Lovell releases new statement re: McAdams

[keefe]

If I spoke badly of my employer in a public forum, I'd be terminated the day my employer found out.

I imagine that's the case for many, many people

You might get fired but I guaran-goddam-tee it won't be for speaking badly of your employer.

I don't know who your employer is but they have multiple mechanisms for getting rid of you. It won't be for bad mouthing the company, however. 

Washington state is an at will jurisdiction but employers still need to be meticulous in documenting performance issues, attempts at remediation, etc... At will is a splendid concept but people can and do seek relief through the courts and no company wants to go through that.

When MSFT gets rid of a person they go overboard to give a poor performing cast off an overly generous severance. Except in cases of explicit malfeasance or gross misconduct they give more than they should just to make the problem child disappear.

[GGGG]

Actually, your response is obtuse and oblique. I expected greater intellectual courage from you, Sultan. You are normally more willing to engage in healthy discourse.

Well I'm sorry to disappoint.  If you go back into this thread, and about a half dozen others on the same topic, you will find my argument.  I'm not going to continue to rehash it. 

[muwarrior69]

MU's written policies about this are crystal clear.  Student teachers are considered students first and teachers second.  And McAdams had already been called on the carpet over similar transgressions.  He can't even rightfully claim that he was unaware of the policy or had misinterpreted it.

Which by definition should not give one student the right to ban, limit discussion in the class room by another student because they think it is "offensive." I am sure this practice would have continued or maybe still does despite this incident becoming public. The next question is will McAdams be replaced with a like minded professor. I am not holding my breath on that one.

[GGGG]

Which by definition should not give one student the right to ban, limit discussion in the class room by another student because they think it is "offensive." I am sure this practice would have continued or maybe still does despite this incident becoming public. The next question is will McAdams be replaced with a like minded professor. I am not holding my breath on that one.

???

The graduate assistant gets to determine how the class functions under the guidance of their supervisor.  Otherwise what you are promoting is a complete free for all. 

Furthermore the point isn't what the student gets to do in front of the classroom.  The point is that McAdams didn't do what he should have done.  He behaved recklessly, and Abatte was harmed by his behavior.

[keefe]

Well I'm sorry to disappoint.  If you go back into this thread, and about a half dozen others on the same topic, you will find my argument.  I'm not going to continue to rehash it.

I would say that you are starting from a false premise.

I recast the construct to present a different perspective. I thought you were more open.

It could be that academia, the world you have been in since age 18, is just a different beast.

I do not agree with what McAdams did but I think there is a trail of misconduct and poor judgment throughout Marquette on this. The only real end game is that it is another PR disaster for Marquette.

[Sir Lawrence]

 The only real end game is that it is another PR disaster for Marquette.

This.  Regardless of which side you land on with respect to the merits of McAdams behavior, the University mishandled the PR. 

[keefe]

This.  Regardless of which side you land on with respect to the merits of McAdams behavior, the University mishandled the PR.

Perhaps it's time to unchain The Zizzo Group to sort out this PR mess...

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

Here's my problem. It's not just this one instance. McAdams and publicly ridiculed other professors and admin on his blog as well. Good for Lovell taking action, wish he would have just fired him cause he's a clown but at least something happened.

[keefe]

Here's my problem. It's not just this one instance. McAdams and publicly ridiculed other professors and admin on his blog as well. Good for Lovell taking action, wish he would have just fired him cause he's a clown but at least something happened.

I don't know academia and its arcane rules and I also have no idea about his employment contract.

But here is the bottom line: Marquette University took adverse personnel actions against Jodi O'Brien and John McAdams for things they wrote on their own time.

Whether or not you agree with what they wrote is not the issue. Their right to express themselves is at the heart of this.

GE employees are expected to aide by the provisions set forth in the corporate Spirit & Letter program. Blogging from home about Jack Wlech, Gary Wendt, or Jeff Immelt will not get you fired. Nor should it.

[Coleman]

I don't know academia and its arcane rules and I also have no idea about his employment contract.

But here is the bottom line: Marquette University took adverse personnel actions against Jodi O'Brien and John McAdams for things they wrote on their own time.

Whether or not you agree with what they wrote is not the issue. Their right to express themselves is at the heart of this.

GE employees are expected to aide by the provisions set forth in the corporate Spirit & Letter program. Blogging from home about Jack Wlech, Gary Wendt, or Jeff Immelt will not get you fired. Nor should it.

I work very closely with  (though not within) the office of ethics at a major Fortune 500 company and doing what mcadams did towards a company superior or colleague would certainly get you an official warning on the first offense, and probably fired on the second.

