Edna Chun’s Sad Tale or As the World Turns at UNCG

All right, I finally did it. I broke down and bought an ergonomic keyboard. I simply can’t keep up with the pace of the UNCG soap opera if they are going to keep churning out news at this rate. I really am going to have to ask for health insurance and a pension if they keep me working full time like this.

The News and Record reported yesterday that Chun has filed a grievance with UNCG.

The irony was not lost on me. I think it would have been considered heavy handed as a story line even in the world of daytime television, but this is reality where no such bars on the purest melodrama exist.

Chun’s angle is that she was fired because of her age (68) and her ethnicity (Asian). She certainly wasn’t fired because of her abilities (insignificant) or her strength of character (absent).

One of her primary complaints isn’t that she was innocent of royally screwing up but that she wasn’t extended the courtesy of being allowed to resign or retire rather than be fired.

Wait, I’m tearing up and I can’t see the screen clearly.

Okay.

In other words, she is the first one that has been dealt with appropriately. That has got to hurt.

Somebody more fluent than I in the subtleties of this system might need to fill us in, but I would imagine that if you retire or resign you get a different set of benefits than if you are fired. At the very least you get to save face.

Something that doesn’t happen, of course, if you are carted away in handcuffs and your mug shot is posted for all the world to see.

But I digress.

So, she wasn’t given the velvet handshake. Also, she says, she doesn’t know why she was fired. And she didn’t have anything to do with the UNCG3 anyway. And Paul Mason made her do it.

I’m having a hard time processing all of those different angles at the same time. She didn’t do it, except for that they made her do it, and she doesn’t know why they fired her, but she didn’t do it anyway, so it doesn’t matter. I think that’s the argument.

Pulling together all of his talents as a university spokesman and after a lengthy incantation to invoke the muses, Joe Gallehugh responded bravely on behalf of UNCG with words that are sure to echo through the ages much as the speeches recorded by Tacitus in his Histories that the university couldn’t comment.

Chun is showing some backbone in refusing to allow others off the hook and go silently. Of course, it would have been helpful earlier if she had brought it to the public’s attention that Paul Mason had demanded to know the names of those who had filed grievances against him and pressured her to dismiss the matter. Also, apparently her supervisor, Charles Maimone created a hostile work environment – something Chun suddenly seems to clearly understand.

But if she wants to call out the whole rat’s nest, I would advise everyone to put on goggles and gloves because it’s going to get dirty.

Maybe Lyda Carpen can offer Chun some pointers about going through the grievance process. But I wouldn’t be surprised if Carpen is too busy these days to have time to help.

The Chancellor Needs to Answer

Now there has been a settlement, the final admission by the university that it didn't have a leg to stand on. Not one, not a stump, not a lean-to, not a dream, not a prayer. There wasn't even a whimper despite the promised bang.

Where is the evidence of egregious wrong doing now?

The lies should stick in Linda Brady's throat.

And if the faculty had any guts at all, they would be at her office on Monday morning demanding that she answer for herself. She should beg our forgiveness and she should leave now. There isn't enough crow to serve her what she deserves.

This. Is. Unacceptable.

We do not forgive.

We do not forget.
Expect us.

Ridding UNCG of Parasites

It has been several thousands of years since rulers realized that a population guided by principles of mutual trust was much more productive. This doesn’t mean that societies end up living in pure harmony, what it means is that the laws and rules put in place were designed to facilitate interactions between people who were not friends or family members. The benefit of creating comfort for ongoing interactions among large groups of unrelated individuals comes from the non-zero-sum nature of information and knowledge. The more that more people know, the more knowledge those people can produce none of which limits the amount of knowledge available to others or for future discovery.

Robert Wright uses the metaphor of the brain to describe a productive human system. The more neurons (people) the more the overall knowledge the brain can both access and produce, nurturing the health and growth of the brain itself (and therefore its neurons). There is nothing to be gained from a rogue ‘neuron’ conquering and destroying others. It eventually damages the brain to the point that the neuron itself cannot survive – in other words, it leads to a total loss.

