From the Journal Star: “In a surprise move Monday, the Peoria District 150 School Board terminated its contract with treasurer/controller Pam Schau, an at-will employee, effective immediately.”
The district isn’t saying why they fired Schau — they can’t discuss personnel issues. But Schau herself told the newspaper that Superintendent Lathan called her after the meeting and told her “the board felt I was not providing sufficient leadership in the area of accounting.”
Schau’s contract allows her to be fired without cause, according to the paper. She’s been employed by District 150 just over a year.
CJ, an at will employee does not have a contract, so how did Schau have a contract that stated she could be fired without cause. Also, if she wasn’t an effective “leader”, then isn’t that CAUSE? Does Dr. Lathan have another friend in North Carolina needing a job? D150’s new assistant supt. was making $83,000. a year at her last job and now she is making $135,000. Wow, lucky her….
Perhaps Schau told Lathan that they could not afford to hire all her friends at such a high salary?
I suspect she was an “employee at will” and the pj star incorrectly used the word “contract”. She probably had a “letter of understanding” with the District defining her responsibilities and pay over a specific term. The letter most likely said she could be dismissed at any time for no reason.
I also suspect she received some kind of severance.
I think the fact that she was terminated 6-0 probably speaks to the fact that it was justified.
District 150 observer: that is the issue. She had been given a 3 year contract in Feb. of 2010. How can you be an at will employee and have a contract too? It does not make sense.
As far as the vote, the BoE only has information that the supt. allows them to have. Many times, as in the past, this board has been worse than ignorant on an issue due to the fact that Hinton kept them in the dark.
As I said, I assume she had a “letter of understanding” or “statement of benefits”, not a contract. If she truly had a contract, she would not have been an at will employee. This letter would have spelled out that she was an at will employee.
She could still litigate against D150, but would have to do it under labor law as opposed to contract law.
I suspect the word “contract” is being thrown around incorrectly.
As for the vote, I assume D150 Board members are probably pretty cautious these days and do some leg work themselves. Usually a unanimous vote means the term is justified.
I also rarely believe what a terminated employee says as to the reasons. The employee can say whatever they want and the employer is handcuffed in what they can say.
I heard most of the board believes it should support whatever the new supt wants regardless of what that is. She obviously wants her own person to control the money. (!)
Note that Martha Ross attended the entire meeting, including the ex. session, but left before the vote to fire the controller/treasurer.
This was taken directly from the January 11, 2010 District 150 School Board Agenda:
10. CONTRACT EXTENSION FOR COMPTROLLER/TREASURER
Proposed Action: That the employment contract of Pamela S. Schau, Comptroller/Treasurer dated July 6, 2009, be
amended to extend the Contract termination date to June 30, 2012.
SHE WAS NOT AN AT WILL EMPLOYEE.
I hope this is not the beginning of a wash of present employees by the new Supt.; if she could find a way to get to incompetent teachers and ridding us of them, she would be worth her money. Too many causes for present day problems and too few remedies; I don’t think bringing in a slew of people from North Carolina is the answer, we have good people here in Peoria. Don’t say “where are they”, the folks on wisconsin Ave. know where they are and who they are. Most of them are teachers!! Get with it Lathan.
well, I don’t think any of us know exactly how she was classified. She may have had a “contract” which stated she could be terminated at any time for any reason with no further compensation and that called her an at-will employee. Her “contract” may have given her no rights. I suspect this is how is worked.
That said, we are all guessing.
While I can’t speak on personnel issues, I can clarify the contract point: Most* administration contracts in District 150 have a clause that allow either party to terminate the contract “without cause” for payment of a particular penalty spelled out in the contract. This contract specified a payment of 10% of remaining salary for the contract year.
You can FOIA the contract without any problem, it is public information.
(*Maybe all, but I haven’t looked at them all.)
(Fixed a typo 3 minutes after original post.)
Looks like Schau gets a payment between $11,000 and $11,500.
Laura, thanks for clarifying that. Very helpful.
I think this *might* be an instance where the Board of Ed. should get a “pass”. There is not enough information for the John Q. Public to have an opinion and the fact that it was a 6 – 0 vote suggests there is something more to the story. From a personal standpoint, I think a lot of people are very disappointed because Schau was very much liked and a welcome breath of fresh air to an information starved public. Can’t help but feel though that we need to tread lightly here. If past experience is any indication, more info will trickle out as time goes by.
