|
|
#10715 - 01/29/10 02:32 PM
Hospital Trustees -- Totally bonkers?
|
Alice in Wonderland
Member Extraordinaire
Registered: 01/31/01
Posts: 813
|
Did you all catch the Boomer article today which reported on Wednesday's hospital board meeting? Not only was duly elected Trustee Shelbie Bershinsky made to shut up during the regular meeting (she was told she would not be recognized nor would she be allowed to vote) but the board, through spokesperson board president Shelley Towler (who was no doubt the mouthpiece for the board's attorneys) sought to justify its untenable position by saying that they were just following federal regulations and cited the Office of the Inspector General, and that the Inspector General had somehow mandated that the board was to have a code of conduct or else lose federal funding! THIS IS TOTAL B.S.!
Who are these people and why do they think they can silence an elected official just because she won't sign a piece of paper! The board has a code of conduct that they passed. Fine! But she doesn't have to sign it! If a board member is disruptive, he or she can be escorted out - but that's not what has happened. The board decided, (after being given what appears to be poor legal advice) that they didn't like what she was saying and they wanted her to sign a code of conduct and she refused, and so they voted to ban her from the board. GUESS WHAT- THEY CAN'T DO IT- SHE IS AN ELECTED OFFICIAL. ONLY THE CITIZENS CAN DO IT, IF THEY SO CHOOSE. THEY HAVEN'T!
This board of trustees has not only acted stupidly, they have acted illegally. I hope she goes after them in Court and that they get what they deserve.
_________________________
Go ask Alice
I think she'll know.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#10716 - 01/29/10 03:11 PM
Re: Hospital Trustees -- Totally bonkers?
[Re: Alice in Wonderland]
|
WyoZ
Member
Registered: 12/16/09
Posts: 9
|
I agree with you Alice... if you look at page 5 of the article Ms. Towler quotes the federal language and no where does Ms. Towler says that Trustees must SIGN any standards of conduct ... they must be made aware of such and pass policies pertaining to conduct as well as other items! Perhaps Ms. Towler, the board attorney, or another Trustee will enlighten the public where what they are asking is mandated! I await their response...
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#10718 - 01/30/10 07:42 PM
Re: Hospital Trustees -- Totally bonkers?
[Re: WyoZ]
|
Spartan
Member
Registered: 10/02/09
Posts: 9
|
Not that I've ever really felt the Hospital Trustees are government, even though they are elected, whatever happened to the priciple "of the people, for the people"? And though I don't necessarily agree with Shelbie's actions, I certainly don't condone the idea that an elected board is playing such games. A huge waste of time and resources, I'm thinkin'
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#10719 - 02/01/10 08:54 AM
Re: Hospital Trustees -- Totally bonkers?
[Re: Alice in Wonderland]
|
frybread
Junior Member
Registered: 12/08/05
Posts: 2
Loc: Laramie
|
I don't think Shelby Bershinsky was banned, but she just would not be recognized by the board chair. Which is strange.
_________________________
The renown which riches or beauty confer is fleeting and frail; mental excellence is a splendid and lasting possession -- Sallust (86-24 B.C.E.)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#10721 - 02/01/10 10:42 AM
Re: Hospital Trustees -- Totally bonkers?
[Re: frybread]
|
Joe Hageman
Member Extraordinaire
Registered: 10/29/02
Posts: 496
Loc: Laramie
|
Such a crock. The Board of Trustees are not employees of IMH. This attempt to make a lame excuse for trammeling an elected official's right and duty to speak ( as well as the voters' rights to have their representative serve in the position) is simply shameful. I already posted about that on the New and Improved Boomer thread. Funny that D Coffey never responded to my question of what sort of "grandstanding" merited this action by the ill-advised Board.  
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#10722 - 02/01/10 09:37 PM
Re: Hospital Trustees -- Totally bonkers?
[Re: Joe Hageman]
|
Dave Coffey
New Member
Registered: 02/09/08
Posts: 3
|
Mr. Hageman,
I believe that one must attend some board meetings, as they are open to the public, for one to fully appreciate this issue. Forming one's opinion based upon posts made on this site or by reading the Boomerang articles are not sufficient, in my opinion, to understand this issue from both sides. Go to a meeting and then talk with some of the other board members. Ms. Bershinsky isn't the only opinion out there, but it is the loudest.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#10723 - 02/02/10 01:53 PM
Re: Hospital Trustees -- Totally bonkers?