Should each neuron in the brain insist on working by itself, there is no doubt that things such as language, writing, medicine, or cake could never have been developed. If a neuron were to, let’s say, refuse to answer emails or always work with its door shut, it would not be contributing to the growth of the brain’s potential but instead would be a parasitic entity trying to benefit from the production of others while failing to contribute any value of its own.

If the goal of the collection of neurons into a brain is the advancement of opportunity, information, and benefits then there is a requirement for mutual and transparent communication. This has been demonstrated through an exercise known as The Prisoner’s Dilemma. The situation offered as an example is that of two prisoners who are being separately interrogated – cooperation is in their mutual interest but there are also two primary barriers to this cooperation.

The first barrier is the inability of the two to communicate with each other. You cannot communicate if there is a wall (either physical or social) between you. If your door is shut, your attitude is hostile, and your emails unanswered, communication for mutual benefit is impossible.

The second barrier is one of trust. If you cannot openly communicate with a person who is neither a friend or family member, how can you develop the ability to trust that they will do what is in the best interest of all? If they continually indicate that they don’t trust you by engaging in regular practices of anti-social behavior, the possibility to believe that their actions are or will ever be designed to be of mutual benefit is nil.

The question then becomes, why would two (or more) neurons in the same brain, ostensibly working for the betterment of the brain as a whole (and therefore the mutual benefits to its neurons) not build the possibility for open communication and trust?

The answer would have to be that they are either a sociopath or that they see a benefit to themselves that requires or is contingent upon sacrificing the health of the brain. They have other goals.

Obviously, this is a metaphor.

What I am asking here is this:

If members of UNCG’s administration (and here I am thinking particularly of Paul Mason, although he is simply representative of the type of executive that UNCG’s new public management culture has favored) are interested in the growth of UNCG as a university (that’s the brain) then how do we explain their actions?

We can’t.

Instead, those actions become explicable only if we realize that they are not working for the positive growth of the university as an institution of higher education. They have a separate set of interests…and to find out what they are, you have only to follow the money.

The faculty, staff, and students at UNCG are feeling the impact of the zero sum game being played by upper administration. Each time a neuron dies, each time a person disappears from the collective consciousness of that brain, it entails a loss of knowledge. We are each weaker for it. Certainly there are times when through growth or death, we will lose people who contribute to our overall well-being. At other times, though, we must look to surgically remove those who cause damage.

Recently, our mind has been deprived of Lyda Carpen, Beth English, Chris English, Betsi Robinson, Debbie Schallock, Andrea Spencer, and David Wilson. We have also been injured by the loss of Helen Hebert, Laurie Sims, Nelson Bob, Linda Carter, Patti Stewart, Steve Gilliam, and many others.

There is a continual, concerted, and intentional effort to carve away those who would send signals of alarm at the rampant parasitism. As with all parasites there will come a time when the damage is so severe that both the host and parasite are lost. In the short term, however, the benefits to a few are great enough that they will willingly sacrifice everyone’s potential for mutual benefit in order to collect as much as they can right now.

They are fools to sacrifice so much for so little. They give up more than they will gain. Even the corporate world understands that the non-zero sum gains to all are greater than the momentary theft of current assets. Enron, WorldCom, Tyco, and Freddie Mac demonstrated quite clearly what happens – you could have $1 billion now but end up disgraced, jailed, and ruined or you could accept $1 million per year and be remembered as a hero. Short sighted greed will never buy long term good.

UNCG’s administration has gone corporate…but it has gone out of date corporate. Google, Costco, IDEO – these companies and many others realize that happy employees are more productive employees. They understand the non-zero sum nature of the collective brain.

I’m not suggesting they are philanthropists. Running a business isn’t a charity. However, they are smart. They see the benefits that come sharing, from feeding the brain, that are longer term and more sustainable than those that can be obtained by being a parasite. They also are working for the success of the company as an entity. UNCG’s administration has forgotten about the success of the university as an entity and become obsessed with the simple reproduction of administrative structures.

The UNCG community isn’t under attack. It’s up for sale.

