HIPAA violation – the attorney for the Union admitted as much in the hearing, and apparently there is nothing in John/Jane Doe’s personnel file that even speaks to the circumstances around the original request for medical leave, and John/Jane Doe makes it clear in their statement they have never had any direct interaction with Dr. Vogel.

4 – There is no language in the Teacher contract regarding reasons for the prosecution of grievances that had anything to do with this type of circumstance. The next possible step would be for the Union to bring the grievance to mediation/arbitration, but it is not likely that would change the outcome for all the reasons above. The decision of the Region One Board was unanimous to deny the grievance.
After reviewing the comments from Sharon Region One Board Of Education member Bob Whelan, I decided to contact the HVRFA and ask them about the points Mr. Whelan raised in response to my story on the Region One Board Of Education denying the Level 3 Grievance against Pam Vogel.

The Association provided me with the following response to Mr. Whelan’s post:

1) Mr. Whelan has no idea what is in the teacher’s personnel file as he does not have access to it.

2) Had he access to the teacher’s personnel file, Mr. Whelan would know that there exists a note, composed on physician’s letterhead, indicating that physician’s specialty and that leave was medically necessary.

3) While we cannot state definitively how Ms. Vogel might have known about the teacher’s leave, the fact that she discussed it indicates that she did know.

4) An affidavit was not presented because it would need to be signed; based on past behavior, it was CEA’s opinion that there was cause for concern about retaliation against the witness.

5) Dr. Vogel acknowledged that she spoke about the teacher’s leave with her consultant, claiming that what she said was not as specific. The Board appears to have ignored this fact.

In my eyes(Marshall Miles) this raises even more questions!

1) How does he (Mr.Whelan)know about the file if he does not have access to it?
2) Did he have access to it?
3) When Pam Vogel admitted that she spoke about the teacher’s leave,then that item should have opened an additional investigation by the board to find out exactly what she said, when she said it, and WHY she said it at all.

This should not become another series of events by a Region One
administration official that should be swept under the rug, and put into a dark room. It is the boards responsibility to oversee the administration…lets see some of that oversight.

As to Mr. Moore’s comments, the board Chairman should have Mr.Moore apologize for being rude, condescending, and not acting  in the best interests of the board.