2 BYU-I Professors fired, even though their Bishops claim to have endorsed them

[Calm]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

To tell others that BYU behaved like a git and others who consider working for them should keep this potential treatment in mind?

Vengeance works as a motive too of course.

And possibly to put pressure on BYUI to change the process because they are concerned about others who work there and want them to be treated better than they feel they were.

It will be interesting if BYUI makes a statement.  If this is the actual process, for the morale of those who work for BYU, it might be wise to provide more information.  Uncertainty about employment can lead to a drop in loyalty, commitment to work, enjoyment in the work…all potentially leading, intended or not, to a drop in work quality.

[Calm]

13 minutes ago, Snodgrassian said:

It must be cool to witness the impact he has made in the student's lives.

It is fantastic,

[Rain]

 

4 hours ago, ksfisher said:

Yes, but even if they hadn’t I can’t see myself going to a newspaper to complain about it. 

I can't access the article.  Did it actually say they went to the paper? 

Both times I've been in an article the reporters came to me because they had heard something.  Also, even though it was just a high school newspaper reporter the things I reported on I sought out or heard about. 

Isn't it possible that a reporter heard about the 2 cases and went to them?  If it had only been 1 person then I can see leaving the story alone, but with 2 the reporter might be seeing the beginning of a pattern.  

Of course, if they actually did go to the news it would be different.

[Calm]

1 minute ago, Rain said:

 

I can't access the article.  Did it actually say they went to the paper? 

Both times I've been in an article the reporters came to me because they had heard something.  Also, even though it was just a high school newspaper reporter the things I reported on I sought out or heard about. 

Isn't it possible that a reporter heard about the 2 cases and went to them?  If it had only been 1 person then I can see leaving the story alone, but with 2 the reporter might be seeing the beginning of a pattern.  

Of course, if they actually did go to the news it would be different.

It would not surprise me in the least if the professors had talked to friends about their frustrations and one of them contacted the paper or even a friend of a friend or remote acquaintance..  Several times when I have researched stories and ended up on exmormon boards, there are people saying call this or that paper, even naming reporters, even just about the vaguest controversy.

[smac97]

28 minutes ago, Snodgrassian said:

I don't think any less of her. Its not my MO, but she obviously feels wronged by her former employer.

I don't have any particular opinion about her.  Broadly speaking, I find "Here, let me air my personal and private grievances in the Court of Public Opinion in order to make someone I don't like look bad, and knowing that this someone will not respond to me"-style histrionics to often be a distasteful, unwise, and unnecessarily harmful course of action.

28 minutes ago, Snodgrassian said:

Though I am interested if there was any clause violated by speaking to the press. My department was let go a few months ago, and the paperwork was extensive, including a non-defamation clause. Form your legal point of view, would this article violate such a clause if one existed? 

Yes.  But I would be surprised if such a non-disparagement clause is in play here.

28 minutes ago, Snodgrassian said:

I don't view the employee/employer relationship as balanced.

Nor do I.  But I don't think it's as off-kilter as many seem to think.  Employers can be materially injured if an employee quits or needs to be fired.

28 minutes ago, Snodgrassian said:

An employee quitting is not even close to the same thing as an employer laying off or firing an employee.

Could you elaborate?  What is the difference?  

28 minutes ago, Snodgrassian said:

The power dynamic is heavily tilted in favor of the employer.

You are kind of right.  There is a similarly skewed power dynamic in landlord/tenant relationships, particularly where the housing market is tight (Utah being a good example).

28 minutes ago, Snodgrassian said:

I guess my perspective of this story/non-story is, it is not anti-church.

I think Larson Call and/or the Trib wants to make it so, at least derivatively.  Take a look at California Boy's comments in this thread.  His reaction was, I think, what they intended to elicit.

28 minutes ago, Snodgrassian said:

We all need to get over the us vs them mentality.

I would much prefer a "live and let live" approach to things.

Thanks,

-Smac

[teddyaware]

4 minutes ago, Rain said:

 

I can't access the article.  Did it actually say they went to the paper? 