First Draft of Timeline

I am working on a timeline of events since the arrival of Paul Mason. I think there is a much longer timeline that needs to be assembled in order to show the networks of influence and continued pattern of bully cultivation that has become part of the administrative status quo. However, everything has to start somewhere and so here I lay out some key moments - it will also serve as a catch up to anybody who might not have been able to devote the kind of time I have to following up the threads that lead to whatever is rotting at UNCG (please forgive the mixed metaphors.)

I would greatly appreciate any contributions to filling out this timeline and any corrections to errors that are seen herein.

April 1. Paul Mason begins work at UNCG as Vice Chancellor of University Relations.

September 2. Andrea Spencer, the chancellor’s former speechwriter, resigns from the University Relations department, saying: “It didn’t feel healthy.” She later added, “Having experienced the atmosphere and seen all of the signs leading up to the criminal charges, there’s no question in my mind that the agenda was to rid the department of certain people.”

September 12. Carpen, English, and Wilson are notified by UNCG that they are under investigation under suspicion of having falsified time sheets. Their computers are seized and the three are put on paid leave[1]. The initial statements released by the university focused on the use of university cameras and computers for their freelance business, however the charges that were later levied were for incorrectly filled out time sheets.

September 25. David Wilson, Chris English, and Lyda Carpen are served with arrest warrants for the commission of 22 felony charges. The charges are obtaining property under false pretenses and aiding and abetting in obtaining property under false pretenses. Translation: The money they were paid for work is the property and the false pretenses were the time sheets. The aiding and abetting portion was the signing of the time sheets by Carpen. Keep your eye on these particular charges.

September 29. A letter was sent by Betsi Robinson (former Director of Communications, 2 years), Debbie Schallock, (former Director of Marketing, 13 years) and Andrea Spender (former copywriter, 11 years) to the executive staff indicating an ongoing problem of abuse and harassment by Paul Mason. The letter indicates that numerous efforts had been made to look to Human Resources for relief and labels Mason's treatment of the employees he supervised as "deplorable."

Dear UNCG Executive Staff:

We write to each of you today with grave concern over the actions taken on the morning of Thursday, Sept. 25, 2014, against three SPA staff members who worked in the University Relations Department and under the Office of the Chancellor. On Sept. 24, 2014, these employees were terminated after an investigation regarding secondary employment.

Following their termination, Lyda Adams Carpen, Chris English and David Wilson, dedicated university employees for 17 years, 12 years and 11 years, respectively, were served with felony arrest warrants. We are compelled to immediately respond with a shared voice of outrage over these actions, which include ongoing threatening treatment of these professionals and the deeply concerning mismanagement of the University Relations Department.

All three employees have impeccable UNCG service records with award-winning results as well as a deep admiration for the university. The fact that their livelihoods and professional integrity are being threatened by criminal charges is not only alarming, but should be of grave concern to any SPA employee who could face similar threats.

In the past six months, seven people in University Relations have been forced from their positions. One was forced to transfer departments. Two were released through a reduction in force. One resigned her position based on concern over her own professional welfare. And, now, three have been terminated and accused of criminal behavior.

The actions taken on Sept. 25 are unjust and certainly not the way UNCG should treat dedicated, loyal, passionate and committed employees who have served the university, the Chancellor’s office, and the greater campus community with honor and pride.

UNCG is committed to being an inclusive, equitable and safe community. Members of the Executive Staff are charged, in part, to oversee and protect the wellbeing of the university. We respectfully implore you to be the voice of SPA employees and the UNCG community as a whole by expressing your mutual concern about the university’s treatment of these employees under the management of Paul Mason, who joined the UNCG community on April 1, 2014, and immediately created a hostile work environment in University Relations. Numerous employees of University Relations have notified HR about Paul Mason’s harassment. Most of these complaints are documented and show a disturbing pattern of behavior that must be stopped before it is publicly exposed and causes irreversible harm to UNCG’s integrity and reputation.

