Teacher with cancer forced out from job

Here's one that will make most hearts bleed, and leave others scratching their head over the lack of common sense in application of employment policies.

From The Washington Post, Metro section, Monday, January 10, 2005.

Loudoun Teacher With Cancer Forced Out

Educator New to District Is Told to Resign or Face Firing After She Uses Up (10 - that's right, ten) Sick Days

By Michael Laris
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, January 10, 2005; Page B03

The students in Alison Yowell's seventh-grade English class made stickers of support when she told them she had just learned her cancer had returned.
"They wrote on the sticker someone they knew who died of cancer -- or who survived cancer," said Yowell, who wore the emblems on her T-shirt in a fundraising walk before returning them to the students, many of whom stuck them to their notebooks.
But top Loudoun County Public Schools officials, Yowell said, have had a less compassionate response to her Hodgkin's disease: They forced her from her job.
The case has focused attention on a school district whose leaders often cite the difficulty of recruiting enough qualified teachers to serve students in the nation's fastest-growing county.
Patsy Layer, director of the Loudoun Education Association, which represents teachers, said school administrators notified Yowell that she must resign, or face firing, because she had used all her sick days. As a recent hire, Yowell was ineligible to request leave without pay.
Layer recommended that Yowell, 31, resign before being terminated to avoid marring her teaching record. She submitted her resignation last week, effective today.
"In a case similar to this, we would always offer the opportunity to resign so there is no sense they are being 'fired.' Their record would be clear," said Loudoun School Superintendent Edgar B. Hatrick III.
Critics said Yowell's treatment is a reflection of rigid leave policies heartlessly applied, and they warned that it could hurt efforts to hire top talent in the Washington region's highly competitive market for teachers. School officials said the uniform application of personnel rules is a cornerstone of management that benefits the system and its students.
Yowell said she knew Loudoun policies when she was hired.
"I know what they've done is completely legal," Yowell said. "I don't feel this policy is ethical."
School Board member Priscilla B. Godfrey (Blue Ridge), who chairs the committee that oversees personnel issues, said the district views matters differently.
"As an employer, you have to watch out for yourself," Godfrey said. "To her, it would be an unethical result. But legally, if you have a policy on your books, everyone is treated the same, and everybody has to toe the line, whatever that line may be. Otherwise, it's not a policy."
In September, doctors told Yowell, whose cancer was declared in remission in early 2004, that her cancer had returned.
"The doctors had been pretty confident I would not have to deal with this again," Yowell said. "Unfortunately, they are not always right."
She began taking days off for preliminary treatment. Once she used up the 10 annual sick days allotted to teachers in her position, as well as three personal days, school officials told her she'd be asked to resign, she said.
In November, Yowell requested a four-month leave without pay for a debilitating course of medical treatment that would leave her vulnerable to infection. She volunteered to keep preparing lesson plans and grading papers while receiving her chemotherapy drips and stem cell transplants.
But Loudoun officials, citing Yowell's recent hiring -- she started in August -- said no. According to district policy, employees must be on the job for 90 days to be eligible for unpaid leave. "This requirement has not been met resulting in a denial of your request," wrote Assistant Superintendent Sue Hurd.



... more at linked article

This one just makes me scratch my head. I don't know the lady, so I don't know if she's a good teacher or not, but I have to imagine that if she was hired, she impressed people well enough to get the job.

Granted, she's got a debilitating illness, and has asked for an extended leave from work, but it's WITHOUT PAY, and I would assume without benefits, and that leaves me trying to figure out why you wouldn't want to grant the leave.

I also understand the rules regarding the leave bank, and understand the safeguards that had to be built into the system to prevent abuse, but that also seems to be the right approach for a situation such as this.

I wish all the best for Ms. Yowell. I sincerely hope she makes it through the next round of treatment, and that she's able to go on to much bigger and better things.
9,479 views 28 replies
Reply #1 Top
They are paying her salary while she's gone, and they're also paying the salary of the sub who replaces her.


Read again please. She was asking for "Leave without pay", meaning she would not be paid at all.

Again, there's questions on whether she'd get benefits for that period, whether she'd continue to gain any seniority, credit towards required service time, etc., but if she was put into a leave without pay status that was neutral in that regard, then it seems ignorant to me to make her quit.