But District Watcher…isn’t it more important that we jump to conclusions without benefit of any information? I mean really, it is District 150 so it must be definitionally wrong and we would be remiss in our obligations as citizens to fail to complain about it.
You have a good point, Spike.
Oh, that’s right – it was “Lynn”
Hey Lynn District 150 has named a new head of Security. What do you think? Just in case your insiders who gave you all your info in the past didn’t fill you in – it’s Officer Greg Collins (per Emerge).
Wasn’t it “Lynn” that was questioning the hiring procedures for the new security chief? Lynn Smith, I believe.
“have a clause that allow either party to terminate the contract “without cause” for payment of a particular penalty spelled out in the contract. ”
Laura… you guys need a new HR director. You guys don’t have contracts with your employees you have toilet paper.
Why not save yourself the trouble and make them punch a clock for hourly wages? You’d save a lot of money…
Spikeless, District 150 is a public body. We shouldn’t have to jump to conclusions. They should do everything in their power to give us information so that we don’t jump to conclusions. I am finding that some of my FOIA’d information has given me cause to jump to conclusions about the accuracy of information I receive. I will continue to seek the truth.
Could this be the result of the investigation into the $9 raises? Someone said their signature was forged in that situation, as I recall. Sharon, I do hope you continue to seek the truth for a very long time and shine a light on the other stuff.
Sharon, Elaine, and all the arm-chair quarterbacks should call for an end to their gamesmanship. It seems we really do have a leader in place. Hopefully teachers will begin policing their own too. How about an open teachers vote on tenure! Quit protecting those that are poisoning the learning environment for our children. Nobody should receive lifetime employment for 3 years service. We need a REAL tool to remediate or remove ineffective teachers. Let them be “adjunk prof’s”, not teachers of our children. Don’t just seek the truth that serves your own views, seek and share the FULL truth.
While you all are keeping tabs on #150, I am pretty much alone on the County Board keeping tabs on our (to be) new museum building and grounds. It appears only Board Member Brad Harding and I seem to be asking the hard questions.
Thanks, C.J. and Karrie, for your research and postings. Please read my factual blogs on the situation that I posted today.
fyi: you must work 4 full years and tenure is not achieved until the 1st day of your 5th year. If you find a teacher that should not be teaching ask yourself, who was the APRINCIPAL that hired this person. teachers do not hire teachers, principals do. btw, some of the worst principals end up hiring “questionable” educators because the cream of the crop will not work for a poor administrator with horrible people skills. Get rid of lousy principals and you will find fantastic teachers. D150 has some of the best educators in the state, I am proud to say.
Susan-
It is not always the principal that may keep a sub par teacher around. If a bad teacher has connections to the central office they may be “protected”
Like I said, teachers do not hire teachers. Besides when a principal hires a new teacher, it is the JOB of the principal to mentor and help the new hire become an excellent teacher. If that doesn’t happen, get rid of the principal and give the new hire another chance, then, if their talents do not come through, give them the ax. Too many principals continue to keep teachers that are sub par because they know they have NOT done anything to help them. This is when the union steps in. Procedures are in place for a reason. You simply don’t hire a new teacher fresh out of college and say, go for it, anymore than any other profession. A mentor or colleague to mentor is worth their weight in gold, if done properly.
Look, I don’t buy the whole “Schau got canned because of the unapproved raises” thing. At least as I understand it, her gig as accountant/controller was not one that was able to grant the raises in the first place…if it comes down from administration that the raises are OK, then she pays them.
Since this was done totally out of the blue, you can bet there is something going on behind the scenes. You watch…one of Lathan’s compadres will be hired to take Schau’s place.
To me, this firing begets many questions, most of which surround the upper echelon of D150 Administration and the Board, as to “who knew what and when” about all of those raises. I’d be willing to bet that Norm and the Board knew about them, but when the information was made public, they quickly took the “I swear I had no idea!” approach, and figured they could let someone hang out to dry for it all…not, of course, before the close of the fiscal year…that way, they could get as much blood out of the turnip as possible.
It would also be interesting to know if Schau had any knowledge of Mary Davis’ dealings…whether she agreed with McArdle and informed her superiors about shifty financial behavior…and if she did, if Hinton and the Board ignored her information…or if they just decided to declare that little audit the district did of those books as being just fine over Schau’s objections. Just a little trial balloon I figured I’d float out there. Too bad the PJ Star can’t be bothered to ask those kind of questions.
Schau was Asst. Superintendent of Business at Maine Township H.S. Man, that’s a great high school…too bad that D150 doesn’t know when to keep good people on staff. Of course, taking recent history into consideration, if they’re not a “yes man,” then they’re pretty much immediately terminated.
