No Teaching???

Date: Apr 30, 2004

No Teaching???

Date: Apr 30, 2004

See the two messages from Adelman on behalf of his clients, also now on the Hattiesburg American Web site.

They refer specifically and regretfully to having no contact with students for the next two years.

Robert Campbell

Date: Apr 30, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Robert Campbell
"See the two messages from Adelman on behalf of his clients, also now on the Hattiesburg American Web site. They refer specifically and regretfully to having no contact with students for the next two years. Robert Campbell"

Nice huh? Let's punish the professors by keeping them away from the students. Gee, that seems like a student-centered plan!

Date: Apr 30, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: present professor
" Nice huh? Let's punish the professors by keeping them away from the students. Gee, that seems like a student-centered plan! "

And since we have hordes of PhD's beating down USM's doors to teach here, we will hardly miss two distinguished, experienced full professors, will we?

Date: Apr 30, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Robert Campbell
"See the two messages from Adelman on behalf of his clients, also now on the Hattiesburg American Web site.
They refer specifically and regretfully to having no contact with students for the next two years.
Robert Campbell"

I saw this, but it isn't mentioned in the aggreement. Is there a secret part to the agreement?
If they are employed and their chairman assigns them a class to teach, what prevents them form teaching?
I know the president can order the chair not do assign them classes, but the is NOT mentioned in the agreement. We are talking about a legal document here.

Otherside

Date: Apr 30, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Otherside
"I saw this, but it isn't mentioned in the aggreement. Is there a secret part to the agreement?"

I wondered about this, too. There sure isn't anything in the published agreement about teaching classes.

Here's a couple other parts of the agreement I found intriguing:

7. The Professors agree to refrain from offering public criticism or commentary about the University’s internal administrative operations during the term of this agreement.

There is no similar clause prohibiting Thames from engaging in further character assassination. Without a legal writ, do you think he can restrain himself for long?

OTOH, does this mean that either Dr Glamser or Dr Stringer will treat us all to a book ("Exit 13 Revisited") in about 2 years? (OK, a book other than John Donne

)

8. ... The parties acknowledge and agree that the Hearing Officer will make certain detailed statements to the media regarding this agreement.

Does this mean that Reuben Anderson will make detailed statements to the media? Has he done so already & I've just missed it?

Date: Apr 30, 2004

I heard the announcer of WUSM read a statement from Thames tonight, and to me it sounded like he had violated the agreement not to trash the other parties. He said (implied?) his actions were justified. I was driving and almost crashed!

Date: Apr 30, 2004

yes, footsoldier, I agree.

A violation already and I read the "full" settlement ten times. He could not wait.

But, he is protected by a, I believe, corrupt judge.

I doubt this judge, perhaps sent in to save SFT, will never say a thing about it. It was a done deal.

Date: Apr 30, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: foot soldier
"I heard the announcer of WUSM read a statement from Thames tonight, and to me it sounded like he had violated the agreement not to trash the other parties. He said (implied?) his actions were justified. I was driving and almost crashed!"

When did this announcement come on the radio? I knew he was supposed to release something but I didn't know he was going to try and vindicate himself. Damn, time for another blast of letters and phone calls . . .

Date: Apr 30, 2004

Well, I did title my latest Liberty and Power contribution "Is the Fix in at the University of Southern Mississippi?"

But I also wonder there what kind of time horizon the College Board is operating with. Nanoseconds?

Every unresolved conflict except the status of Glamser and Stringer is still on the table.

Robert Campbell

Date: Apr 30, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: foot soldier
"I heard the announcer of WUSM read a statement from Thames tonight, and to me it sounded like he had violated the agreement not to trash the other parties. He said (implied?) his actions were justified. I was driving and almost crashed!"

Foot Soldier,
The agreement only limits Gray and Frank from saying negative things about the administration. The is no restriction on the administration. I started the "Evidence of Loser" thread to point this out.

Otherside

Date: Apr 30, 2004

RE: No Teaching???--hey otherside...

Date: Apr 30, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: RealityCheck
"Otherside

I know you love Thames. That is fine, your right here. We are all Americans. Many of us are conservatives, which you may not know.

Anyway...........

