Former SJU Player Dismissed as Coach

[Beasts of the East]

This thread should be renamed the Rush to Judgment special. I don’t know that anyone posting here knows enough to judge whether the schools action was justified. I sure don’t.

Read the article.

Her defense was 1) they had fun 2) they were safe 3) it wasn't a school trip

Bottom line is part time coaches are only hired on a per season basis. Completely up to the school to bring her back. So there was no firing because she is a part time hired for a season.

This in part is why St Johns banished most fraternities. They are liabilities and whenever kids in a frat gather on or off campus, anything they do is a liability for the school. Similar thing here.

There is not a scintilla of speculation that Kia had bad intentions and appears she just wanted to do something nice for her players. So please - stop with the judgment stuff.

To LJSA's point, school boards are elected, and sometimes do questionable things, but in this case the principal likely decided her fate.


The real point of such actions are that every year, dozens and maybe hundreds of teachers/coaches do criminal, stupid stuff with kids. All these rules are designed to protect kids. I can give lots of examples just how rigid some schools are in enforcing these rules, all to protect kids from predators. The rules MUST apply even to those to innocently failed to follow them, because not endorcing those rules are a liability for schools.

 

[Redenbacher]

This thread should be renamed the Rush to Judgment special. I don’t know that anyone posting here knows enough to judge whether the schools action was justified. I sure don’t.

I thought the article was pretty clear- she organized a field trip without school authorization. Lots of issues spring from that. It takes at least an hour by car to get from Copiague to Carnesecca arena. How did they get there? Did she have enough liability insurance in case there was an accident on the highway? Who paid for the tickets? She’s a school employee who received a bunch of free tickets (via her personal foundation) to a game against UConn that was probably sold out, or close to it. Thats a potential conflict of interest if it wasn’t approved by the school ahead of time, which it clearly wasn’t.

 

[logen]

I realize I am an anachronism, a relic from a bygone era. I also don’t pretend to know the rules governing such actions; I adhere to the Red Auerbach rule regarding rules, the less the better. Auerbach famously had one rule, be on time.
But it seems to me from a common sense point of view that a trip not associated with a school in any way should not concern that school in any way, nor should that school have any jurisdiction over that trip. Parents should solely decide what, when and with whom their children can socialize with outside of the official school environment.
If my assumption that Ms. Wright acted completely independent of the school this seems woefully wrong IMO. This is not protecting children, it is draconically preventing them from being influenced by a seemingly positive adult role model with their parents formal written approval.

 

[Redenbacher]

But it seems to me from a common sense point of view that a trip not associated with a school in any way should not concern that school in any way, nor should that school have any jurisdiction over that trip. Parents should solely decide what, when and with whom their children can socialize with outside of the official school environment.

It was associated with the school. If she had just been acting independently via her nonprofit, she would have included other kids from the community on the trip. But she didn't. She only included members of the school basketball team, of which she is the head coach.

 

[logen]

It was associated with the school. If she had just been acting independently via her nonprofit, she would have included other kids from the community on the trip. But she didn't. She only included members of the school basketball team, of which she is the head coach.

It very well may have been, I certainly don’t know; but your reasoning seems faulty. The attendees being exclusively from the school does not in and of itself create a legal association IMO.
Logically, what if Ms. Wright only was able to acquire 2 tickets for the game and took only two players from the team? Would the school have jurisdiction over that?
Again, I am not a lawyer so my last comment on the subject and I certainly would defer my opinion to one who knows the law.

 

[Redenbacher]

It very well may have been, I certainly don’t know; but your reasoning seems faulty. The attendees being exclusively from the school does not in and of itself create a legal association IMO.
Logically, what if Ms. Wright only was able to acquire 2 tickets for the game and took only two players from the team? Would the school have jurisdiction over that?
Again, I am not a lawyer so my last comment on the subject and I certainly would defer my opinion to one who knows the law.

Question is - did she even offer the tickets to anyone in the broader community or did she always plan this outing to be exclusively for her school team? It's a conflict of interest if the latter, she's blurring the lines between her roles as head of a foundation (which is how she got the tickets) and school employee.

There's no question that she exposed the school district to liability, though. If the bus she hired to take the kids to the game got into an accident and resulted in injuries or death, it wouldn't be her little one-person foundation that the victims' families would go after. It would be the deep pockets of the school district. Yes, I know she got the parents to sign waivers. But if it was discovered that she handed the waivers out at school and was otherwise promoting the trip in her capacity as a school employee, the victims lawyers would be all over the school district for allowing that to happen.

 

[logen]

Question is - did she even offer the tickets to anyone in the broader community or did she always plan this outing to be exclusively for her school team? It's a conflict of interest if the latter, she's blurring the lines between her roles as head of a foundation (which is how she got the tickets) and school employee.

There's no question that she exposed the school district to liability, though. If the bus she hired to take the kids to the game got into an accident and resulted in injuries or death, it wouldn't be her little one-person foundation that the victims' families would go after. It would be the deep pockets of the school district. Yes, I know she got the parents to sign waivers. But if it was discovered that she handed the waivers out at school and was otherwise promoting the trip in her capacity as a school employee, the victims lawyers would be all over the school district for allowing that to happen.

Ok, every post, you keep adding “facts” I have said very clearly I am not privy to. I was commenting on what was available in the thread, nothing more, nothing less. A more complete, concise summary of what “you know” in th3 beginning would have added to the exchange.

 

[logen]

Question is - did she even offer the tickets to anyone in the broader community or did she always plan this outing to be exclusively for her school team? It's a conflict of interest if the latter, she's blurring the lines between her roles as head of a foundation (which is how she got the tickets) and school employee.

There's no question that she exposed the school district to liability, though. If the bus she hired to take the kids to the game got into an accident and resulted in injuries or death, it wouldn't be her little one-person foundation that the victims' families would go after. It would be the deep pockets of the school district. Yes, I know she got the parents to sign waivers. But if it was discovered that she handed the waivers out at school and was otherwise promoting the trip in her capacity as a school employee, the victims lawyers would be all over the school district for allowing that to happen.

Well, “IF” is an awful big word when discussing liability and I notice you use it several times. So I assume a reasonable position would be to find out what exactly Ms. Wright did before jumping to conclusions she was in the wrong.
The whole crux of the matter is whether Ms. Wright’s actions put the school in a position of legal liability and therefore giving them the authority to terminate her employment over the trip. Just because a parent may potentially have attempted to hold the school liable doesn’t make it valid.