Play Time Is Over–A thorn by any other name is still a thorn–Jim, you can disguise your name, but your message is always the same. Yours is a style that is so easy to detect.
There are now 6 accounting clerk job openings at the admin building. 6. Not good.
TV news tonight said Schau will get 1/3 of a year’s pay as severance per her contract.
Sharon…….
Tell me who else did they hire last night that there is no mention of in the paper?????
District Watcher: “There is not enough information for the John Q. Public to have an opinion and the fact that it was a 6 – 0 vote suggests there is something more to the story.”
What was vote to fire Julie McArdle?
Vote to fire McArdle was 4-1
Ross was no. Spangler not present. Gorenz not present. That vote is going to cost the district a pretty penny.
“TV news tonight said Schau will get 1/3 of a year’s pay as severance per her contract.”
So the district has over $40,000 to piss away?? Must be nice!
Lynn, they didn’t vote publicly for anyone, so I don’t know anything more than what I’ve read in the PJS and on Emerge’s blog–I don’t believe the security chief has been made public, has it?
Susan, you are so, so right–teachers do not hire teachers. Jim Stowell expects teachers to “police” people that they did not choose. Sorry, but principals are paid higher salaries for a reason–they do have more responsibility, so evaluating, training, and firing teachers are all in a day’s work for them. I have, also, said over and over again that principals can fire teachers if they take the time and effort to follow protocol to document offenses, etc. I never, never considered myself to be the overseer of any other teacher–that task was nowhere in my job description. Teachers should not be pitted against teachers–that’s a great way to destroy the learning environment for students. Students enjoy an environment where teachers have a good relationship with each other. (Students sometimes make attempts to pit teachers against one another–they carry many tales). Professionals, however, are very careful not to let students know when and if they have disagreements with other teachers. I have, also, witnessed principals, deans, etc., who have reprimanded teachers in front of students–very, very unprofessional.
Lynn Smith,
Emerge posted on her blog that it appears that Greg Collins, a Peoria police sergeant for over 30 years, has been named as the head of Security. On the district website, under the departments tab, Greg Collins’ name is listed as the contact.
Earlier, you said:
“This is the new change that has come with D150?s new leader…….
The current security chief is retiring and she is actually going to interview one applicant who has been fired from at least two previous jobs..one for sexual harassment. he gets bad work reviews, seldom is at his assigned school and falsifies overtime records.
A second applicant was forced to resign from his previous job, works his own hours, falsifies overtime and spends most of his day at work in a closed room at school with his paramour.
The new superintendent will interview consider those two for the chief of security’s job simply because they are minorities yet she has refused to interview and consider most of the very qualified white applicants for the job. The second one described above is going to get the job because he is the least qualified BLACK applicant.”
Was that “second applicant” the police sergeant Greg Collins or is there another Greg Collins that fits your description (other than being black)?
Sharon – I hope teachers get an evaluation tool and process they can work with and that is fair. Tenure is obsolete, but some poorly trained principals aren’t the best judge of talent either. Dr. Lathan wants to build capacity of outstanding principals and I couldn’t agree more. Tenure has been used as a shield by many who are poor performers. To argue otherwise would be wrong. That system must be replaced. Just ask our President.
WOW – who actually made that statement and to what source was it attributed to? Sharon – I wouldn’t disagree with play time.
Jim it was reported on Week news at 5 pm. They said according to her contract she gets one third of her salary, about $40,000. Also says it on their website.
“Board members unanimously voted Monday to terminate the contract of comptroller-treasurer Pam Schau. According to her contract, the district is required to pay Schau one third of her annual salary. That amounts to slightly more than $40,000”
hey Jim, who poorly trained the d150 principals? You could put all the decent principals in a bathroom stall. the rest need lots of remediation or better yet first hand training. I know you love to blame the teachers for all the problems in this district due to tenure but remember bad principals hire bad teachers.
ps: who wouldnt expect you to agree with the supt. 100%?
idiotwatcher – as to your “little trial balloon” about a possible connection between Schau and McArdle – perhaps you didn’t realize that McArdle was terminated (and the audit relating to Lindberg school funds made public) months before Shau was even hired. I guess it’s a good thing that the PJStar apparently knew enough not to ask those questions.
See, here’s the deal…
Tenure for teachers is roughly equivalent to probationary periods for employees in the business sector. I say roughly, because nobody who I’ve ever known who works in the corporate sector has had to go through four years of probationary employment.