[Re: Dave Coffey]
|
Joe Hageman
Member Extraordinaire
Registered: 10/29/02
Posts: 496
Loc: Laramie
|
Can an opinion be loud enough to merit removal or arrest of an elected official? I do not have to attend to know that when the board votes to have law enforcement arrest a member, they are overboard. No crime is or ever has been alleged. No matter how much you understand both sides of the controversy, this cannot be justified. If I am, in some way, not understanding this part, please advise.
Without a full understanding of both sides (which certainly cannot be accomplished now without having been present for all past meetings and executive sessions), could you provide an example of her behavior which, if it happened at every meeting, would be sufficient to remove her from her elected position or outweigh the voter's right to have their elected representative in office speak out.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#10725 - 02/02/10 04:10 PM
Re: Hospital Trustees -- Totally bonkers?
[Re: Joe Hageman]
|
Alice in Wonderland
Member Extraordinaire
Registered: 01/31/01
Posts: 813
|
I don't have to go to a meeting to be able to read the law and apply it. A hospital board is a board authorized by the State of Wyoming to carry on the governance of the hospital. The Trustees are elected officials, not appointed. They serve at the pleasure of the people who elected them, not at the whim of the other trustees.
And you know those (worthless) federal regulations that were read by Board Pres. Towler? My guess is that someone typed in "code of conduct" in the Dept of Health and Human Services website and came up with those paragraphs on "distribution of written standards of conduct" and "voluntary compliance programs" (Note the "voluntary"). But guess what? it's just a smokescreen. Those cited paragraphs provide absolutely no authority for the board members to kick Ms. Bershinsky off the board! They have no justification, no legal authority. If they did, they would have used it. They kicked her off simply 'cause they didn't like what she had to say. Period, end of story. Mark my words- This action will come back to haunt them.
And you know what's equally bad? The hospital CEO evidently condones this action as she is allowing it to continue.
_________________________
Go ask Alice
I think she'll know.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#10726 - 02/04/10 03:28 PM
Re: Hospital Trustees -- Totally bonkers?
[Re: Alice in Wonderland]
|
Joe Hageman
Member Extraordinaire
Registered: 10/29/02
Posts: 496
Loc: Laramie
|
You know, I can't count the number of times when I was on the City Council when I thought the words coming out of another Councilor's mouth were wrong or frustrating or downright embarrassing in their stupidity or lack of understanding. That was never adequate reason not to hear what they had to say or even consider that their vote should not be counted. To refuse to recognize a member of any elected body is to refuse to recognize each and every member of the public who voted for that person. Reliance on some suggested voluntary distribution of a code of conduct applicable to EMPLOYEES , not elected Trustees, is more than a misunderstanding and is too thinly veiled to be an effective CYA.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#10727 - 02/04/10 08:35 PM
Re: Hospital Trustees -- Totally bonkers?
[Re: Joe Hageman]
|
IMHnurse
Junior Member
Registered: 11/04/06
Posts: 8
Loc: Laramie
|
Thanks Alice and Joe,
I agree this whole thing is totally bonkers and really sad. That this Board would waste time harrassing me rather than on critical patient care issues is beyond me. I have alwayws taken my ELECTED trustee position very serious. That means asking hard questions that are not always liked. I will continue, I will not sign that Code of Conduct and I will follow this through because I strongly belive voters rights are being infringed with these ridiculous policies and by attempting to censure me.
Shelbie
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#10730 - 02/05/10 04:16 PM
Re: Hospital Trustees -- Totally bonkers?
[Re: IMHnurse]
|
Sid
Silly In Delirium
Registered: 05/20/03
Posts: 1979
|
Shelbie,
I don't know you personally but I support your position 100%.
