Saturday, September 09, 2006
Babies on Buses - Part 1 Continued
At some point Green said that he would look up the legality when he got to work the next morning.
Board member Frank Coleman pointed out that having children in the bus mechanics' area was “dangerous.”
“I can’t see anything that’s healthy about it,” Herringer added.
“The argument is made that we won’t be able to get bus drivers. (They) make up to $17 an hour.”
Snow asked Chief Operations Officer Stewart how many bus drivers were bringing infants.
“I don’t have the numbers,” the man in charge of transportation replied. “I personally would have no problem giving direction to cease this immediately….Let the chips fall where they may.”
“We do have to be reasonably,” Human Resource Director Smith said, “adding that the baby they had previously discussed was now “a year old.”
“I don’t think we need to wait,” Herringer said.
“They have received a verbal notice at an all district meeting,” Smith repeated.
“I think another question is how many (school board members) had prior knowledge,” Stewart interjected.
“I knew,” long-time board member Kim Skaja answered.
Fellow board member Coleman said, “No one said (infants) on the bus.”
Then, Chief Financial Officer Stan Hall joined the attack on the current practice of allowing drivers’ children on their buses.
“I had this same discussion with our insurance carrier. You need to get them off the bus.”
“Would it be helpful to just make this a policy?” Green asked.
“I would think we should be very definitive that a kid should not be on a bus unless they are assigned to it,” Herring added.
Skaja said she remembered (something about having kids on their mothers’ buses) “about ten years ago.”
Smith again joined the conversation, saying, “Well, none of us think it’s a good idea to have kids on the bus.
At this point, Snow asked, “Do we really want to risk a potential work stoppage.?
“There are 20. I think it was in the 20’s.”
(There are about 60 buses.)
Then, Smith spoke in a manner I took to be rebuking Snow:
“If employees are calling any board member, (it is) inappropriate (not to tell the superintendent).”
“Do you expect board members to be discourteous to people?” Snow replied.
Skaja interposed herself between the two verbally by interjecting, “If it isn’t against the law,” it would be “OK.”
At this point newly appointed School Superintendent John Burkey said, “We have no other classification where an employee can bring their children to work. Where we have it, it is a safety question.
“If we have 20 bus drivers who are going to walk out, then we need to be (realistic).”
Stewart continued his support of prohibiting the drivers’ children on their buses:
“I don’t know where Mr. Snow gets the idea that we’ll get a walkout.
“…we have taxpayers concerned we have seats occupied with somebody else’s children.”
He went on to echo Hall concerning liability, saying it was “negligent to allow this to go (on).”
“I see a heck of a lot of exposure. I’m certainly going to find out…define the size of the problem.”
“For my money, this stops tomorrow,” board vice president and meeting head in the absence of Mike Skala (who left early) said.
“I’ll take responsibility. I say it ends tomorrow.”
Snow agreed with Stewart.
“I’m going to agree with Glen. You have to define the size of the problem.
“I agree with Mr. Burkey. You have to be realistic.
“The bus drivers were surprised tat this was going to end.”
Newly appointed board member Tony Quagliano, who had sat quieting through all of this, said some that I didn’t catch, but I did write down this sentence:
“We are defining this as non-school age children,” which may have been a question.
Stewart’s next comment was, “I just think this is a sticky wicket all the way around.”
Herringer followed up with
“I shouldn’t just be on my mother’s bus. She should be on the bus she is assigned to…I just see it as such potential problems.”
Burkey spoke for a second time: “If Monday morning we’re missing 20 drivers…(as) Larry says…
“That’s what I’m told (but) Glen should know,” Snow replied.
“It’s between 19 and 20. Maybe half of them would be there,” employee Smith said.
“The union is aware,” she continued. “The union president knows people very (well).
Smith told of how her mother had taken her as a child to school when she taught.
“We don’t allow kids to sit in their teachers’ classroom.”
I can’t figure out whether all of the expressed concern for safety and school district liability is for real or just part of a coordinated effort to get back at the president of the union which represents the bus drivers.
“I would tell you now that the only child on those buses who needs a car seat is mine,” Yvonne Tovar told me.
Part 2 of this series will run Sunday. Find out what the union president has to say.