Teachers have to prove for those four consecutive years that they are teaching at the level the district wants for its delivery of instruction. If they are approved after that time, it is not solely about job security like most people who are detractors of tenure enjoy parroting whenever they get the chance, but a statement by the district that says “You are an excellent instructor, and we want to keep you here.” Tenure is an incentive for teachers to stay put in that district and give the consistently great instruction they are capable of year in and year out…in essence, it is designed to be a “win-win” situation for all involved.
I know it’s hard for some people to grasp, but no one forces school boards to give tenure to teachers…if, after four years, it’s obvious that the teacher in question is not the right fit, they can deny tenure. In some cases that means the job is lost, in others, it might mean another probationary year. I have a feeling that John Q. Public thinks the granting of tenure is automatic.
In my opinion, to say that principals are to blame for keeping inept teachers on staff because “they aren’t the best judges of talent” really speaks volumes about the school board that would willingly hired such inept leaders in the principal positions in the first place (this is after going through exhaustive interview processes, mind you). Maybe the system is broken because school boards, many times, are lousy “judges of talent.”
Also, to say that bad teachers hide behind tenure is an oversimplification of the issue. Of course it happens…but if the evaluation process is done correctly, they can be (and are) removed from their tenured positions. Some folks would have you believe that the public schools are rife with poor teachers…that just ain’t the case, Jethro.
I don’t think school boards really want tenure abolished…if it was, you would see competition take over, and districts attempting to get the best teachers by luring them away from other schools with higher salaries and better benefits, much like the corporate world works in terms of recruiting management employees. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that there is a reason that suburban schools consistently outperform those in the rest of the state…the teachers up there make more money, and that entices good teachers to try to land jobs north of I-80. The current craze of recruiting superintendents nationally is just the tip of that financial iceberg if tenure is abolished, let me tell ya’.
And then how are all of those people who cry “Teachers are overpaid and underworked!” going to feel? Their heads would probably explode a la the movie “Scanners.”
Tell you what, at least one good thing would come out of the abolition of tenure…teachers would finally get paid what they’re worth, and be a sought after commodity…and not a punching bag for those who constantly scream about their taxes being too high to support a system that they think is broken, but is, in reality, being systematically torn down from the inside by political correctness, teaching to the test in order to “prove” kids are learning (which is total B.S. by the way), the removal of God and Patriotism from the classroom, and the dispassionate attitudes of parents towards their children’s academic achievement.
Jim-
Is Week 25 reporting accurate information?
Hey Jon,
My bad on that one…I misread and thought Schau was hired July of 2008…first mistake I’ve made all year!!
So, whatever happened with the Valda Shipp appeal situation? I’m assuming since it wasn’t on the news or in the paper that she will not be returning to the district. Anybody?
Kohlrabi – Surely you don’t suggest that they would be so stupid as to repeat the McArdle mistake?
Jim, please don’t tell me there are two of you–I still believe Play Time Is Over is your alter ego. 🙂 Jim, tenure isn’t obsolete–you just wish it were and will work tirelessly to make it so. Please don’t pull the “President card” when you probably don’t agree with him on any other issue. How many more contracts will be bought out before Jim’s term is over? Anyone care to place your “bet”? At least, when non-tenured teachers or even tenured teachers are let go, they don’t have contracts that have to be bought out when they prove to be ineffective. And, Jim, you’re spinning your wheels over FOIA expenses when you just voted to pay Schau $40,000 for doing nothing. Yes, of course, I caught your question last night–and recognized the similarity to your other alterego from Emerge’s blog–District 150 Parent. This is my night to be hard on Jim!
District Watcher – I’m saying that a 6-0 BOE vote doesn’t necessarily suggest that there’s more to the story. They’ve had majority votes in the past (McArdle) that appear to be ill-advised. Close votes on anything are the exception.
Accounting clerk jobs open? What are the duties, qualifications? I know someone who has done lots of accounting clerk work in the private sector that kept downsizing employees.
Is it possible that Dr. Lathan has gotten 3-year contracts for her former colleagues she has known for years, & because she knows their work ethic, their style, what motivates them? Is it possible that Dr. Lathan has gotten 1-year contracts for principals that she has only known for 6 months or so, & is still learning their work ethic, their style, what motivates them? Just a thought.
This is just a prediction, but no matter who Dr. Lathan recommends to the BOE to replace Ms. Schau (whether it is a former colleague, or someone promoted within Dist. 150), you will have folks complain about who she picked.