Re 'at will' vs. 'contracted' employees at MPS, Michael Atherton states, in part: > There's nothing that would prohibit giving "at will" employees > more secure contracts sometime in the future. Indeed, it's > easier to go from "fire at will" to tenure, than from tenure to > "fire at will." >
[MH] I was under the impression that the employees in question were policy/administrative/mgmt -type positions. If that is the case I see no need for tenure at all. Contracts are one thing, tenure is another (a contract+ if you will). Most public service-type employers seem to make the top administration people (i.e. those reporting directly to the chief exec. officer) 'at will' employees that serve at the pleasure of the top/chief exec. officer. Why should the MPS be any different? The chief executive, the superintendent in this case, should have a high degree of control over the direct reports that will be helping develop/implement major policy initiatives... seems to me anyway. Do policy/administrative/mgmt -type positions normally hold tenure in the public schools? Mike Hohmann Linden Hills REMINDERS: 1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[email protected] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