To return to McHenry County Blog, click here.
Board member Frank Coleman pointed out that having children in the bus mechanics' area was “dangerous.”
“I can’t see anything that’s healthy about it,” Herringer added.
“The argument is made that we won’t be able to get bus drivers. (They) make up to $17 an hour.”
Snow asked Chief Operations Officer Stewart how many bus drivers were bringing infants.
“I don’t have the numbers,” the man in charge of transportation replied. “I personally would have no problem giving direction to cease this immediately….Let the chips fall where they may.”
“We do have to be reasonably,” Human Resource Director Smith said, “adding that the baby they had previously discussed was now “a year old.”
“I don’t think we need to wait,” Herringer said.
“They have received a verbal notice at an all district meeting,” Smith repeated.
“I think another question is how many (school board members) had prior knowledge,” Stewart interjected.
“I knew,” long-time board member Kim Skaja answered.
Fellow board member Coleman said, “No one said (infants) on the bus.”
Then, Chief Financial Officer Stan Hall joined the attack on the current practice of allowing drivers’ children on their buses.
“I had this same discussion with our insurance carrier. You need to get them off the bus.”
“Would it be helpful to just make this a policy?” Green asked.
“I would think we should be very definitive that a kid should not be on a bus unless they are assigned to it,” Herring added.
Skaja said she remembered (something about having kids on their mothers’ buses) “about ten years ago.”
Smith again joined the conversation, saying, “Well, none of us think it’s a good idea to have kids on the bus.
At this point, Snow asked, “Do we really want to risk a potential work stoppage.?
“There are 20. I think it was in the 20’s.”
(There are about 60 buses.)
Then, Smith spoke in a manner I took to be rebuking Snow:
“If employees are calling any board member, (it is) inappropriate (not to tell the superintendent).”
“Do you expect board members to be discourteous to people?” Snow replied.
Skaja interposed herself between the two verbally by interjecting, “If it isn’t against the law,” it would be “OK.”
At this point newly appointed School Superintendent John Burkey said, “We have no other classification where an employee can bring their children to work. Where we have it, it is a safety question.
“If we have 20 bus drivers who are going to walk out, then we need to be (realistic).”
Stewart continued his support of prohibiting the drivers’ children on their buses:
“I don’t know where Mr. Snow gets the idea that we’ll get a walkout.
“…we have taxpayers concerned we have seats occupied with somebody else’s children.”
He went on to echo Hall concerning liability, saying it was “negligent to allow this to go (on).”
“I see a heck of a lot of exposure. I’m certainly going to find out…define the size of the problem.”
“For my money, this stops tomorrow,” board vice president and meeting head in the absence of Mike Skala (who left early) said.
“I’ll take responsibility. I say it ends tomorrow.”
Snow agreed with Stewart.
“I’m going to agree with Glen. You have to define the size of the problem.
“I agree with Mr. Burkey. You have to be realistic.
“The bus drivers were surprised tat this was going to end.”
Newly appointed board member Tony Quagliano, who had sat quieting through all of this, said some that I didn’t catch, but I did write down this sentence:
“We are defining this as non-school age children,” which may have been a question.
Stewart’s next comment was, “I just think this is a sticky wicket all the way around.”
Herringer followed up with
“I shouldn’t just be on my mother’s bus. She should be on the bus she is assigned to…I just see it as such potential problems.”
Burkey spoke for a second time: “If Monday morning we’re missing 20 drivers…(as) Larry says…
“That’s what I’m told (but) Glen should know,” Snow replied.
“It’s between 19 and 20. Maybe half of them would be there,” employee Smith said.
“The union is aware,” she continued. “The union president knows people very (well).
Smith told of how her mother had taken her as a child to school when she taught.
“We don’t allow kids to sit in their teachers’ classroom.”
I can’t figure out whether all of the expressed concern for safety and school district liability is for real or just part of a coordinated effort to get back at the president of the union which represents the bus drivers.
“I would tell you now that the only child on those buses who needs a car seat is mine,” Yvonne Tovar told me.
Part 2 of this series will run Sunday. Find out what the union president has to say.
To return to McHenry County Blog, click here.
# posted by Cal Skinner : 6:29 PM
