February 9, 2011: Detroit Public Schools deny students admission on Count Day
Detroit Public Schools is facing a $363 million deficit and needs every dollar it can get to maintain its financial solvency. The school district has suffered continual declining enrollment over the past 10 years. In 2001, there were over 159,000 students enrolled in the Detroit Public Schools system. The student enrollment for the fall count day on September 30, 2010 was 77, 314 students down almost 10,000 students from the 2009-2010 annual count of 83,777 students. School districts receive over $7,000 annually for each student in attendance at their schools, with 75% of funding determined from the fall count day and 25% funding determined from the winter count day. Therefore, for every student that is denied admission on count day the school district loses over $1,700 in funding.
“Why is a school district with such a huge deficit turning students away on count day?” Students are being denied admission to the schools because they are not adhering to the dress code policy. In previous years, count day was a special day for students with “free dress”, pizza and ice cream parties, celebrity visits, and other incentives developed to increase attendance for that day which is used to determine the amount of funding that school systems will receive. However, this year, some schools are being very strict with the dress code policy and actually turning students away at the door for not being in the school uniform even though the school has the potential to lose the over $1,700 for the students not being in attendance for the day. Other schools are requiring students to pay monies for free dress day, with events such as “pajama day”.
For cash strapped school districts, what is more important, the dress code policy or funding? From a financial perspective, the answer would seem simple, funding is more important. Yet, schools are denying the students admission because they are not adhering to the dress code policy. As parents and a community we need to question DPS as to how the school district can continue to function with such a high deficit and such little concern for the funding stream needed to maintain the school district. The dress code policy should never take precedence over the need for funding. This indicates that DPS is focusing on the wrong areas when it pertains to a children’s education and ensuring that the school system is providing a quality education. DPS should be reminded that without funding, the school district will have to close more schools and reduce it workforce, which has nothing to do with the school dress code policy. It should be noted that while count day is the official day for determining school funding, schools do have 30 days to account for a student with an authorized excused absence and 10 days to account for a student with an unexcused absence. However, if a student is out of the dress code on count day, why subject the school or the student to the elongated process when the school needs to funding.
For every problem, there needs to be a solution presented. If the dress code policy can potentially cause DPS to lose funding because students are being denied admission then there is a problem with the policy. It can only be suggested that DPS re-evaluate the dress code policy to determine if this is one of the reasons schools are suffering from declining enrollment each year by sending out surveys and calling drop outs to find out why they are not returning to DPS. Because in some cases, when a student is denied admission, they may not return in a timely manner and eventually drop out. At the end of count day, DPS needs all the funding it can get and denying students admission because they are not adhering to the dress code should not be an option.
Mari Hadley is a graduate of Detroit College of Business with a BBA and MBA in Business Administration. She facilitates courses for the University of Phoenix, Axia College of the University of Phoenix, and Capella University in both the undergraduate and graduate departments. Mari is the Chief Executive Officer for her consulting companies, MDZ Hadley Enterprises and Business and Education Research and Training Organization (BERTO), specializing in Education/Financial Aid, Strategic Management, and Organizational Development Consulting. She is pursuing a PhD. in Higher Education at Walden University. Mari is the author of Michael Jackson Master of Illusion.
Wednesday, February 9, 2011
Monday, June 1, 2009
Uncaring management
What happened to company loyalty and employee loyalty? In the early 20th century, many employees prided themselves on their company loyalty and longevity at organizations. With the advent of the “at-will” employee this became a thing of the past. Many employees found themselves the product of downsizing, supervisor animosity, and co-worker treachery resulting in unexpected terminations or lay-offs after giving many years of service to the organization. In addition, the employer did not exercise any compassion or sensitivity for disrupting the lives of its employees without notice. Employers expected the employee to give two-week notice if they were terminating their employment, however, they did not give the employee the same consideration.
The “at-will” clause in most employee contracts allows the employer to terminate the employee without prior notice for almost any reason and without compensation.
As managers and leaders, are these employers exercising “Caring management or leadership”? Employees have families and responsibilities that are severely disrupted by the loss of their income. Management shows no remorse for terminating the employee and often escorts the employee from the building thereby increasing their humility and causing irreparable mental anguish.
