On Monday, COCC staff received an email from college public relations guy, Ron Paradis, warning us about an article that was due to run in the Bend Bulletin yesterday. That article focused on the fact that Patrick Lanning had been on "administrative leave" from his post at Chemeketa Yamhill since February 11. This morning the Bulletin features a story saying that COCC's College Board is meeting tonight in "executive session" to discuss the issue.
As someone who is stuck with what I'm being told by Tyler Leeds, the journalist covering the story, I find it rather confusing. Here are my questions and suppositions.
First, why is this a story at all? The only reasons I can think of are 1) because it wasn't mentioned in earlier reports about Lanning and 2) "administrative leave" smacks of disciplinary procedures.
Why wasn't it mentioned in earlier reports? Once again, the only reasons I can think of are 1) because Ron and the COCC Board didn't know or 2) because they knew and didn't think it important to share with the Bulletin or any of the rest of us.
So, did the Board know? According to this morning's story, something disrupted the Board's intention of making the hiring announcement on St. Patrick's Day. The college "received information . . . that led to a decision to postpone the board's vote on whether to appoint Lanning." Leeds quotes Ron as saying the school needed to continue its "due diligence and other background checks." Leeds also makes a point of putting a single word Ron used in quotes separating it from the rest of its linguistic context: "Paradis said the college 'rushed' toward a decision on March 17." Emphasizing "rushed" certainly leaves the impression that the college board is re-thinking its decision.
Leeds also quotes Bruce Abernethy, COCC's board chairman, as saying that Lanning told them on February 12 that he was ill. The question of whether or not he also told them that he was on administrative leave was left hanging in the air. Leeds makes a point to quote Abernethy as saying, "we were taking his word on the medical issue." This, of course, is an explanation for an accusation that hasn't as yet and may not be made.
So, to answer the question I asked above, it sounds like the Board did not know about the administrative leave.
Fueling the suspicions of this Bulletin reader is Leeds' comment that Yamhill's "dean of public information," Greg Harris, "declined to provide any further information as to why Lanning is currently on leave."
So what is "administrative leave"?
Following internet searches with a variety of limitations, I came up with some answers. According to the IRS (an organization much on my mind this week), "Administrative Leave - the placement of an employee in a non-duty status without charge to leave or loss of pay." (6.752.2.4 [10-15-2010]) According to the Oregon University System's controller's division, there are two Banner labels for administrative leave, one with pay and one without. But according to that most august of dictionaries, the OED,
administrative leave n. orig. U.S. a leave of absence imposed or granted in extraordinary circumstances; spec. enforced leave (paid or unpaid) taken by an employee pending the resolution of a disciplinary investigation.
1932 Washington Post 2 Aug. 4/1
All 24 days legislative furlough must be taken before any payless administrative leave may be allowed.
1953 Frederick
(Maryland)
Post 23 May 13/3
The field house will again be the center for the Detrick
blood-collecting operation. Civilian personnel will be granted
administrative leave.
1975 N.Y. Times 12 Aug. 58/2
Five agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation were placed on
administrative leave pending the outcome of a Federal grand jury
investigation.
2000 P. Cornwell Last Precinct
(2001)
44
Administrative leave is the same thing as being suspended. It is the first step in being fired.
Yup. Look at that Patricia Cornwell quote. Sure, she's a mystery writer given to paranoia but the quote offers an answer as to why this term is so freighted with perceptions of doom.
The term itself and Tyler Leeds' method of reporting about Lanning both fill my mind with doubt. Add to this a couple of other discoveries.
- In spite of having a eight different reports to make at the January 15, 2014 Chemeketa Community College Board Meeting, Patrick Lanning was absent and Johnny Mack substituted for him.
- while he was on the Eugene Water and Electric Board some members were concerned that he missed many meetings after he moved to Salem. Other members, however, said that he was conscientious and they seemed loath to criticize him, even after he missed 9 of 19 meetings.
However --
My bottom line belief is this: If the hiring committee and the COCC Board did not know about the administrative leave and the reasons for it, they should have. Lanning should have told them. Period. End of discussion. There is no reason that I can think of that allows for prevarication on this issue, not for someone applying for such an important leadership position. No matter how innocent or embarrassing it might have been to him personally, this was no time to avoid confession. It is, after all, good for the soul. A true leader, heck, even a true manager, would have known that.
My opinion: start the search over.
2 comments:
Kake
You've outdone yourself with this astute post. You should share it with the Board.
Stacey
Hear, Hear
Post a Comment