[rocket surgeon]

  "He behaved recklessly, and Abatte was harmed by his behavior."

was she really?  she had the backing of the administration.  yes, i realize that she had some "blow-back" from the mccadams supporters, but hey, what a nice teaching moment.  strap on the big boy pants and rock n roll.  we are all going to face some criticism throughout life, especially those who want to lead.  if she was in the right, nothing to worry about

[warriorchick]

GE employees are expected to aide by the provisions set forth in the corporate Spirit & Letter program. Blogging from home about Jack Wlech, Gary Wendt, or Jeff Immelt will not get you fired. Nor should it.

Keefe,

I don't know how long it has been since you worked for GE, but all of the companies I have been associated with in the last several years have very recently updated their employee handbooks regarding online behavior.  I wouldn't be surprised if GE's policies have also been changed or clarified since the last time you checked.

Also, McAdams wasn't criticizing the Jack Welch of Marquette.  He excoriated the equivalent of an intern whose personal safety was affected as a result.  He did it after he had been admonished for similar behavior in the past. It's not apples to apples.

[keefe]

Keefe,

I don't know how long it has been since you worked for GE, but all of the companies I have been associated with in the last several years have very recently updated their employee handbooks regarding online behavior.  I wouldn't be surprised if GE's policies have also been changed or clarified since the last time you checked.

Also, McAdams wasn't criticizing the Jack Welch of Marquette.  He excoriated the equivalent of an intern whose personal safety was affected as a result.  He did it after he had been admonished for similar behavior in the past. It's not apples to apples.

I was last with GE in Singapore in the aughts so they might very well have updated the Spirit & Letter program in the meantime.

But with GE Edison Life/GE Asset Management Japan the Compliance team reported to me and the policy was clear - you cannot take adverse action against an employee for written or verbal correspondence unless it disclosed proprietary information or trade secrets, violated the rights of a protected category, or was deemed hostile in a threatening way.

It did not permit adverse action against an employee saying Jack Welch, their supervisor, or the tea lady was incompetent, had bad breath, or that you just didn't like them.

We are modeling our employee handbook after the MSFT, f5, and Getty Images models and I know all of these cultures allow significant latitude in communication (Our COO was the CTO of Getty, our CIO was an EVP at MSFT, our CFO was the CFO of Getty, and our HR head was an SVP at f5 Networks.) I have the handbooks from each of those three companies and, like GE, they are very specific in what they won't accept and blogging is not within their purview.

Here is my perspective: Seattle and San Jose are the epicenters of technical innovation and creativity. Corporate cultures here facilitate artistic freedom and intellectual investigation. Putting restrictions on discourse inhibits expression. Cruise through the MSFT, Google, and Apple ecosystems and you will see Darwinian struggles for intellectual supremacy and curated excellence.

I know you are back in Chicago - perhaps the Midwest has a different attitude about how corporate cultures should be. Because in Seattle, corporate officers wear fleece, shorts and flip flops, staff ride Cannondales to work, and there is an insistence on openness, candor, critical evaluation, and a no holds barred attitude toward intellectual discourse and staff engagement.

We have pin ball machines, pool tables, and xBox mosh pits in the office. Pearl Jam plays in the common areas where lunches are provided every day and there are reach in coolers stocked with dozens of different drinks. And when both our engineering and dev teams gather to work they employ Agile methodologies including Kanban and Scrum processes which are ferocious tests of will designed to build out applications through a vigorous dialectic process where the weak are marginalized and fall by the wayside.

Seattle generates more disruptive technology across a range of verticals and will generate more wealth off of that innovation than will Chicago which is three times the size. I would argue that we ditched the suits and enabled personal freedoms that have unleashed the creative energy that continues to alter the way we work, play, think, and produce.

What McAdams did was in poor taste and ill advised. He would not have been disciplined by GE. Getty, MSFT, and f5 would not do anything about him blogging what he did from home.   

[jsglow]

I was last with GE in Singapore in the aughts so they might very well have updated the Spirit & Letter program in the meantime.

But with GE Edison Life/GE Asset Management Japan the Compliance team reported to me and the policy was clear - you cannot take adverse action against an employee for written or verbal correspondence unless it disclosed proprietary information or trade secrets, violated the rights of a protected category, or was deemed hostile in a threatening way.

It did not permit adverse action against an employee saying Jack Welch, their supervisor, or the tea lady was incompetent, had bad breath, or that you just didn't like them.

We are modeling our employee handbook after the MSFT, f5, and Getty Images models and I know all of these cultures allow significant latitude in communication (Our COO was the CTO of Getty, our CIO was an EVP at MSFT, our CFO was the CFO of Getty, and our HR head was an SVP at f5 Networks.) I have the handbooks from each of those three companies and, like GE, they are very specific in what they won't accept and blogging is not within their purview.