I would think, given the desire amongst the school system to hire well qualified employees, that they'd want to retain those that they are able to find, and would further expect that they could come up with some sort of creative solution that would allow them to not look cold and heartless.

I would, at a minimum, expect the school system to promise to give Ms. Yowell priority for any future openings once she's able to return to work. Alternatively, perhaps, they should offer her an opportunity to work as a substitute teacher or some similar role, where she could continue to do what she's trained for, while waiting for a full time position to open up again.
Reply #2 Top
rules with no compassion just suck.... to stiick it to an already ill person is just not fair. I for one am OUTRAGED
Reply #3 Top

I would be outraged, but the school has a point also.  They are paying her salary while she's gone, and they're also paying the salary of the sub who replaces her.  Yes it's tough that she's losing her job, but in these days of low school budgets, the school probably doesn't have the money to continue paying her forever.

Yes, that probably sounds callous, but realize I sympathize for the teacher and I doubt this is a decision the school board came to as quickly as the article makes it seem.

Cheers

Reply #4 Top

Reply #2 By: jeblackstar - 1/10/2005 2:40:32 PM
I would be outraged, but the school has a point also. They are paying her salary while she's gone, and they're also paying the salary of the sub who replaces her. Yes it's tough that she's losing her job, but in these days of low school budgets, the school probably doesn't have the money to continue paying her forever.
Yes, that probably sounds callous, but realize I sympathize for the teacher and I doubt this is a decision the school board came to as quickly as the article makes it seem.
Cheers


WRONG! leave WITHOUT pay is just that. NO pay, NO salary!
Reply #5 Top
Just out of curiousity, have either of you ever taught in Public Schools before? If you had, you might understand what you were talking about.


My wife works for the public school system. Care to try again?

Seriously, leave without pay -- in almost all cases -- means LEAVE WITHOUT PAY. No pay = no income.

You (and I before you) are correct in saying that leave without pay is not necessarily leave without benefits, and that it may result in credited time in service, may or may not include benefits (I think it's safe to assume she would have been getting benefits before, and certainly that is a point of contention, and part of why the policy exists as it currently is -- in order to prevent having to pay for benefits for people that are not really full time employees, etc.), and all of the other things associated with an employee that is not there, but is still an employee.

If the employee can go on leave without pay and leave without benefits though, then it seems stupid to not put the employee on such status to keep her, and avoid looking like a cruel and heartless employer.

It's entirely possible that can't happen though, because of union rules, labor laws in the jurisdiction, or a host of other reasons. It just leaves people scratching their head and pointing at the situation and saying it's wrong, wrong, wrong. Which is precisely where we are now.
Reply #6 Top

She may have been asking for it, but while on sick leave, teachers receive pay.  Besides that fact, leave without pay does not mean leave without healthcare benefits, or other things that we don't count as part of our pay check, but which cost the school money.  Retirement funds for instance.  She would be accruing time in the state retirement fund without working for it.


Leave without pay is not what you are thinking.  If it were, than how is her resigning, with the possibility of rehire, any different?

Just out of curiousity, have either of you ever taught in Public Schools before?  If you had, you might understand what you were talking about.


Cheers

Reply #7 Top

Reply #5 By: jeblackstar - 1/10/2005 4:12:12 PM
She may have been asking for it, but while on sick leave, teachers receive pay. Besides that fact, leave without pay does not mean leave without healthcare benefits, or other things that we don't count as part of our pay check, but which cost the school money. Retirement funds for instance. She would be accruing time in the state retirement fund without working for it.


Leave without pay is not what you are thinking. If it were, than how is her resigning, with the possibility of rehire, any different?
Just out of curiousity, have either of you ever taught in Public Schools before? If you had, you might understand what you were talking about.


Cheers


Are you under the ignorant impression that only a teacher can apply for *leave without pay*?
Reply #8 Top
Wow. I hope she has some recourse to sue the pants off them. I don't get it. She gets cancer, a disease that very few people recover from, has to go for sick treatment and the school district, full of honey, goes, 'well, we'll let you either quit or get fired?'