We implore you, as leaders of the university, to get involved, to ask questions and to take action to protect UNCG and all of its employees against this kind of deplorable treatment.
Respectfully,
Betsi Robinson, former Director of Communications, 2 years Debbie Schallock, former Director of Marketing, 13 years Andrea Spencer, former Copywriter, 11 years 

October 7. A fund is set up to help the UNCG3 offset the legal costs related to their firing and arrests.

October 8. A forum is held by Edna Chun, Vice Chancellor of Human Resources; Jaime Herring, Chief of UNCG police; and Charlie Maimone, Vice Chancellor for Business Affairs to address concerns regarding secondary employment generated by the firings and arrests. Approximately 250 people attended the forum.  From the News & Record:

“The central issue is what is called secondary employment. According to state and UNC system policy, employees must disclose details about paid jobs outside their normal UNCG work. Employees must submit disclosure forms annually, and a supervisor must approve them. Outside employment isn’t typically restricted — UNCG officials said Wednesday they encourage it — but it cannot conflict with the employee’s primary job at UNCG.”

Edna Chun stated that there were no formal complaints of a hostile work environment that had been filed. During her exit interview Betsi Robinson asked about filing an official workplace harassment complaint against Mason but was told that because she is not a member of a protected class that option was not available to her. In addition, David Wilson’s attorney Ken Free attested that Wilson had filed a complaint against Mason.

October 15. 156 faculty from UNCG sign a petition to the DA urging that the charges against the UNCG3 be dropped. There were 995 faculty members at UNCG in 2013, assuming only minor shifts in that number, this means that nearly 16% of the faculty signed this petition. Looking closely at the faculty numbers, it is important to realize that as of 2013 the number of non-tenure track faculty (meaning those whose employment is renewed on a fixed term basis, either semester-to-semester, year-to-year, or in three year cycles) is 465. These are people who are very easily intimidated by the lack of security in their position. In addition, a large number of these non-tenure track faculty are adjuncts who teach a small number of courses and whose employment is renewed on an as needed basis by semester. In addition, some of the faculty with tenure are those in upper administration.

It is also important to note that this 16% of unanimous support is far greater than the mixed reactions given to the new rec center in the Brailsford and Dunlavy Campus Needs Assessment survey to which only 10.7% of the student population responded and of those 55% said the current rec center satisfied their needs – and yet the Brailsford & Dunlavy survey results were apparently convincing enough to spend $91 million. Which is more 45% of 10.7% or 100% of 16%?

October 17. The Chancellor’s office issues an invitation to a forum to discuss secondary employment.

“The events of the past few weeks have been difficult for all of us in the UNCG community. Many issues have been raised, and I am working hard to address them. On Friday, October 17 at 2:00 p.m., I invite you to a forum to address questions and concerns related to our policies on secondary employment and conflict of interest. The Forum will take place in Room 114 in the School of Education.

Many of our faculty and staff pursue secondary-employment opportunities. It is an essential part of a university culture, and it promotes individual, professional and institutional growth.

Our faculty and staff – many of whom engage in outside employment – show up here on campus every day and do the good work of this university. We are proud of our colleagues and the work that they do, on campus and off.

I look forward to seeing you Friday.

Sincerely,

Linda P. Brady”

At the "forum", she addresses a packed house by reading a canned statement and then refusing to take questions. Her statement is, in a nutshell, trust me, it’s a lot worse than you know.

I use scare quotes because, a forum is defined as “a place, meeting, or medium where ideas and views on a particular issue can be exchanged.”

In other words:

1. In an effort to show the UNCG community that it can trust her, she brings them together under the false pretenses of a forum.

2. Her attempt at “speaking directly and personally to this community” consisted of reading a generic statement and refusing to take questions. 

3. In an attempt to clarify she reveals she can say nothing that has not already been said.

It’s brilliant.

Needless to say, people were somewhat taken aback.

An emergency fund is immediately started to buy the Chancellor a much needed dictionary so that she can learn to use words with the definitions they already have assigned to them.

The message she read and then emailed indicated that the crimes that had taken place were much different than simply making personal phone calls or copies at work. (note: it turns out to be about using a UNCG laptop for personal business while at home…but I guess we can still make copies and phone calls.)