Organizations should be considerate of its employees and their values and feelings. The perception of an organization in its treatment of employees should be a factor when determining a career within the organization. Organizations that have a high turnover rate of employees need to evaluate how their employees perceive the organization and its culture. Employees that perceive the organization and its managers (leaders) as uncaring may have been the recipients of an atmosphere that demonstrated the lack of understanding of the organization in a stressful situation. The employee may have experienced a situation in which the manager mishandled the matter and did not show concern for the employee. This ultimately leads to discontent and low morale among employees as information concerning the matter is disseminated within the organization.
Management should find a balance between company loyalty and employee relations. How the employee perceives the organization will determine their loyalty to the organization. Organizations spend millions of dollars to train new employees. Some of this funding should be expended to train managers to have a more caring attitude toward their employees. This will improve the retention of valuable employees that the organizations has already vested time and training in. Often Managers do not realize they are alienating the employee or that they are exhibiting an uncaring attitude. Managers perceive their behavior as representation of the culture of the organization. They are often exhibiting the behavior they have been trained to use by Human Resources or upper-level management. If the management style is not changed the organization can become fragmented costing the organization more time and money as they continuously retrain new employees.
The “at-will” clause in most employee contracts allows the employer to terminate the employee without prior notice for almost any reason and without compensation.
As managers and leaders, are these employers exercising “Caring management or leadership”? Employees have families and responsibilities that are severely disrupted by the loss of their income. Management shows no remorse for terminating the employee and often escorts the employee from the building thereby increasing their humility and causing irreparable mental anguish.
Organizations should be considerate of its employees and their values and feelings. The perception of an organization in its treatment of employees should be a factor when determining a career within the organization. Organizations that have a high turnover rate of employees need to evaluate how their employees perceive the organization and its culture. Employees that perceive the organization and its managers (leaders) as uncaring may have been the recipients of an atmosphere that demonstrated the lack of understanding of the organization in a stressful situation. The employee may have experienced a situation in which the manager mishandled the matter and did not show concern for the employee. This ultimately leads to discontent and low morale among employees as information concerning the matter is disseminated within the organization.
Management should find a balance between company loyalty and employee relations. How the employee perceives the organization will determine their loyalty to the organization. Organizations spend millions of dollars to train new employees. Some of this funding should be expended to train managers to have a more caring attitude toward their employees. This will improve the retention of valuable employees that the organizations has already vested time and training in. Often Managers do not realize they are alienating the employee or that they are exhibiting an uncaring attitude. Managers perceive their behavior as representation of the culture of the organization. They are often exhibiting the behavior they have been trained to use by Human Resources or upper-level management. If the management style is not changed the organization can become fragmented costing the organization more time and money as they continuously retrain new employees.
Friday, May 8, 2009
Future Generation: The children of the unemployed and homeless today
To the Republicans … thanks for all your concern for the economic burdens that the future generations will have to endure based on the fiscal spending of today. While your concern is amicable, do you realize that the future generation is the children of today that are homeless, hungry and destitute in many cases due to the financial crisis that the United States is enduring now. Many of these children are not concerned about the financial status of the United States next year, five years, or even ten years from now because they are more concerned with the fact that their standard of living has changed tremendously due to their parents losing their homes and living in tent cities, being laid off and forced to receive unemployment benefits, or ineligible for unemployment and having to apply for welfare benefits that do not cover the families basic needs, let alone allow the child to enjoy some of the “joys of life” that they had before the economic crisis. Children of today are the “now” generation that is concerned with what is happening today and not in the future. They understand that in order for the economic crisis to be resolved there has to be spending. They want their parents to be able to keep their homes or cars. Republicans keep complaining about the federal deficit and how it will affect the future generations that will have to absorb the debt. Did you ever stop to think who the future generation is? If so, you would see the absurdity of your argument and defense. In addition, the future cannot be predicted because if that was the case then President Clinton or President Reagan would have known that they world would be in a financial crisis in 2009 during their terms and creating a significant “surplus” that could would have alleviated the trillion dollar deficit that we are not facing. The United States could stabilize within the next five years and see an increase in employment and the financial crisis could be alleviated. In considering the current economic crisis, a five year old is less concerned about a federal deficit in 2020, than having food and shelter in 2009. The Republicans keep promoting the defense that “future generations will bear the burdens of the federal deficit of today”. In reality, the current generation is shouldering the financial burden as we see costs rising, unemployment rising, healthcare cost rising, etc. The only individuals truly complaining about the federal deficit are the Republicans and “affluent” that are not financially affected by the economic crisis. Therefore, to the Republicans and “affluent”, the unemployed and low income US Taxpayers say “Thanks for your concern for future generations and if you are so truly concerned then donate 10% of your current salary per month to reducing the federal deficit to make the future generations financial burdens less”. Otherwise, let President Obama do what is necessary to make sure that the future generations (children of today) receive the necessities that it takes for them to thrive and grow today.