Here is my perspective: Seattle and San Jose are the epicenters of technical innovation and creativity. Corporate cultures here facilitate artistic freedom and intellectual investigation. Putting restrictions on discourse inhibits expression. Cruise through the MSFT, Google, and Apple ecosystems and you will see Darwinian struggles for intellectual supremacy and curated excellence.

I know you are back in Chicago - perhaps the Midwest has a different attitude about how corporate cultures should be. Because in Seattle, corporate officers wear fleece, shorts and flip flops, staff ride Cannondales to work, and there is an insistence on openness, candor, critical evaluation, and a no holds barred attitude toward intellectual discourse and staff engagement.

We have pin ball machines, pool tables, and xBox mosh pits in the office. Pearl Jam plays in the common areas where lunches are provided every day and there are reach in coolers stocked with dozens of different drinks. And when both our engineering and dev teams gather to work they employ Agile methodologies including Kanban and Scrum processes which are ferocious tests of will designed to build out applications through a vigorous dialectic process where the weak are marginalized and fall by the wayside.

Seattle generates more disruptive technology across a range of verticals and will generate more wealth off of that innovation than will Chicago which is three times the size. I would argue that we ditched the suits and enabled personal freedoms that have unleashed the creative energy that continues to alter the way we work, play, think, and produce.

What McAdams did was in poor taste and ill advised. He would not have been disciplined by GE. Getty, MSFT, and f5 would not do anything about him blogging what he did from home.   

And people working 22 hours a day existing on cocaine.  Count me out.  Never wanted it, never will.  I coached youth soccer instead.  And raised 2 great kids.

[keefe]

And people working 22 hours a day existing on cocaine.  Count me out.  Never wanted it, never will.  I coached youth soccer instead.  And raised 2 great kids.

Personally, I have never, ever seen that nor do I know anyone who does. But that legend is out there...

If we wish to compare notes on addiction:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/study-chicago-has-worst-heroin-problem-in-us/

[ChicosBailBonds]

When hell freezes over


http://www.cardinalnewmansociety.org/CatholicEducationDaily/DetailsPage/tabid/102/ArticleID/4801/Embattled-Marquette-Professor-Will-Apologize-%E2%80%98When-Hell-Freezes-Over%E2%80%99.aspx

[PuertoRicanNightmare]

When hell freezes over


http://www.cardinalnewmansociety.org/CatholicEducationDaily/DetailsPage/tabid/102/ArticleID/4801/Embattled-Marquette-Professor-Will-Apologize-%E2%80%98When-Hell-Freezes-Over%E2%80%99.aspx

Some of what Lovell is proposing is not as bad as I thought. Expressing regret for harm caused to the TA seems OK to me.

I must say, while he is clearly an enthusiastic guy. Lovell seems to enjoy attention as much, if not more, than McAdams.

[GGGG]

I must say, while he is clearly an enthusiastic guy. Lovell seems to enjoy attention as much, if not more, than McAdams.

I think that's because we have become so conditioned to a guy like Wild who did substantive work, but he was usually behind the scenes.

Lovell is much more in the mold of a modern university President. 

[rocket surgeon]

When hell freezes over


http://www.cardinalnewmansociety.org/CatholicEducationDaily/DetailsPage/tabid/102/ArticleID/4801/Embattled-Marquette-Professor-Will-Apologize-%E2%80%98When-Hell-Freezes-Over%E2%80%99.aspx

   and MU, with it's "lay authority" now in place, continue to not only continue to step in it, but are now rolling around and soiling themselves in the process. note how they've "progressed" from fr.s raynor( the last true warrior)-diulio-wilde-pilarz-wilde-lovell, the stage has been set; does lovell have to take the same vow of poverty? sorry, i digress. you can't tell me there are some in this administration that are wincing real hard at what has become of this once "proud" jesuit, catholic institution of higher learning.  i know there are many alumni included, that do not recognize this school as the one they've once attended. 

   it's funny, not in a ha-ha way, but weird how they viewed dr. daniel mcguire's teachings back in the day.  note the form letter they wrote, probably due to the hundreds if not more of complaints they received for his "stuff".
 
http://mu-warrior.blogspot.com/2012/02/dan-maguire-just-short-step-from.html
 
    they exihibited a tolerance back then, with the veins in their foreheads pulsated with anger; the same should be shown with prof. mccadams, sans the hemorrhagic petechia-EIN'a?   yes, i hear it coming already, dr. mccadams strayed outside the boundaries of academia to attack a "student" personally, blah blah...well my friends, i think doc mcguire just plum tuckered them out.  maybe dr. mccadams put his toe on the line.  but MU has POUNCED and they just will not let go. they are letting out all their pent up aggression built up over the years of having to bite their tongue. finally with patience wearing thin and a LAY president in place, the stage had been set and they've sprung; now they just can't help themselves. 

