Monday, February 06, 2017

Fired substitute teacher sues Neosho R-5 School District

A substitute teacher who was fired after saying in two classes that she did not support the Neosho R-5 School District bond issue to build a new junior high school, is suing the district, Superintendent Dan Decker, Penmac Staffing Services and Nancy Kenney of Penmac.

In her lawsuit, which was filed today in U. S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri, Dee-Anna Marcoux says she had only answered students who questioned her about whether she supported the bond issue and that she had told them she did not, but they would have to make up their own minds.

During that same time period, the petition says, district teachers and staff were wearing yellow t-shirts that said, "Building Neosho's Future- It's Time," and that a student sent an e-mail to all students using the district server saying, "It has been a fun run trying to get yes votes," and thanking students who supported the bond issue.

After that, the petition claims, Decker called her into his office and accused her of insubordination and of telling students "not to vote for the bond issue."

It was not long after that she was removed from Neosho schools' substitute list and her employer, Penmac Staffing Services, removed her from the automated system, AESOP, used by school districts, including Neosho, to staff substitute teachers.

Marcoux claims her First Amendment right to freedom of speech was violated, that she suffered lost wages and emotional distress. She is asking for a jury trial.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Different day, same song in Neosho. It seems that nothing ever really changes.

Anonymous said...

Sounds like she has a good case.

Anonymous said...

Employers dont have to have/give a reason to let some go or stop using them all he said she said....this person will just waste taxpayers money by dragging this accusation into court

Anonymous said...

6:29 - You're right that employers don't have to give a reason, but if they do give a reason it can't be an illegal one. If she can prove her "facts" to be accurate, then they may have done just that.