On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 14:04:26 -0800, Michael Sylvester wrote: >To me,if your contract is not being renewed,you are implicitly being >fired.
As Denzel Washington's character Alonzo Harris in the movie "Training Day" said: "It's not what you know but what you can prove". An academic who doesn't have his/her contract renewed is not being explicitly fired because, technically, a cotnract employee is often not guaranteed additional employment upon the expiration of the contract (read the fine print in the contract). However, if one is in a tenure-track position and is *denied tenure*, then one can be said to be fired because there is the expectation of continued employment unless the employer finds cause not to grant that employment. I'm not a lawyer, so my interpretation may not be correct. If Prof. Lugo is in the former situation, she doesn't have much of a case and all she can do is cause a public stink (which probably will make it more difficult for her get a position elsewhere). If the latter case, she would have to prove that she didn't get tenure because she complained about the text. But is any professor's record so "perfect" that something else can be used as the "reason" (e.g., student complaints about teaching)? >I had a colleague who would always write in the "Reasons for >leaving" - Non-renewal of fixed term contract,which really meant >a firing. Well, that does depend upon what means by being "fired". A contract expiration without renewal is ambiguous though one might have a bias in interpreting what it means. >But the sublimated expression for being fired is "The department >is moving in a new direction". Again, what was in the contract? If the contract says that the administration is under no obligation to make an offer of continued employment after the expiration of the contract, they can say anything for not renewing the contract. >Btw Mike P isn't it" separate" instead of :seperate"? Pop quiz: Who said: “I can’t stand a man who has only one way to spell a word.” Was it: a) Mark Twain b) Andrew Jackson c) Marshall Brown d) Mike Palij I leave it as an exercise to the reader to determine what the correct answer is. >Also why do you think that Reagan said "Trust but verify."? But how can one verify if one isn't provided sources? Not to make a big deal about it but I did verify even without you giving any sources.. I verified that you had the title of the textbook wrong. Now we're even. ;-) -Mike Palij New York University [email protected] --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=6567 or send a blank email to leave-6567-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