The Chancellor’s personal, communicative, and transparent email reads:

When I announced this forum earlier in the week, it was because I know many of you have questions about recent events in University Relations, concerns about the climate on campus and confusion about how university policies may affect you. And I wanted to speak directly and personally to this community.

I know what is really on your minds is the University Relations issue. So I have chosen to focus my remarks on that.

I want to acknowledge how difficult this has been for all of us. I know that some of you believe these employees weren’t treated as they should have been.

I also want to acknowledge that this university and our state benefit enormously every day from the commitment that you bring to your work here. UNCG is a great university because of our outstanding faculty, staff and students. I carry that message with me—proudly and consistently—everywhere I go.

That’s what makes this issue so difficult … because I know that the issue involving three University Relations employees is an exception on this campus.

There has been a great deal of speculation and inaccurate information that I know you have all heard or read. We have been receiving numerous emails with questions regarding these events and news reports about them. We have limited our public conversation. The employees are able to speak freely but we are bound by laws of confidentiality. Today, I will clarify as much as possible about what transpired.

Anytime we become aware of employee misconduct or misuse of resources, we are obligated as stewards of North Carolina’s resources to investigate and respond.  We also have important and clear obligations under state law when we have information that may indicate possible theft or misuse of state resources to report that information to law enforcement authorities and then cooperate in any resulting criminal process.  That is what we did in this case.

When Paul Mason joined UNCG as associate vice chancellor for marketing and strategic communication on April 1, 2014, I asked him to elevate the performance of University Relations for the benefit of the university and to find ways to operate more efficiently, particularly given the serious budget cuts we have experienced over the past several years.  In the course of conducting an initial assessment of the department, Paul discovered information that indicated possible misconduct by employees.

When made aware of this information, as required, the UNCG Police Department conducted a criminal investigation.  I understand from Chief Herring the information from the investigation suggests that three employees in the office of University Relations participated or aided in operating a for-profit business using university equipment, during university time, while receiving substantial revenues from the business. This went on for at least several years.

It is important that our faculty and staff understand that what he found was very different from the secondary and outside employment arrangements that are permitted and encouraged at UNCG. It is significantly different in scale from the incidental use of university resources that is permitted, as well.

I stand by the decisions that we have made. The employees have appealed their terminations, and I know the grievance process will provide a fair and objective review of the decisions. I know the District Attorney’s Office will continue to make the appropriate decisions related to the criminal charges and the employees will have another opportunity to be heard.

One of the most disturbing elements to me is that this situation has created fear and anxiety among faculty and staff. Let me assure you that this is not about a few hours of time recorded inaccurately. It is not about making personal copies or phone calls at work. It’s not about appropriate outside employment that has been approved through established university procedures. This was an egregious misuse of university resources that had a direct impact on these employees’ ability to perform their day jobs.

Again, the information supports that employees were operating a for-profit business out of university offices on university time, using university equipment, over a period of several years. That is not acceptable.

We have addressed this issue, and will continue to address this issue, with fairness and integrity, consistent with the core values of our university.

I have received many questions, and the ones I will address today reflect some of the concerns that I’ve been hearing:

1. “Are you going to drop the charges?”

I think we’ve made the right decisions, and that we’ve addressed this issue with fairness and integrity. There is a grievance process on campus that will provide employees a fair and objective review of our decisions, and the criminal process will follow its course as well.

2. "Can you address staff members’ unease that they no longer feel safe within the UNCG system, if at any time a manager can go back years on timesheets and work up a case of timesheet fraud? There is not a person on this campus who has not made an error or two on their timesheet…listing a day as a work day instead of a vacation day because of human error."

I understand this concern. This case is not about incidental mistakes, or the unintentional failure to document a brief instance of an outside employment opportunity because of not understanding a policy.  Again, let me remind you that the situation in University Relations was very different.

3. "Has anyone addressed the common feeling that if you go to our HR department, you are not considered in a confidential status?"

I have heard this feedback and we are working with Human Resources to ensure that clear policies are in place regarding confidentiality and that these policies are adhered to. We know it’s important that our employees have a safe and confidential resource to support them.