Both times I've been in an article the reporters came to me because they had heard something.  Also, even though it was just a high school newspaper reporter the things I reported on I sought out or heard about. 

Isn't it possible that a reporter heard about the 2 cases and went to them?  If it had only been 1 person then I can see leaving the story alone, but with 2 the reporter might be seeing the beginning of a pattern.  

Of course, if they actually did go to the news it would be different.

Does this means that if the reporters seek you out that telling them “no comment” or “get lost” isn’t an option?

[smac97]

21 minutes ago, Calm said:

And possibly to put pressure on BYUI to change the process because they are concerned about others who work there and want them to be treated better than they feel they were.

It will be interesting if BYUI makes a statement.  If this is the actual process, for the morale of those who work for BYU, it might be wise to provide more information.  Uncertainty about employment can lead to a drop in loyalty, commitment to work, enjoyment in the work…all potentially leading, intended or not, to a drop in work quality.

Good points.  Never underestimate a bureaucracy's ability to mess things up.

Thanks,

-Smac

[ksfisher]

33 minutes ago, Rain said:

Did it actually say they went to the paper?

Perhaps that's an unwarranted assumption on my part.  But someone close to the situation would have had to.

[Rain]

26 minutes ago, Calm said:

It would not surprise me in the least if the professors had talked to friends about their frustrations and one of them contacted the paper or even a friend of a friend or remote acquaintance..  Several times when I have researched stories and ended up on exmormon boards, there are people saying call this or that paper, even naming reporters, even just about the vaguest controversy.

Yes, I can see this.  But not just to antagonistic sources.  Sometimes stories just spread, especially if unusual.

[Snodgrassian]

36 minutes ago, smac97 said:

1 hour ago, Snodgrassian said:

An employee quitting is not even close to the same thing as an employer laying off or firing an employee.

Could you elaborate?  What is the difference?  

For medium to large companies, an employee deciding to take their "talent" elsewhere might sting for an hour, day, rarely a week or more. The company marches on, continues doing what they do. I have worked in some highly specialized offices, where we had single points of failure. When those single points of failure quit/retired people always freaked out. But guess, what. 100% of the time the offices recovered. Sometimes they used it as an opportunity to pivot. Basically, if a company fires or lays off employees, they can plan for it in advance, unfortunately. the employee can't, and it often has long lasting effects/impact on the newly unemployed. When an employee quits, it is part of running a company. It may put the company in a bind, but rarely is it a game changer. If a company is truly single threaded, and failure means FAILURE if an employee leaves, that is a risky business to be in. 

I am more concerned about the individual than the organization. In some situations, employees quit because they believe they found a better fit in with a new employer. When an employee is fired (excluding for cause)/laid off it can be unexpected and not int he best interest of the employee.

I loved my previous employer. I wanted to spend the coming years building it. But management maid some really bad strategic decisions that severely impacted the entire company.  I had many colleagues quit before the reduction in force, it stung but we moved on and adapted. The reduction in force, though a longterm strategic move, showed the entire workforce how little power we had. Look at Twitter. Employees who thought they had leverage are gone, and the platform is still up and running. 

[mfbukowski]

I would die for the church, but not work for it.

[OGHoosier]

9 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

I would die for the church, but not work for it.

My sentiments pretty much exactly.

[Stormin' Mormon]

13 minutes ago, Snodgrassian said:

For medium to large companies, an employee deciding to take their "talent" elsewhere might sting for an hour, day, rarely a week or more. The company marches on, continues doing what they do. I have worked in some highly specialized offices, where we had single points of failure. When those single points of failure quit/retired people always freaked out. But guess, what. 100% of the time the offices recovered. Sometimes they used it as an opportunity to pivot. Basically, if a company fires or lays off employees, they can plan for it in advance, unfortunately. the employee can't, and it often has long lasting effects/impact on the newly unemployed. When an employee quits, it is part of running a company. It may put the company in a bind, but rarely is it a game changer. If a company is truly single threaded, and failure means FAILURE if an employee leaves, that is a risky business to be in. 