This debacle reminds me of the old loyalty oaths of the last century. I've pasted an article about the old loyalty oaths below. Does anyone else see similarity or parallel here, or at least irony given the number of school/education affiliated trustees of IMH? (As this is eLaramie, it is acceptable and appropriate if anyone disagrees with Sid.  )
Loyalty Oaths, Red-Baiting, and Academic Freedom
American Decades | 2001 | COPYRIGHT 2001 The Gale Group, Inc. This material is published under license from the publisher through the Gale Group, Farmington Hills, Michigan. All inquiries regarding rights should be directed to the Gale Group. (Hide copyright information) Copyright
LOYALTY OATHS, RED-BAITING, AND ACADEMIC FREEDOM
Academic Freedom
During the 1930s financial pressures and political factionalism combined to imperil the principle of academic freedom, by which teachers are free to instruct without the imposition of political or ideological agendas. Conservatives in groups such as the American Legion and the Daughters of the American Revolution (DAR) repeatedly attacked the schools as bastions of communist propaganda and sought to have school boards restrict the curricula of public schools and require teachers to sign loyalty oaths. After the Democratic landslide in the elections of 1936, conservatives, smarting from wholesale repudiation at the polls, turned their attention to the schools, attempting to turn them into bastions of conservative philosophy. Although historians normally date the onset of "red-baiting," or "witch-hunting" for communists, after World War II, for teachers red-baiting began in the 1930s.
Red-Baiting
Immediately following the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, conservatives suspected communists were attempting to take control of the schools so that they could subvert the minds of children. Often such charges were brought by conservatives distraught over the new progressive curriculum and seeking to tar it with the brush of communism. In 1928, for example, the DAR accused the progressive National Education Association (NEA) of being "sympathetic with communist ideals" and denounced it in a pamphlet. The frequency of such charges increased during the Depression, especially after teachers organized to oppose sweeping cutbacks in educational financing and other teachers adopted educational philosophies such as social reconstructionism that were sympathetic to left-wing causes.
Loyalty Oaths
The foremost technique for enforcing political conformity was the loyalty oath. In the 1920s some states required their teachers to swear not to teach ideas or doctrines "subversive" to the status quo. The definition of subversive was highly subjective and varied from state to state, encompassing anything from Marxism to civil rights to sexual liberation. The consequence of failing to swear such an oath, however, was clear to everyone: dismissal, a prospect truly intimidating during the Depression. By 1936 twenty-one states were making teachers take loyalty oaths; fourteen of those states had instituted the requirement since the onset of the Depression. Increasingly states also required children to say the pledge of allegiance before the school day began, a practice that would be declared unconstitutional in the 1940s. In the mid 1930s a last-minute rider attached to a congressional appropriation bill for Washington, D.C., required teachers to sign a statement that they were not teaching communism. Educators protested this "red rider" loyalty oath, pointing out that a true subversive would sign anything to achieve his goal; Congress was asking for a conformist gesture of obedience to authority from law-abiding teachers—one that violated the principle of academic freedom and the constitutional right to free political expression in the nation's capital. Pressure from teachers succeeded in rescinding the rider in 1937.
Firings and Dismissals
Throughout the decade there were other challenges to academic freedom. In 1934 six teachers in Toledo, Ohio, were threatened with dismissal for supposedly using radical textbooks, including one by New Deal official Rexford Tugwell. In North Carolina principal James M. Shields was fired for publishing Just Plain Larnin (1934), a novel critical of the tobacco companies. The New York City Board of Examiners began an intrusive screening process to expose subversive teachers. In 1935 Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in Troy, New York, dismissed English professor Granville Hicks, a noted critic and a communist sympathizer; City College of New York refused to reappoint writer Morris Schappes to the faculty because he had led unionizing activities on campus. At Rollins College in Florida eight faculty members were dismissed in a dispute between the administration and the faculty over a 30 percent pay cut and innovative curriculum,
Attack
Conservatives rarely discriminated in their attacks on the schools, lumping progressives, liberals, socialists, and communists into one subversive group. For some, red-baiting was a business. The Hearst press specialized in boosting newspaper sales by making sweeping and unsubstantiated charges about subversive plots in the schools. "Red Radicalism," William Randolph Hearst hinted ominously, "has planted a soapbox on every campus in America." Cost-conscious school boards routinely dismissed teacher protests against salary cuts as communist inspired. Two teachers in Westchester County, New York, were fired as agitators after protesting a pay cut. Between 1930 and 1936 twenty-five teachers were dismissed and fifty-nine resigned because of budget cuts and protests at the University of Pittsburgh. In Wisconsin Rapids, Wisconsin, thirteen instructors were dismissed on the excuse of their supposed radicalism. Other redbaiters were anticommunist zealots, none more so than Elizabeth Dilling, whose 1934 book, The Red Network, sketched out a fantastic communist conspiracy supposedly reaching from the common schoolteacher to the president. Similarly, New York State Economic Council president Merwin K. Hart denounced the popular textbooks of historian Harold Rugg, used in forty-two hundred school systems, as "promoting unrest, of fomenting class struggle, of proposing unworkable government planning, of retailing inaccurate views of the Constitution." Charles Walgreen, the drugstore-chain owner, was sufficiently influential to get the Illinois state legislature to investigate communism at the University" of Chicago in 1935. The legislative committee concluded, "Nothing in the teachings or schedule of the school can be held to be subversive of our institutions." National Republic, "A Magazine of Fundamental Americanism," advised teachers in 1937 to "Be Loyal to America or Leave It!" Other groups instrumental in pushing for loyalty oaths and dismissals of radicals were the American Legion, the Anglo-Saxon Federation, the Junior American Vigilante Intelligence Federation, and the American Defense Society. In the 1940s such groups stepped up their attacks on American education, and—via investigative agencies such as the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) and the New York State Rapp-Coudert Committee—they successfully purged the schools of presumed radical influences—and of many good teachers.