Thursday, May 7, 2009
The next Third World Country: The United States of America
There are over 6 million individuals unemployed in the United States. Many of these individuals are collecting unemployment benefits and some welfare benefits. However, in today’s economy the funds being received are barely enough to cover the costs of “having a roof over your head”. Thus many families are existing on less food than when the parents were gainfully employed. According to a Feeding America, a non-profit agency, more than 3.5 million children will not receive the recommended daily allowance of food need for their cognitive development. This makes the United States of America the next Third World country with families and children that are impoverished. The children would be suffering from malnutrition and physically and mentally underdeveloped. How can the United States allow so many children to be undernourished when they are allowing “big business” to pay retention bonuses to dysfunctional employees. The characteristics of many third world countries focuses on the underdevelopment of standards of living, healthcare, education, economics, and globalization. While the US had made some gains in globalization, there are significant deficiencies in standards of living, healthcare, education, and economics that can categorize the US as a Third World country. The standard of living in the US has been impacted by the financial crisis with many families homeless and without money for even their basic needs, such as food and water. The healthcare system in the US promotes the provision of healthcare to the employed and not the unemployed which contributes to the societal genocide as many families are unable to seek medical attention when needed. The education system is still focused on the elitest although it touts open access, yet SAT and ACT test alienate the minorities that are unable to meet the tough standards of the tests that provide for scholarships and grants that alleviate some of the financial burdens that can make college more accessible. The question for President Obama, Secretary Sebelius, and Congress is “What strategies can be put forth to alleviate the lack of ability to meet the basic needs of the common US Taxpayer when unemployment and welfare benefits are not sufficient?” The answer, without a doubt, is the raise the amount of unemployment benefits and the welfare benefits to a level that is appropriate to meet the standard of living for society in general. This means that families cannot survive on $312 per week in unemployment benefits or $240 per month in food stamps and be at the standard of living that they had when employed. When the US continues to provide billions of dollars to corporations so that they can survive (and the corporations use the monies to pay retention bonuses) then surely they can increase benefits for unemployment and welfare so that families can afford to meet their basic needs, especially when there is the potential for so many children to face severe hunger in the next few years.
3.5 Million Children Under 5 on the Verge of Going Hungry:http://wcco.com/health/kids.hunger.families.2.1003701.html
3.5 Million Children Under 5 on the Verge of Going Hungry:http://wcco.com/health/kids.hunger.families.2.1003701.html
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
AIG: President Obama and the Federal Government Jokes on you … again
AIG: President Obama and the Federal Government Jokes on you … again
AIG has indicated it paid out over four times the original amount in retention bonuses to its employees. The company indicated that it paid these bonuses across several divisions with the average individual receiving between $4-11K as retention bonuses. This is a change from the earlier disclosure in which it was indicated that some employees received bonuses of over $1 million dollars. It would seem that AIG has been using “selected” accounting methods to indicate their retention bonus payments. While the amount that has been paid out in retention bonuses by AIG is a source of great concern. The more fundamental question is “What is President Obama, Secretary Geithner, and Congress going to do about this debacle that is being created by AIG? When the country is in a state of financial crisis, with the 6.1 million people on unemployment receiving at modest $315 per week, when their previous income was at least $1000 per week and you have a company like AIG that had a substantive impact on creating the financial crisis receiving significant government bailout monies and then using the taxpayer monies to pay out over $400 million dollars in retention bonuses. President Obama campaigned on the “Yes, We Can” and has talked of change and how businesses cannot continue to operate as they have in the past. Well, it is time for President Obama to “walk the walk” and demonstrate to the American Taxpayers that AIG is not to big to be held accountable for their actions. It is time to step up to the plate and bring AIG to their rightful place and indicate that they cannot continue to “dupe” the Federal Government without repercussions. When an American Taxpayer provides “erroneous” information on their taxes or does not disclose their financial status, they are held “accountable” by the IRS and required to pay monies back and penalties, as well. How can AIG not be held by the same requirements, even though it is a corporation? The Federal Government and President Obama have got to make a stand now on corporations that receive bailout monies and use the monies to pay out retention bonuses rather than for the “operating expenses” that they indicated the funds were needed for.