 

I was just researching this issue for my employer this morning, and found that HR experts estimate that the cost of replacing an employee is 50% to 200% of the departing employee's annual salary, depending on the position being replaced and the amount of institutional knowledge they take with them.  Yeah, that's a cost that a large company can recover from, but it ain't nuthin.  

(I don't really have much else to add to this conversation.  I'm just chiming in because of the odd coincidence of me researching this mere hours before and the issue now coming up on the board.  As you were, everyone).

[smac97]

15 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

I would die for the church, but not work for it.

I applied for a position with the Church years ago, but I did not get it.  In retrospect, I am glad of that.  I truly love the Church, but I don't want to have an employer/employee relationship with it.  I'd much rather just attend services and the temple, serve in callings, and otherwise do what I can to "build the kingdom" without the involvement of drawing a paycheck.

Thanks,

-Smac

[mfbukowski]

2 minutes ago, OGHoosier said:

My sentiments pretty much exactly.

Management philosophies of Scrooge mingled with scripture.

On the other hand, they get slammed for using sacred tithing finds for making some of the best property investments, so we can build our own nation state, Zion.

Can't win for losing 

[mfbukowski]

1 minute ago, smac97 said:

I applied for a position with the Church years ago, but I did not get it.  In retrospect, I am glad of that.  I truly love the Church, but I don't want to have an employer/employee relationship with it.  I'd much rather just attend services and the temple, serve in callings, and otherwise do what I can to "build the kingdom" without the involvement of drawing a paycheck.

Thanks,

-Smac

Agreed! I have known too many church employees to think otherwise

 

[Snodgrassian]

27 minutes ago, Stormin' Mormon said:

I was just researching this issue for my employer this morning, and found that HR experts estimate that the cost of replacing an employee is 50% to 200% of the departing employee's annual salary, depending on the position being replaced and the amount of institutional knowledge they take with them.  Yeah, that's a cost that a large company can recover from, but it ain't nuthin.  

(I don't really have much else to add to this conversation.  I'm just chiming in because of the odd coincidence of me researching this mere hours before and the issue now coming up on the board.  As you were, everyone).

I have been down the same rabbit hole, yet companies don't really seem to care nor pay attention. Keep your employees happy, give them a bump in pay if needed/deserved. It is much cheaper to keep talent than replace talent. But there is not a place that captures loss of replacement in any financial document. Once that number is calculated and shareable, maybe companies will change. 

[HappyJackWagon]

19 hours ago, Calm said:

I can understand the impulse of desiring to know and believing the only way to find out was to make a stink about it.  I can’t go back and reread it, but my memory said one had the option to appeal and they might have learned that way, but they had lost the desire to work there, feeling betrayed.

So this might be the only way they may find out without having to jump through too many hoops. (Even the bishop couldn’t find out if it was his endorsement).

I would hope nobody equates the BYUs with the Church myself.

We wouldn't want a subservient bureaucracy to be confused with the bureaucracy that controls it  

[california boy]

2 hours ago, smac97 said:

I don't have any particular opinion about her.  Broadly speaking, I find "Here, let me air my personal and private grievances in the Court of Public Opinion in order to make someone I don't like look bad, and knowing that this someone will not respond to me"-style histrionics to often be a distasteful, unwise, and unnecessarily harmful course of action.

I am curious why you even find this article distasteful.  If you are in full agreement with sending someone to fire an employee who has no idea why they are doing the firing and can't give even a hint why the firing is taking place, then what is the problem shining light on how BYU-I handles employment issues? Think of it as a public service announcement.  I certainly would want to know what kind of organization I was dealing with in deciding if I should accept a job offer no matter what that organization was.  Some might falsely assume that because BYU-I is associated with the Church, they would have unfounded expectations of being treated decently and with common curtesy the most secular companies exhibit.

 

[Teancum]

2 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

I would die for the church, but not work for it.

Well that sort of speaks volumes.

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, smac97 said:

I applied for a position with the Church years ago, but I did not get it.  In retrospect, I am glad of that.  I truly love the Church, but I don't want to have an employer/employee relationship with it.  I'd much rather just attend services and the temple, serve in callings, and otherwise do what I can to "build the kingdom" without the involvement of drawing a paycheck.

