The fired, then rehired SBI faculty members are sitting around waiting and just waiting. They've been rehired, but haven't been given any work today. This sounds alot like the reasons given for letting former law dean Percy Luney go over a year ago. Wasn't he charged with hiring a faculty member and authorizing them to be paid without requiring them to do work?Anyway, a tentative August 15th meeting to dicuss their grievance is schedule. See: SBI Faculty Still in Limbo
I wonder how we compare to other state universities?
ReplyDeleteRN - "This sounds alot like the reasons given for letting former law dean Percy Luney go over a year ago. Wasn't he charged with hiring a faculty member and authorizing them to be paid without requiring them to do work?"
ReplyDeleteYou're confusing apples with oranges. The acts of the former dean of the law school amounts to occupational fraud and abuse. He approved payroll disbursements to a ghost employee, faked university records for that ghost employee to the payroll system, and even set up a "sham office" at the law school. As a result, the university's payroll summary report failed to make the appropriate deductions for federal and state payroll/employment tax purposes. Such acts are ILLEGAL and could lead to a criminal investigation. This is not the case with the SBI 8. Let's not confuse the two.
Please elaborate on this contract for the fake employee. B/C one of the ghost employees was hired as a consultant and not an employee on the position line.
ReplyDeleteTrue, but paying someone and not expecting job performance equals the same thing.
ReplyDelete^sorry, if it seems i got apples and oranges mixed, but that was precisely the point i inteded to make!^
ReplyDelete"True, but paying someone and not expecting job performance equals the same thing."
ReplyDeleteThat's a sophomoric viewpoint. In the real world of HR, the former dean's actions implicate fraud and abuse. In the case of the SBI 8, the administration's actions amount to leave w/pay (usually what most employers do prior to termination of the sort).
Castell & Co had the Law School Dean investigated by CFO's office and they did not find any criminal intent in the Law School matter. By the way, how is the investigation going pertaining to Castell, Challis, Holmes, and the rest of that fake BOT? Wasn't the IG conducting an investigation concerning the kick backs and under the table deals some of these fakes were receiving from University contractors when he was abruptly dismissed? And what ever happen to the investigation on Delmas Barber concerning his illegal drug use in the President's house, also, his dismissal from the Dept of Environmental Protection? Delmas is well known in Tally for his courtship with the drug crowd. He works directly for Castell!!! HaHa.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said... 8/08/2006 2:30 PM
ReplyDeleteThat's a sophomoric viewpoint. In the real world of HR, the former dean's actions implicate fraud and abuse.
Has the former dean been indicted? It has been well over a year since Castell levied these allegations. Because right now, that is all they are. Therefore, you cannot say with any confirmation/authority that fraud, abuse or malfeasance has taken place.
This very well could play out as another CVB manufactured crisis, i.e., "Ghost Employee", $51M deficit turned $8M surplus.
IMPLICATE defined means to imply or to indicate by inference. How 'bout you do a little vocabulary work before commenting. Believe me, you're no Perry Mason (w/ your flawed understanding of the use of an indictment). Indictments are merely ACCUSATIONS framed by a prosecuting authority on paper. Sooooo ... your point? Potatoes ... potawtoes ... tomatoes ... tomawtoes ... I pray that you're not a student at FAMU law. If so, you might wanna pay attention in Criminal Proc.
ReplyDeleteIndictment: - A written statement charging a party with the commission of a crime or other offense, drawn up by a prosecuting attorney and found and presented by a grand jury.
ReplyDeleteQuestion: Have these people been charged?
Florida BOG Vice-Chair Sheila McDevitt doesn't understand why so many FAMUans are upset at the interim president.
ReplyDeleteFrom the 8/7/06 St. Pete Times article entitled: "Authority over four-year degrees a main focus," McDevitt said:
"The FAMU business is troubling. No interim (president) can do a good job if they don't have the support of their board of trustees. An interim is there to clean up a mess, and you've got to have support. So why don't you rally around that person? I'm just kind of shocked about what's going on. ... They're in all kinds of a swirl."
I suggest that someone give Ms. McDevitt a link to RN.
In a nutshell:
ReplyDeleteIt's a whole lotta junk going down on The Hill. Who did what, where, when, why, how, and for how long. I think whenever this mess gets untangled, we will all be gray-headed and wrinkly. This big bag of pretzels and mixed nuts is too much for this old school Rattler to keep up with. I stay close to the main Book and seek solace from the man/woman above. If no solace comes, I simply try and gather my rosebuds while I have rosebuds left to gather.
Did they just fire the SBI 8 again and advertise their positions? I thought the collective bargaining agreement called for 1 year's notice.
ReplyDeleteThis BOT sucks. No one on the board really gives a damn, and they are just as paraylzed by Castell's actions as the employees.