The first step for President Obama and the Federal Government should be to require that CEO Edward Liddy “step down”. He is not an effective leader when he allowed the bonuses to be paid without full disclosure. CEO Liddy represents the same philosophy that permeates throughout so many other corporations among the leadership, “It is okay for the Rich get Richer and the Poor get Poorer”. AIG needs a leader with “empathy” (the new President Obama buzzword”) that understands the plight of the American Taxpayers and that AIG cannot continue to operate as it has in the past. For the AIG employees that receive the retention bonuses, the Federal Government needs to require that AIG provide the names of the individuals and they need to be terminated from AIG for receiving retention bonuses for which they were not entitled. It is up to President Obama and the Federal Government to make sure that AIG is held accountable for their actions. If they do not then they are not representing the “will” of the American Taxpayers.
AIG bonuses four times higher than reported: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22134.html
AIG has indicated it paid out over four times the original amount in retention bonuses to its employees. The company indicated that it paid these bonuses across several divisions with the average individual receiving between $4-11K as retention bonuses. This is a change from the earlier disclosure in which it was indicated that some employees received bonuses of over $1 million dollars. It would seem that AIG has been using “selected” accounting methods to indicate their retention bonus payments. While the amount that has been paid out in retention bonuses by AIG is a source of great concern. The more fundamental question is “What is President Obama, Secretary Geithner, and Congress going to do about this debacle that is being created by AIG? When the country is in a state of financial crisis, with the 6.1 million people on unemployment receiving at modest $315 per week, when their previous income was at least $1000 per week and you have a company like AIG that had a substantive impact on creating the financial crisis receiving significant government bailout monies and then using the taxpayer monies to pay out over $400 million dollars in retention bonuses. President Obama campaigned on the “Yes, We Can” and has talked of change and how businesses cannot continue to operate as they have in the past. Well, it is time for President Obama to “walk the walk” and demonstrate to the American Taxpayers that AIG is not to big to be held accountable for their actions. It is time to step up to the plate and bring AIG to their rightful place and indicate that they cannot continue to “dupe” the Federal Government without repercussions. When an American Taxpayer provides “erroneous” information on their taxes or does not disclose their financial status, they are held “accountable” by the IRS and required to pay monies back and penalties, as well. How can AIG not be held by the same requirements, even though it is a corporation? The Federal Government and President Obama have got to make a stand now on corporations that receive bailout monies and use the monies to pay out retention bonuses rather than for the “operating expenses” that they indicated the funds were needed for.
The first step for President Obama and the Federal Government should be to require that CEO Edward Liddy “step down”. He is not an effective leader when he allowed the bonuses to be paid without full disclosure. CEO Liddy represents the same philosophy that permeates throughout so many other corporations among the leadership, “It is okay for the Rich get Richer and the Poor get Poorer”. AIG needs a leader with “empathy” (the new President Obama buzzword”) that understands the plight of the American Taxpayers and that AIG cannot continue to operate as it has in the past. For the AIG employees that receive the retention bonuses, the Federal Government needs to require that AIG provide the names of the individuals and they need to be terminated from AIG for receiving retention bonuses for which they were not entitled. It is up to President Obama and the Federal Government to make sure that AIG is held accountable for their actions. If they do not then they are not representing the “will” of the American Taxpayers.