   in their latest demands on dr mccadams, they think they've reached a compromise.  it's their way of saying, o.k., we can acknowledge our wrongs(which in their mind are few to none) now you dr. mccadams must do your part and then they might be able to hold their nose and lie in wait for mccadams to "cross THEIR line" again.  MU thinks it's taking the high road, offering the "olive branch"(for those of you from rio linda-sorry for the religious reference, but that means piece, umm, i mean peace) ya see with more and more lay people in charge, this is easy.  this is the way academia is moving, sectarian or not, but mostly not. so now, MU is trying to tell dr. mccadams with a proverbial gun(once again i apologize for the violent reference which MU would never approve of) to his head to say he's sorry.  ya know, one has to admire him for sticking to his principles.  he could do a head fake and walk right into MU's trap and enslave himself to them as many others have in this bastion of what they call themselves "an institution of higher learning". the PC people have everyone walking around like automatons, in constant fear of HR and the PC police; sadly, they have now ensnared MU.  curious to see how this would play out if prof. mccadams were wearing taqiyah instead of a brewers hat...dr. mccadams would just really be a peaceful fella,  AYN'a hey fellas? 

[GGGG]

I love it when, without a hint of irony, people claim others are "automatons" yet parrot one another's phrases like "PC police."

[keefe]

Some of what Lovell is proposing is not as bad as I thought. Expressing regret for harm caused to the TA seems OK to me.

I must say, while he is clearly an enthusiastic guy. Lovell seems to enjoy attention as much, if not more, than McAdams.

You nailed my reservations about Lovell. I think he will do a fine job; my concerns center around style.

Wild did an excellent job but his public personae was very different than what he employed behind the scenes. Anyone who thinks that Bob Wild was the jovial parish priest running the CYO has an incorrect understanding of the man's personality.

One of my other alma maters appointed a new university President recently and I have that unique perspective of watching two men settle into similar roles. Michigan named Dr. Mark Schissel as its President in 2014. His style is markedly different than Lovell's and, frankly, I much prefer Schissel's approach.

Lovell craves the spotlight and focuses on the flash. Schissel brings the gravitas of an accomplished scholar to the role of senior executive. I much prefer the latter over the former. There is something to be said for the understated and letting accomplishment stand on its own merit.

http://umich.edu/announcements/new-president/

[GGGG]

Lovell is by pretty much any definition, "an accomplished scholar."

[keefe]

Lovell is by pretty much any definition, "an accomplished scholar."

You are being obtuse as I never said he was not.

Lovell craves the limelight and throws a lot of flash into his messaging. I contrast that with the style of Schissel whose approach to his role is fundamentally different.

The Puerto Rican pointed out correctly how Lovell is a showman.

I know members of the Bok family and they have given me insight into a transition in the management of Harvard Corporation. Lawrence Summers is an accomplished  scholar but he was too much the showman for the college. Summers "left" Harvard and Bok came back, a la Bob Wild II, until Drew Gilpin Faust was named as President.

I am watching how Schissel and Lovell are settling into their roles and I much prefer Schissel's Derek Bok over Lovell's Lawrence Summers.

[GGGG]

You are being obtuse as I never said he was not.

This is what you wrote:

"Lovell craves the spotlight and focuses on the flash. Schissel brings the gravitas of an accomplished scholar to the role of senior executive. I much prefer the latter over the former."

You were clearly implying it.  If Lovell is an accomplished scholar, why would you bring up that attribute to describe Schissel in a paragraph clearly setting out to contrast the two?

Here is my suggestion:

"While both are accomplished scholars, Lovell craves the spotlight and focuses on the flash, whereas Schissel leads in a much more reserved role away from the limelight. I much prefer the latter over the former."

You're welcome.

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

Lovell craves the limelight and throws a lot of flash into his messaging. I contrast that with the style of Schissel whose approach to his role is fundamentally different.

I can see how you got here, but having seen Lovell speak at an alumni event, I would disagree - seems very humble. 

He does have a lot of big ideas and seems to find it very important to support and foster the mission of MU.  Based on what he said a couple years ago its the over-riding reason he chose MU rather than going on the public university path he was on. 

I agree that Wild had plenty of controversy in his tenure and I believe public 'messaging' of those controversies was one thing people criticized MU over. 

At the end of the day Lovell is choosing to take a stand here...let's see how it goes.