Orthodoxy
In the 1930s academic freedom was also assailed by Communists on the Left. For the most part teachers' unions and professional groups cooperated with or tolerated Communist functionaries throughout the decade. Often Communists were among the most dedicated teachers and were on the cutting edge of educational reform. The Communist-influenced Local #5 of the AFT in New York, for example, led the nation in providing quality education to black students. While flexible in its pedagogy, the Communist Party nonetheless required rigid adherence to orthodox Soviet politics and sought control of many teachers' unions. Before 1935 Communists believed that non-Communist leftists were "social fascists," implicitly giving aid and comfort to reactionaries. In 1934, for example, philosophy professor Sidney Hook, an early left-wing anti-Communist, was simultaneously denounced as a "red" by the Hearst New York American and as a "counterrevolutionary reptile" by the Communists. After 1935 Communists abandoned such rhetoric in favor of cooperation with non-Communist leftists, but repeated efforts by Communists to seize control of teachers* unions led many educators to view the Communists with suspicion. Factionalism was so pronounced among the members of the New York Local #5 of the AFT that the non-Communist members of the union left to form the New York Teachers Guild, leaving Local #5 in Communist control. When the Communist Party supported the signing of the Hitler-Stalin Pact in 1939, most non-Communist leftists and liberals broke all ties to the Communists. Disputes with Communists throughout the 1930s increased the stress on teachers and their unions. As Local #5 representative Abraham Lefkowitz put it after a Communist takeover bid in 1933, "Between the bankers and the Communists, we're having a hell of a time."
Sources:
Robert W. Iversen, The Communists & The Schools (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1959);
Marjorie Murphy, Blackboard Unions: The AFT and the NEA, 1900-1980 (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1990);
James M. Wallace, Liberal Journalism and American Education, 1914-1941 (New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1991).
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3468301127.html
Edited by Sid (02/05/10 04:21 PM)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#10733 - 02/09/10 06:11 PM
Re: Hospital Trustees -- Totally bonkers?
[Re: Alice in Wonderland]
|
Joe Hageman
Member Extraordinaire
Registered: 10/29/02
Posts: 496
Loc: Laramie
|
"It takes a long time to learn that a courtroom is the last place in the world for learning the truth." Alice Koller
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#10750 - 02/27/10 11:21 AM
Re: Hospital Trustees -- Totally bonkers?
[Re: Joe Hageman]
|
Sid
Silly In Delirium
Registered: 05/20/03
Posts: 1979
|
What happened to the matter of 'disruptive behavior' that once was in the newspaper and now is absent from it? The newest trustee indicated that he thinks it's unfortunate that the 'disruptive behavior' thing was ever in the newspapers? Is there some issue of someone being disruptive? Shelbie, by virtue of disrupting a disruptive process of oppression? Other trustees, by disrupting (actually deadening) voters' rights in trustee meetings prior to or by silencing Shelbie, who was only trying to secure voters' rights?
Let us consider 'disruptive behavior' here..... if only because we can..... without fear of reprisal.....
A vigorous temper is not altogether an evil. Men [and other persons] who are easy as an old shoe are generally of little worth. ~Spurgeon
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
Moderator: Creepy Eddie Haskell, Evilaynde
|
0 registered
and 12 anonymous users online.
|
|
650 Members
6 Forums
590 Topics
7722 Posts
Max Online: 100 @ 01/04/07 04:43 PM
|
|
|