AIG bonuses four times higher than reported: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22134.html
Friday, May 1, 2009
Texas secedes from the Union: The Republic of Texas (Fictional)
Texas secedes from the Union: The Republic of Texas (Fictional)
*Disclaimer: This blog is fictional and does not imply or suggest that Texas secede from the United States.
On January 1, 2010, Governor Perry indicated that Texas has seceded from the Union (The United States of America) and is now “The Republic of Texas”. Governor Perry has declared himself “The President of Texas” with Chuck Norris as the “Vice President of Texas”. Due to the new status of Texas the following have been enacted:
The 13th Amendment has been repealed. All minorities are to report to processing stations in major cities for deportation to the United States or assignment to job stations at plantations around the state.
Residents of Texas cannot hold dual citizenship as a United States Citizen and a Texas Citizen and must indicate their preference by January 30, 2010 or face deportation to the United States.
Individuals traveling between the United States and Texas must have Passports for entry as border checkpoints have been established at all entry points.
The Federal Department of Human Services will be replaced by the Texas Republic Department of Human Services (TRDHS). The TRDHS will provide short term assistance to Texas Citizens in the form of cash, housing, and medical assistance. Recipients of services must pass drug and alcohol testing to receive services. Services are limited to six months and once the maximum six months has been utilized the individual (or family) is not eligible for subsequent services for three years.
Texas citizens receiving unemployment benefits will be re-evaluated as of January 30, 2010. The maximum amount of benefits is limited to $200 per week for a total of 13 weeks. Recipients should be employed by the 13th week as no extension will be given.
Texas citizens attending colleges and universities will no longer be eligible for US Student Loans and will have to apply for Texas Republic Student Loans in a competitive process. Student loans will no longer be guaranteed. Students will have to pass a rigorous process to receive funding for postsecondary education as students with a high school GPA of 2.5 or lower will not be allowed to pursue a college degree. Minorities are not eligible for postsecondary education funding.
A special meeting of the Texas Legislature is scheduled for January 31, 2010 to discuss further legislation to be enacted in the Republic of Texas.
*Disclaimer: This blog is fictional and does not imply or suggest that Texas secede from the United States.
On January 1, 2010, Governor Perry indicated that Texas has seceded from the Union (The United States of America) and is now “The Republic of Texas”. Governor Perry has declared himself “The President of Texas” with Chuck Norris as the “Vice President of Texas”. Due to the new status of Texas the following have been enacted:
The 13th Amendment has been repealed. All minorities are to report to processing stations in major cities for deportation to the United States or assignment to job stations at plantations around the state.
Residents of Texas cannot hold dual citizenship as a United States Citizen and a Texas Citizen and must indicate their preference by January 30, 2010 or face deportation to the United States.
Individuals traveling between the United States and Texas must have Passports for entry as border checkpoints have been established at all entry points.
The Federal Department of Human Services will be replaced by the Texas Republic Department of Human Services (TRDHS). The TRDHS will provide short term assistance to Texas Citizens in the form of cash, housing, and medical assistance. Recipients of services must pass drug and alcohol testing to receive services. Services are limited to six months and once the maximum six months has been utilized the individual (or family) is not eligible for subsequent services for three years.
Texas citizens receiving unemployment benefits will be re-evaluated as of January 30, 2010. The maximum amount of benefits is limited to $200 per week for a total of 13 weeks. Recipients should be employed by the 13th week as no extension will be given.
Texas citizens attending colleges and universities will no longer be eligible for US Student Loans and will have to apply for Texas Republic Student Loans in a competitive process. Student loans will no longer be guaranteed. Students will have to pass a rigorous process to receive funding for postsecondary education as students with a high school GPA of 2.5 or lower will not be allowed to pursue a college degree. Minorities are not eligible for postsecondary education funding.
