Sunday, August 29, 2010

The Double-Reverse Trick Play

Someone had asked earlier about the 142 hour reversal that appeared in the superintendent's vacation leave record. The document in question is reproduced below under "Paid Vacations."

I made some inquiries and this is what I was told:

I was first told that they would have to access the back-up documents in order to explain why 142 hours had been restored to his leave account. But no one could find any back-up documents.

I was then told that during the period in question several different individuals had been entering his leave and that they had mistakenly marked him as "absent" when he was out of the office but on district business. Other alleged mistakes were that on 7/2/07 they had indicated 56 hours taken instead of eight and on 12/21/07 they had indicated 80 hours taken instead of eight. I was told that the 142 hour reversal was to correct these various errors in record keeping.

I challenged that explanation to district staff. If you look at the entry for 7/2/07, for example, under "Remarks" it notes the dates 6/18-22 and 6/25 and 6/26. That's seven days and seven days x eight hours per day = 56 hours. That also corresponds to a trip to Europe taken by the superintendent according to several people's recollections. It also appears, based on the "Remarks," that the 80 hours on 12/21/07 was in fact a "pay-out" for ten days of unused vacation. After I shared my perception of the leave record, I was told that, yes, I was correct and that those two entries were not, in fact, mistakes. The question remains: If those two entries, totalling 136 hours, were not incorrect, why the 142 hour reversal? No one seems to know.

According to the leave record, the superintendent was given 432 hours of vacation leave for 2007-08. That is the equivalent of 54 days. Without the 142 hour reversal it's 36.25 days. According to his contract he receives 22 days of vacation, ten of which can be transferred to the following year. Assuming he had 10 days carried over from the previous year, that's only 32 days. So for 2007-08, he received anywhere from 4 to 22 extra days of vacation. He also received 9 days of sick leave/personal leave. Altogether he missed as much as three months of work.

Of course, the next year he supposedly only took 4.75 days of vacation for all of 2008-09. Perhaps he was making up for his time off the year before by working on Christmas Eve, over Spring Break and all the other days the schools are closed but that are not legal holidays. I find that as unbelievable as the explanations given for the 142 hour vacation reversal.


  1. I would say the guy owes us money for vacation time taken and not reported, or reimbursed. The district office does "close" on school recesses, but I was told that the 12 month employees have to take vacation or comp time, and administrators are exempt and cannot accrue comp time, so if they are awarded vacation time, they need to record it. Looks like it was recorded and then backed out because he didn't have any to "cash in."

  2. This is yet another example of inadequate monitoring of the superintendant by the board. There should be a board member designated to track and account for his vacation and reibursements. All the "errors" in record keeping are unacceptable. There is just one person being tracked here. Lets have some focus and get it right!!!