If you go read the full text version of the settlement, you will find words that say both parties will refrain from making negative statements about the other.........

I might go back and post the exact words, if someone doesn't beat me to it.

Shelby said negative things already in the media.

I am sure the good pro thames judge will give him a pass. G/S will not be given the same pass."

Here it is.

"7. The Professors agree to refrain from offering public criticism or commentary about the University’s internal administrative operations during the term of this agreement.

8. The parties agree to refrain from making public comments about this agreement until final approval by the Board. The parties agree not to make any public comments about this agreement designed to reflect negatively on the opposing party. The parties acknowledge and agree that the Hearing Officer will make certain detailed statements to the media regarding this agreement."

Otherside

Date: Apr 30, 2004

RE: No Teaching???

Date: Apr 30, 2004

Can someone post a link or paste in the text of Shelby's statement? I haven't seen/heard it.

Date: Apr 30, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Robert Campbell
"The intention probably is for Thames' violations of the settlement to be ignored.
All the same, it does say:
"8. The parties agree to refrain from making public comments about this agreement until final approval by the Board. The parties agree not to make any public comments about this agreement designed to reflect negatively on the opposing party. The parties acknowledge and agree that the Hearing Officer will make certain detailed statements to the media regarding this agreement."
That binds Thames, too.
Robert Campbell"

I can post, but can't read. I see it now. I was concentration on #7 that limits the professor’s first amendment right to free speech for two years as far as criticizing the administration. #8 deals with comments on the agreement only. Thanks for the correction.

Otherside

Date: Apr 30, 2004

This isn't the whole statement but I think they quote part of it:

http://www.clarionledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040430/NEWS01/40430014

Here is the quoted part:

Thames, USM president for two years with another two years remaining on his contract, said the agreement was in the best interest of all involved.

“I said from the beginning that it was never my intention to cause financial harm to Drs. Glamser and Stringer, but the evidence provided to me warranted by initiating dismissal proceedings,” Thames said in a statement.

“This matter could not have been taken light because the issues in this case were very serious, as the settlement agreement confirms,” he said.

Sounds to me like he broke the agreement, especially with that last line.

Date: Apr 30, 2004

Mike Adelman, where are you?

Date: Apr 30, 2004

Tiger........

Yes,

He broke it.

Watch Judge Anderson not say one word.

Then watch in the coming months, Thames say some more and get away with it.

Date: May 1, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Otherside
"Why is the SPIN of the media that they will NOT teach?? The Clarion Ledger states

"The state College Board has approved a deal in which two University of Southern Mississippi professors targeted for firing will stay on campus for two years in non-teaching roles."

However, the agreement doesn't mention this.

"3. The University withdraws the termination proceedings and agrees that the Professors will be compensated at their current nine-month academic-year salaries for a period of two years beginning with academic year 2004-2005. At the end of academic year 2005-2006, any obligation of employment from the University to
the Professors shall have been satisfied. The Professors understand that at the end of academic year 2005-2006 they will have no expectation of continued employment."

Am I missing something?

Otherside
"

I'm still trying to find out why everybody including the papers say they will not teach. No where in the agreement does it say this. No office or supplies, yes, but no mention of teaching.

Date: May 1, 2004

Maybe the inference is in item 6

6. The Professors agree the University will not provide any office facilities, office supplies, or otherwise facilitate their physical presence on campus or their research projects.

But they could teach off campus perhaps. It's just so dumb.

Date: May 1, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: educator
"Maybe the inference is in item 6
6. The Professors agree the University will not provide any office facilities, office supplies, or otherwise facilitate their physical presence on campus or their research projects.
But they could teach off campus perhaps. It's just so dumb."

I know of a retired professor that teaches one course each semester. He has no office, but meets with students in a conference room during certain hours each week (office hours). If Frank's chair assigns him a course to teach, what in the agreement would prevent him from teaching? Granted he would have to use his own chalk and paper etc. Won't he still have a faculty/staff parking permit, etc?

I'm reading it as a legal document ,so to me if it isn't in there it isn't forbidden. (Unless Shelby tells the chair not to use Frank.)

Otherside

Date: May 1, 2004

I think we know what Shelby is going to tell the chair.

Robert Campbell