4. "What about the claims of a hostile work environment?"

I don’t want any employee working in a hostile work environment. If you feel like you are in such an environment, you should contact either the supervisor of the individual about whom you have concerns, or contact Human Resources.  We also have a policy regarding violence in the workplace that prohibits violence, including bullying and intimidation and contains procedures for reporting.

5. "Is the secondary employment form a UNCG-generated form, or is it used system-wide?"

The secondary employment form was generated by UNCG but complies with the requirements of the office of state human resources policy. A similar form is used on all campuses of the university system.  Generally secondary employment that does not interfere with work hours, or does not create a conflict of interest, is permissible.

6. "Has the current University Relations staff been asked how things are?”

I met with the University Relations staff on Wednesday to communicate my support and respond to concerns that they have. Clearly this has been a difficult time for the university community, but especially for the University Relations staff. They have my continued support.

7. "Who does the head of police report to?"

The chief of the university police department reports to the office of the Vice Chancellor for Business Affairs.  It’s important to note that the university police department is a fully functioning law enforcement agency under state law, and operates independently from the university in determining if a crime has been committed.

I recognize that I have only been able to address a few of the questions that faculty and staff have asked. We will continue to work to answer your questions and provide more information as we are able.

I want to say again that I know what a difficult time this has been for our campus community. As challenging as it is at times, we must always do the right thing. It is painful for me to hear that many of our faculty and staff are afraid and hurting.  This is not the kind of environment that we want to foster at UNCG.

Together we must focus on rebuilding our community. Nothing is more important for the future of this university.

October 20. The Chancellor resigns, I mean, announces her retirement as is generally done by having it coincidentally occur in the middle of a major scandal. The two events are in no way connected. None. Seriously. Many employees find themselves in agreement with a decision made by the Chancellor for the first time during her tenure and a general sense of elation floats through the air at UNCG, just briefly, before reality settles in again.

October 23. Provost Dana Dunn invites faculty to a forum regarding the university’s policies and procedures regarding external professional activities. Attending university forums appears to have taken on the aspect of a full time job, most likely requiring filling out a secondary employment form.

October 28. A silent vigil is held in the center of campus attended by over 100 faculty, staff, and students who stand in the heat of the midday sun for 22 minutes, one minute for each of the felony charges levied against the UNCG3.

October 30. In a definitive demonstration of the egregious nature of the charges levied against the UNCG3, all 22 charges are dropped. It makes me think back to the day (October 12) when UNCG attorney Imogene Cathey told the News & Record:

“While confidentiality requirements prohibit us from specifically addressing the details of these issues, we can say that our findings are solid and our actions were appropriate to the situation. We expect that will be borne out as the employment and legal processes play out.”

November 6. Chancellor Brady announces that she will review UNCG’s human resources department and hold more of her beloved forums which, like Roosevelt’s Fireside Chats during the Great Depression, are sure to have families gathering around their radios in adoring rapture.

This announcement came at a Faculty Senate meeting where Brady characterized the problems on campus as resulting from “a subset of faculty” that did not like the decisions that she had had to make in these difficult times. However, given that the charges had been dropped, she suggested it was time that we all move on. Stop asking questions. Stop it dammit! Or something to that effect.

Brady cautioned faculty members to look forward, not back.

“I am sorry that this situation has created so much tension and uncertainty on this campus,” Brady said, “but it is critically important that we collaboratively focus on the future.

“We are damaging this institution and putting the search for a new chancellor at risk if we continue down this potentially self-destructive path.”

As only a nanosecond had elapsed between the revelation that the charges had no merit and Brady’s sudden desperation to move on, some were left wondering that if we were so concerned about self-destruction and collaboration if it might not have been wiser to not to let Mason destroy the University Relations department and try to ruin people’s lives. Also, if there were any possibility of looking to a future in which Mason didn’t work at UNCG and bullying was not tolerated. Others saw an opportunity to kiss up to the Chancellor and engage in a little hostility of their own (See November 10). So, everybody won.