And then we wonder why the educational system goes down for the last time when school boards do messed up stuff like this?

Reply #9 Top
rules with no compassion just suck.... to stiick it to an already ill person is just not fair. I for one am OUTRAGED


We are seriously starting to agree on way too much stuff. I'm scared...
Reply #10 Top

It's entirely possible that can't happen though, because of union rules, labor laws in the jurisdiction, or a host of other reasons. It just leaves people scratching their head and pointing at the situation and saying it's wrong, wrong, wrong. Which is precisely where we are now.


That we agree on.


Cheers

Reply #11 Top

Reply #5 By: jeblackstar - 1/10/2005 4:12:12 PM
She may have been asking for it, but while on sick leave, teachers receive pay. Besides that fact, leave without pay does not mean leave without healthcare benefits, or other things that we don't count as part of our pay check, but which cost the school money. Retirement funds for instance. She would be accruing time in the state retirement fund without working for it.


Leave without pay is not what you are thinking. If it were, than how is her resigning, with the possibility of rehire, any differen


Just an FYI.... Nowhere in the article does it even mention the possibility of rehire. It only said "resign or be fired".
Reply #12 Top
Reply #9 By: latour999 - 1/10/2005 9:38:19 PM
rules with no compassion just suck.... to stiick it to an already ill person is just not fair. I for one am OUTRAGED


We are seriously starting to agree on way too much stuff. I'm scared...


ain't it grand when 2 very different people with oppisite views can find common ground?
Reply #13 Top

drmiller, if you've worked in a profession with leave without pay before, than you know that you don't sign away your benefits when you take a leave of absence.

Reply #14 Top

Reply #13 By: jeblackstar - 1/11/2005 4:37:49 PM
drmiller, if you've worked in a profession with leave without pay before, than you know that you don't sign away your benefits when you take a leave of absence.


Excuuuuse ME! I never said *anything* about benefits now did I? I very specifically said without PAY!
And just an FYI, yes I have worked in a place like that. I have worked as upper management before.
Reply #15 Top

Than you will agree that even if the school is not paying her salary they are paying for things, like healthcare, retirement funds, etc.?  If you agree with me about that than why did you pick the fight?


Cheers

Reply #16 Top

Reply #14 By: drmiler - 1/11/2005 5:21:37 PM[/quote
Excuuuuse ME! I


I defitely heard a john belushi imatation just then........ lololo
Reply #17 Top

Reply #15 By: jeblackstar - 1/11/2005 5:26:57 PM
Than you will agree that even if the school is not paying her salary they are paying for things, like healthcare, retirement funds, etc.? If you agree with me about that than why did you pick the fight?


Cheers


re read the original post ok?
Reply #18 Top

Excuse me Moderateman, I've read the original post, and I believe I understand what you think I'm saying.  You think I'm saying the school is continuing to pay for her healthcare, I am not, I'm saying that just because she was requesting leave without pay does not mean that the school district would not be paying for anything involved with her.  Teachers Unions probably require the school to pay for health insurance, which a teacher, on sabbatical, leave without pay, or even active teaching, always receives when employed by the school district.  Thus the school is out of pocket a great deal of taxpayer money, for services they are not retaining.  This is a sensationalist article designed to illicit sympathy for the teacher, and I am sympathic to the teacher, but I can understand the rationale the school district is using.


Cheers

Reply #19 Top

Reply #15 By: jeblackstar - 1/11/2005 5:26:57 PM
Than you will agree that even if the school is not paying her salary they are paying for things, like healthcare, retirement funds, etc.? If you agree with me about that than why did you pick the fight?


What fight? I said pay not benefits! *You* started this as being about pay. *You* never* mentioned benefits. I reposted your reply so you wouldn't have to go look for it. Please show me where you said benefits in the post.


Reply #2 By: jeblackstar - 1/10/2005 2:40:32 PM
I would be outraged, but the school has a point also. They are paying her salary while she's gone, and they're also paying the salary of the sub who replaces her. Yes it's tough that she's losing her job, but in these days of low school budgets, the school probably doesn't have the money to continue paying her forever.