Thanks,

-Smac

The following for better or worse is my understanding after a lot of temple experience- close to 20 years as a worker-  and church experience in ward and stake leadership- but I could be mistaken on any point- 

The management of temple employees, for instance, handled by the  calling of Registrar,  is given on the basis of TEMPLE experience and of course all that it takes to get into temple leadership as a member.  Spiritual leadership - the temple president-is of course, the SPIRITUAL leader but does not handle employee management.  NOTHING to do with it at all- anything at all requiring business decisions is handled by the Registrar.  But those CALLED to do the job of Registrar, though likely having been a stake president, do not necessarily have  to have had a lot of business experience in personnel matters, buying supplies, running a cafeteria , etc. after being a computer programmer for 30 years.

"What shall we do with that area of the grounds that does not get sun?

Who is that cafeteria worker who has the problem at home?   Why aren't those trees trimmed yet?  Should we hire this former missionary to work in the office?  How do we handle that sister in the office who is always late?  She has a long drive, but this is the TEMPLE, God's House and she should honor her job more, but on the other hand....   How can we stop men's rented shirts from disappearing?   We lost $xxxx on unreturned rented shirts last year!   Yes those people paid their tithing but that doesn't mean they can walk off with their rented shirt!...  I know they meant to return it but just needed it for one Sunday, and then.... oops....!   "

Yes he gets paid for his job, but he is doing the best he can- but in many cases he doesn't know what he is doing......  Maybe some technical job for life, and now he has to know the nuances of federal laws regarding employees, how to manage employees who are still humans in the house of God.....,  and I am supposed to be retired- when do those "golden years" start anyway?.....

No thanks!   But somebody has to do it!

[mfbukowski]

2 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Well that sort of speaks volumes.

To you, who have no experience with the problems, nor any desire to try to help solve them.   Did you think that church was NOT run by humans?

The purpose of being here is to learn how to SOLVE these discrepancies now, not after we are trying to run Zion.  The Lord is a teacher and we are preparing to run a world wide theocracy, like it or not.

Did you not know that?

[mfbukowski]

28 minutes ago, california boy said:

I am curious why you even find this article distasteful.

 

Cute.

Man, I did not want to edit out my real answer.  But I did.

Edited November 30, 2022 by mfbukowski
repentance

[Arthur Vandelay]

21 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

To you, who have no experience with the problems, nor any desire to try to help solve them.   Did you think that church was NOT run by humans?

The purpose of being here is to learn how to SOLVE these discrepancies now, not after we are trying to run Zion.  The Lord is a teacher and we are preparing to run a world wide theocracy, like it or not.

Did you not know that?

I must admit I too was taken back a bit by your statement that you would die for the Church.

Die for the Lord?  Die for God?  Die for you wife and children?  That makes total sense.  But dying for a human-run institution that could, potentially, be under condemnation of the Lord?  Perhaps your loyalties are just a bit off target?

[Analytics]

38 minutes ago, california boy said:

I am curious why you even find this article distasteful.  If you are in full agreement with sending someone to fire an employee who has no idea why they are doing the firing and can't give even a hint why the firing is taking place, then what is the problem shining light on how BYU-I handles employment issues? Think of it as a public service announcement.  I certainly would want to know what kind of organization I was dealing with in deciding if I should accept a job offer no matter what that organization was.  Some might falsely assume that because BYU-I is associated with the Church, they would have unfounded expectations of being treated decently and with common curtesy the most secular companies exhibit.

 

A huge trend in the Deseret News is to editorialize about about the evils of "cancel culture." They don't seem to understand the irony that the Church's universities are infinitely worse than any secular university in terms of canceling choosing not to renew the contracts of people who don't toe the party line.

The Church generally has the legal right to do this, of course. And I don't feel too sorry for the people who get cancelled from BYU this way. They should have known what they were getting into. But to minimize people being surprised by this, the way the Church treats people ought to be documented and publicized.