A resolution was also brought forward at the faculty senate requesting that the search for the new chancellor be open given the low level of faculty morale and general disaffection. The resolution is tabled as being both too specific and too general, and characterized as being a laundry list of complaints that did not provide enough details. A wormhole was created in the universe.

November 7. In a demonstration of the campus’ willingness to move on, the UNCG3 remained the main topic of conversation nearly everywhere.

November 8. (See November 7.)

November 10. In a valiant attempt to demonstrate that the ancient art of letter writing is not dead, Classical Studies Professor Jonathan Zarecki insists that we shouldn’t dwell on the past. Also, something about hockey.

A flurry of letter writing ensues leading all parties to a deeper understanding of each other’s positions and pledges of eternal brotherhood. No wait, sorry, that was an episode of the Borgia. Nothing nearly that civilized happened here.

November 12. Lyda Carpen rejects the university’s generous offer to, given that she never actually did anything wrong, change her departure status from firing to resignation. This ‘egregiously’ generous offer came after a hearing with a panel of independent mediators who confided that it certainly looked like Mason might have been brought to UNCG to clear out the department.

November 19. Tom Ross speaks at the faculty senate meeting stating that the search this time should yield someone human (I’m actually not making that part up!) Unfortunately, the search should probably be confidential and will involve as little faculty and staff input as possible with the sincere hope that doing the same thing we did last time we looked for a chancellor will magically yield different results this time. Confidence in this prospect is overwhelming.

December 8. Paul Mason forwards a proposal for reorganization in University Relations, including a note that Sherri MacCheyne’s salary should be re-examined.

December 9. Edna Chun forwards a request to create two new positions at UNCG in University Relations. The new positions are just awfully similar to the positions that were eliminated in order to get rid of Schallock and Robinson, but that’s just a coincidence. The difference is that the new positions are EPA which means it’s a lot easier to fire people who aren’t as morally flexible as you would like them to be. It also means you can over or under pay them more easily as your needs change and their willingness to serve becomes more evident.

December 12. Administrative panel in second stage of employee grievance process upholds Carpen’s firing after determining that she used a university laptop for personal business when not at work on her own time. Also, she had made an amount of money so small that if it fell off the table, the Chancellor wouldn’t have even leaned over to pick it up, by working on freelance jobs with two photographers she supervised with the full knowledge and consent of her supervisors. However, the actual things that she was charged with and that were given as reasons for her firing were neither “intentional” nor “egregious” unless Brady was using those words to mean “unintentional” or “of little consequence” when she said them.

This announcement was met with what, if there were an award for it, should win ‘Funniest Post Article Commentary Ever. Ever’ by Scott Romine:

“All of you who are criticizing the panel's findings need to consider how this would look to the average NC taxpayer. Imagine that you're paying this woman's salary and that, DURING OFF HOURS, SHE IS DOING SOMETHING TOTALLY UNRELATED TO HER JOB AND GETTING PAID FOR IT. Even if she had filed the correct forms and obtained her supervisor's permission, you'd be outraged, right?

To add insult to injury, she's also--and I wouldn't accuse her of this if there weren't hard evidence supporting it--using the computer YOU BOUGHT to do something unrelated to her job! Sure, she's also using the computer to do her job, but really, she is STEALING disk storage and CPU usage from the hardworking taxpayers of the state. And we're not talking about kilobytes; we're talking about MEGABYTES.* Plus, what if she had spilled coffee on her keyboard during her nefarious exploits? As a society, we cannot afford to condone burglary and armed robbery. Similarly, we cannot afford to sanction this kind of THEFT OF STATE RESOURCES.

In my opinion, Lyda Carpen is lucky to have avoided a lengthy prison sentence for her dastardly crimes.

·      The author of this post, a UNCG employee, is using his children's computer, not the University-supplied computer in his basement office.”

The truly unfortunate thing is that the irony in the statement is lost on those who would benefit most from its existence.

December 22. The Chancellor announces that it turns out she was right all along only it was about the wrong stuff and so the wrongness of it is cancelled out if you carry the two and…look something shiny!!

---

[1] There are conflicting dates for when paid leave began, N&R says Sept 5 as the date