A special meeting of the Texas Legislature is scheduled for January 31, 2010 to discuss further legislation to be enacted in the Republic of Texas.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
US Treasury: Just say “NO” to Citigroup bonus requests
US Treasury: Just say “NO” to Citigroup bonus requests
Citigroup has requested permission from the US Treasury to pay bonuses to certain employees that may feel demoralized by the current economic situation and that may defect to other banks due to the executive pay limits. They want to pay these employees to retain them, just as AIG stated it wanted to pay out the $165 million in retention bonuses. This is the same “ol’ tired” argument that we keep hearing about executive bonuses when we have families that are losing their homes, unemployment at a record high, and imminent layoffs coming from the Auto Industry. Again, it needs to be stressed that these organizations received Federal Bailout monies because they indicated they were unable to survive financially without the funding. Yet, less than a year later they are requesting to compensate employees above and beyond their salaries. To these employees the US Taxpayers say “You are lucky to have a job and if you are unhappy that you are not receiving a bonus, then join the 6 million on the unemployment rolls”. There should be no more bonuses paid to executives or employees regardless if the company has paid back the Federal Bailout monies or not. The problem with the executive bonuses is that is it “funneled” back down on the backs of the US Taxpayers in the form of higher interest rates and fees. It is in the form of foreclosures and mortgages that are not worth the paper they were printed on. The banks and other companies that are seeking to pay executive bonuses are not concerned with the current economic condition. Most of the employees that would be receiving the bonuses already received enormous salaries that allow them to live at a means that the ordinary US Taxpayer could only “dream” about. The bonuses that the banks are paying out could be used to employ more workers and to alleviate some of the 6 million on the unemployment rolls. It could be used to sponsor programs within the communities that the banks serves or as donations to schools and other organizations that are experiencing financial crisis as a result of the economic crisis caused by these very entities. So to the US Treasury, it is your civic duty to the US Taxpayer to “Just say NO to any bonuses” requested by any banks or other organizations to be paid to the executives as retention bonuses. It needs to be stressed that if the employees feel demoralized then they need only look at the 6 million workers that are on the unemployment rolls and then they will truly understand that they are “lucky” to be employed.
WSJ: Citi asks Treasury if it can pay bonuses:
http://www.seattlepi.com/business/1310ap_us_citigroup_bonuses.html
Citigroup has requested permission from the US Treasury to pay bonuses to certain employees that may feel demoralized by the current economic situation and that may defect to other banks due to the executive pay limits. They want to pay these employees to retain them, just as AIG stated it wanted to pay out the $165 million in retention bonuses. This is the same “ol’ tired” argument that we keep hearing about executive bonuses when we have families that are losing their homes, unemployment at a record high, and imminent layoffs coming from the Auto Industry. Again, it needs to be stressed that these organizations received Federal Bailout monies because they indicated they were unable to survive financially without the funding. Yet, less than a year later they are requesting to compensate employees above and beyond their salaries. To these employees the US Taxpayers say “You are lucky to have a job and if you are unhappy that you are not receiving a bonus, then join the 6 million on the unemployment rolls”. There should be no more bonuses paid to executives or employees regardless if the company has paid back the Federal Bailout monies or not. The problem with the executive bonuses is that is it “funneled” back down on the backs of the US Taxpayers in the form of higher interest rates and fees. It is in the form of foreclosures and mortgages that are not worth the paper they were printed on. The banks and other companies that are seeking to pay executive bonuses are not concerned with the current economic condition. Most of the employees that would be receiving the bonuses already received enormous salaries that allow them to live at a means that the ordinary US Taxpayer could only “dream” about. The bonuses that the banks are paying out could be used to employ more workers and to alleviate some of the 6 million on the unemployment rolls. It could be used to sponsor programs within the communities that the banks serves or as donations to schools and other organizations that are experiencing financial crisis as a result of the economic crisis caused by these very entities. So to the US Treasury, it is your civic duty to the US Taxpayer to “Just say NO to any bonuses” requested by any banks or other organizations to be paid to the executives as retention bonuses. It needs to be stressed that if the employees feel demoralized then they need only look at the 6 million workers that are on the unemployment rolls and then they will truly understand that they are “lucky” to be employed.
WSJ: Citi asks Treasury if it can pay bonuses:
http://www.seattlepi.com/business/1310ap_us_citigroup_bonuses.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)