It’s like a reoccurring nightmare

It's like a reoccurring nightmare

AM was an assistant principal of science at Manhattan Center for Science and Math from 2008 until her dismissal in June of 2013. Ms. M was hired by Principal David Jimenez around the same time he hired Assistant Principal Felicia Bray. What binds these two women together are the incidents of sexual harassment they endured at the hands of Principal David Jimenez. Both women had filed federal lawsuits for sexual harassment, retaliation, and wrongful termination. Oddly enough, the Department of Education’s defense in both cases were that the statutes of limitation had ran out. Citing that both plaintiffs failed to filed their lawsuits in a timely manner.
Question: How come the Department of Education never took the stance that Jimenez never committed these offenses?
My assumption to this question is that the DOE felt they had a better case if they never addressed the issue of sexual harassment and retaliation.
AM’s Case
http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/index.html?id=2480412
Felicia Bray’s Case
http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/new-york/nysdce/1:2011cv07884/387092/39

In her case Ms. M had planned on subpoenaing Former Manhattan Superintendent Francesca Pena and Milcedes Pepin a former Assistant Principal (http://www.nycsci.org/reports/08-10%20PepinM-Penaf%20Ltr.pdf‎.) In 2010, Jimenez had testified against both individual in an SCI case#2010-0428. Jimenez’s testimony cites a strained relationship between Pepin and himself, yet in 2009, Jimenez used the school’s procurement card (P-Card)
(https://mcsminmywords.wordpress.com/2013/12/12/transparency-part-ii/) to paid for Pepin’s trip to China. On January 27, 2014 a state judge Lucy Billings reinstated Pepin (Google Search Matter of Pepin v New York City Dept. of Educ.) citing that one fake email does not justify termination. Ms. M’s lawyer in a letter to the court noted that both Pena and Pepin have information pertaining to sexual harassment and retaliation.

The city on the other hand cites that Ms. M’s poor job performance was the reason for her discontinuance. When asked to provide supporting information Ms. M’s lawyer noted that “Jimenez was unable to exactly quantify those numbers and only spoke in generalities. This was similar to my 3020A hearing where Jimenez and Albetta were asked to provide information disputing my 98% regents passing rate. Arbitator Lisa Brogan who in her decision, “I also note that Mr. Silvers offered testimony that his students achieved a 98% Regents passing rate (T.1228) an assertion that stands in this record unrebutted. Student performance is now accepted as a legitimate factor in determining teacher effectiveness and performance at his level cannot be ignored, particularly when the teacher is at risk of termination.” In both M’s case and my 3020A Jimenez could not fabricate stories for actually result.

According to the city lawyers,” Ms. M’s discontinuance was based on the plaintiff’s vulgar and threatening language in the presence of other Assistant Principals.” This is the same old song and dance for Jimenez.

David Deutsch’s Article 78 (Google Search: Deutsch v. NYCDOE – EdLawFaqs)
The First Incident: “Cursing and aggressive behavior” It is undisputed that, on December 21, 2010, petitioner said “Damn you” to the MCSM’s principal, J. David Jimenez, after an ad hoc committee meeting of the School Leadership Team. According to petitioner, “Damn you” was uttered in a private conversation, out of frustration. The disciplinary letter dated January 3, 2011 by Principal Jimenez states, in pertinent part:
“On December 23, 2010, I met with you and your union representative, Eric Cohen, to discuss an allegation against you of misconduct. . . . I began the meeting by asking you to explain why you said, damn you’ to me on December 21, 2010 after we had just finished an ad hoc committee meeting of our SLT. Before you could reply Mr. Cohen said that he did not believe that damn you’ [*5] was necessarily a curse. When I asked you if you agreed, you replied, If you were offended by my statement then I apologize.’ Although I thank you for your apology, I regret that you failed to provide me with an explanation as to why you said damn you’ to me.'”
(Verified Petition, Ex F.)

New York State Supreme Court Judge Michael D Stallman did not find sufficient evidence that David Deutsch was insubordinate

In my 3020A, Hearing Jimenez cited that I told Mr. Albetta in a meeting that “Lets be honest and our cards on the table”. Jimenez told the Arbitrator Lisa Brogan that in the private sector a line like that would be considered threatening and a caused for termination. Ms. Brogan cite that Jimenez’s interpretation was overly dramatic. Well, David I’m assuming two sexual harassment cases and a number of complaints of work place harassment and retaliation would get you a raise and promotion in the private sector.

In the case of Mike Thomas. Jimenez testify that Mr. Thomas attack him a claim that his witnesses all got wrong (http://mcsmledger.blogspot.com)
Q. Can you please just point to him and identify an article of clothing that he’s wearing?
A. That’s Mr. Thomas, wearing a suit, glasses, light blue shirt.
THE COURT: Identifying the defendant.
Q. Why did you shake his hand after everything that happened prior to that time?
A. It was a natural reaction. Somebody smiles, I figure–it was a natural reaction. Somebody sticks out their hand, you shake their hand. He had never been violent with me before.
Q. After you fell to the ground, did you eventually get up?
A. Yes.
Q. What happened after you got up from the ground?
A. Mr. Hernandez was still in between us. I asked him, Why did you knock me to the ground? Why did you strike me? You know, what’s wrong with you? What are you doing here? He proceeded, he kept on. He just proceeded to walk towards Second Avenue, and then said, you put me in the rubber room seventeen months, you deserve this. You put me in the rubber room seventeen months

The reality is someone needs to take a long look at Jimenez’s tenure as principal at Manhattan Center. He has run the school into the ground. Teacher morale at the school is at an all-time low and as one new teachers told me, “you follow along because Jimenez has told them you don’t want to wind up like Mr. Silvers or Mr. De Cruz.” (http://decruztruth.wordpress.com/) (http://evandecruz.wordpress.com/)
He has also told new teachers that, “the Union has no power to protect you only I care about you.”

I’m sure that the same line he used on Milton, Bray, Pena, and Pepin and these were once his peers.

Advertisements

9 thoughts on “It’s like a reoccurring nightmare

  1. This post is pretty powerful and in a normal world Jimenez would be toast. I don’t know who the new teacher is that told you that, but they are absolutely correct. Jimenez has a verbally order that was given to certain individuals to specifically target new teachers. He wants to limit their contact with the union chapter leader. Jimenez plan is to run one of the other cronies for the UFT position since you outed Dennis Hernandez.

  2. Pingback: Its takes Three principals to make one Jimenez | voltaire280's Blog

  3. Pingback: 20,000 more people now know the story | voltaire280's Blog

  4. Pingback: Manhattan Center for Science and Math High School, the New India? | voltaire280's Blog

  5. Pingback: McCarthyism Department of Education Style | voltaire280's Blog

  6. Pingback: Ebenzer Jimenez | voltaire280's Blog

  7. Pingback: FIFTY SHADES OF BULL@$!# THE SEQUEL | voltaire280's Blog

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s