Now try again.
Reply #20 Top

Excuse me, in my profession, when I negotiate my salary, I ask about benefits, it is considered part of my salary, when I go to the hospital, the insurance company, who is being paid by my employer, gets billed, this teacher, who will need a great deal of medical care, will be using her employer provided insurance to cover her bills.  Thus, she is receiving material benefit from an employer, which is being payed, though I confess, indirectly.


And by the way, till she resigned, she was being payed, because sick days and personal days are days with salary, at least in most teaching jobs.


Cheers

Reply #21 Top
Reply #20 By: jeblackstar - 1/11/2005 5:57:58 PM
And by the way, till she resigned, she was being payed, because sick days and personal days are days with salary, at least in most teaching jobs.


Which by the way has nothing to do with leave without pay.
And FYI benefits such as medical are considered part of your compensation package for working, NOT salary! Compensation is not always considered salary. Maybe when I said I worked as upper management I should have been a little more specific. I worked with HR and was in charge of hiring an firing for my department. This is just so you'll know I'm not shooting in the dark here!
Reply #22 Top

you are correct, but in the first section you bolded, I was refering to her sick days, check the tenses.


Cheers

Reply #23 Top
gezeeeeeeee I pray she does'nt die from cancer before this is done
Reply #24 Top
Updating this story:

Teacher With Cancer Is Offered Her Job Back

Loudoun Promises to Review Policy Denying Leave to Recent Hire

By Michael Laris
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, January 13, 2005; Page B01


Loudoun County School Superintendent Edgar B. Hatrick III has made a written offer to rehire a seventh-grade English teacher who was forced from her job after a cancer relapse, and has promised to recommend changes in medical leave policies that would allow "greater latitude" in future cases.
Alison Yowell, 31, had asked for four months of unpaid leave from her job at a Sterling school to receive treatment for Hodgkin's disease. But school officials, citing that she is a recent hire, denied the request and told her she would have to resign, which she did, effective Monday. Officials had argued that they were bound by personnel policies.
After Yowell's case became public this week, prompting angry missives to the school district's Leesburg headquarters, Hatrick informed Yowell that the district would reexamine those policies.
"Please know that your situation has caused me to ask for a comprehensive review of our policies with regard to medical leave without pay, access to the sick leave bank and the possibility of instituting a short-term disability policy to cover employee medical absences," Hatrick wrote. "Although you have resigned your teaching position in accordance with current policies and regulations, you will be immediately rehired to your former position as soon as you are able to return to work," he wrote.
Excerpts of Hatrick's letter were read to a reporter by Yowell. They were confirmed by Patsy Layer, a leader of the Loudoun Education Association who advised Yowell.
Yowell said she is happy the district might change its sick leave rules. "I respect their willingness to reevaluate the policy," Yowell said. But she said she is not sure whether she wants the job back. "I honestly don't know when and how I'll make the decision," she said.
Yowell said that for now, her primary focus is her health. "It's kind of a decision you have to make emotionally, not to take on what's not as important . . . and to put aside anything that's not life-threatening," she said.
Hatrick declined to answer questions about the content of his letter, calling it a personnel matter.
A school spokesman said leave policies would be examined by the School Board's personnel committee. He said confidentiality rules limit what officials can say.
In an interview last week, Hatrick said the school system routinely rehires employees in situations similar to Yowell's. The principal at River Bend Middle School, Bennett Lacy, told Yowell before she resigned that he would rehire her, Yowell said. The authority to hire, however, is held by top officials. Yowell said Lacy has been very supportive.


... more at linked article

So, after a round of bad publicity, it looks like Loudoun County VA's school system is re-examining their policy and trying to look less like bad guys.

As I said before, above all, I hope that this teacher is able to get through this illness and make a full and complete recovery.
Reply #25 Top
Cancer... isn't that contagious.. I sure as hell wouldn't want my children around anybody with *that*

Ok seriously now,

I feel that the school district was completley within it's rights to say resign or we will fire you, and the reason for this is she used 10 sick days. I don't care if they were a) leave with out pay b) leave with pay or c) leave without pay and benefits. In my industry, when an employee is missing work, they get the boot. Especially if there is no union to deal with. Special circumstances would require consideration, like in this case, but the school district (contract contending) was completley within its right.