Tuesday, January 31, 2006

Antonucci is in the race http://www.bayshorenews.com/template.php?ID=33
Posted by at

7 comments:

Downtowner said...

This is a transparent attempt by Mr. Niemann to divert votes from Mrs. Little. Apparently, Mrs. Little is have a big impact.

Tuesday, January 31, 2006 10:21:00 PM
Art Gallagher said...

Does anyone know the outcome of Antonucci vs the Hazlet Township Board of Education? I see that the NJ Supreme Court issued an opnion on September 27 (http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/opinions/sep05.htm), but I can't find the opnion itself online.

Evidently sued because she wasn't granted tenure and she was let go.
(http://independent.gmnews.com/News/2001/0822/Schools.html)

Wednesday, February 01, 2006 3:50:00 AM
Art Gallagher said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Wednesday, February 01, 2006 3:52:00 AM
Art Gallagher said...

Here's the story as published in the Independent, August 22,2001:

Teacher to file suit after contract not renewed
Hazlet school district, teacher at odds over number of absences
By elaine van develde
Staff Writer


HAZLET — Fired twice and feeling the school system that hired her failed her, former township teacher Bridget Antonucci is intent upon suing the Board of Education.

A grade 4-5 Cove Road School Resource Center instructor who was let go for reasons she says are not clear to her, Antonucci says she’s been wronged and has sought legal recourse after the district denied her grievance hearings in April and May.

The preamble to a suit was a notice sent May 31 by her attorney, Jeffrey P. Ferrier of Holmdel, to Hazlet School Business Administrator Bruce Quinn. The notice alleges "the claim arises out of a non-renewal of a teaching contract" and seeks damages for "lost wages, front pay, lost benefits, emotional distress, punitive damages, attorney’s fees, and pain and suffering."

It further implies those damages were inflicted specifically by the Hazlet Board of Education, Nicholas Sardone (principal of Cove Road School), Timothy Nogueira (former superintendent), and a Board of Education member. The process imposed by filing the mandatory tort notice claim keeps the matter out of the courts for six months.

To Board Attorney Michael Gross’ knowledge, "a suit has not actually been filed at this time. The only thing that was filed was the Notice of Tort Claim Act which we are in the investigative stage of now. When a party pursues any public entity in a suit, they have to wait six months in order to give that entity sufficient time to investigate. That’s what the Notice of Tort Claim accomplishes."

That’s six months too long for Antonucci. A teacher in the district for three years, she says her career in Hazlet schools has been cut way too short, noting that her family relocated to the township to accommodate the job she loved.

Feeling time is not on her side and her life is being unjustly put on hold, Antonucci is anxious for some answers which she says she hasn’t gotten.

In the meantime, on the cusp of the new school year, she remains jobless and says the reason she was given won’t stand the test of school and court rules.

While Gross said he could not directly comment on personnel issues. he conceded that "concerning (Antonucci’s) non-renewal of contract decision, it is based on regular performance reasons. The district has every right to not renew a non-tenured teacher contract."

On one of Antonucci’s allegations — discrimination for taking maternity leave — Gross said that "… if discrimination based on taking maternity leave is the claim, I’d have to ask why, all of a sudden, would the district pick on teachers for being pregnant? A lot of teachers have and will continue to have pregnancies and take maternity leave. That’s why a discrimination allegation in that respect makes no sense."

Regardless of the underlying issues, the bottom line is that Antonucci doesn’t have a job, and says the school board fired her for no good reason.

But school officials have said otherwise.

In a letter dated May 10 sent to her from Superinten-dent Nogueira, Antonucci was advised, "You have not been recommended to receive a contract of employment for the 2001-2002 school year."

There was another after-the-fact letter, dated June 8, from Antonucci’s supervisor for home instruction, Richard Conte, then-director of special services. That letter doubled the blow, as Antonucci put it, "firing me a second time from extra services I provided."

The letter from Conte said in part: "It has recently been brought to my attention that, for the past several weeks, you have consistently been utilizing your sick leave and, therefore, have been unable to perform your regular teaching duties. Accordingly, since you have been unable to perform your regular teaching duties, I have determined that it will not be possible for you to continue with your home instruction assignment."

"It makes no sense," Antonucci said. "I’ve gotten excellent reviews and have even received my master’s degree to further my credentials."

Though the dilemma began to unfold as far back as February, by early June, the special education teacher had lost her job in two different capacities, classroom and home instruction, and she said the reasons given for "non-renewal" of her teaching contract amount to nothing less than a smoke screen masking the real issues at hand — discrimination and retaliation.

She contends she was unjustly singled out for taking legitimate maternity and workers’ compensation leaves and reporting what she alleges to be a Board of Education member’s inappropriate actions.

"I still had 17 sick days left (including time that could be carried over from year to year) at the time I was notified that my contract would not be renewed for the 2001-02 school year," said Antonucci in a recent interview.

A letter from her attorney, advising the Board of Education of the suit’s particulars, calls attention to the fact that "non-renewal is a clear violation of the Collective Bar-gaining Agreement which contractually permits 12 sick days per year."

Antonucci added, "Dr. Sardone (principal of Cove Road School) had marked some days taken off as unexcused sick days when, in fact, they were workers’ compensation days and maternity leave days. The fact that he even mentioned these two legitimate leaves on my evaluation and included them in his comments about excessive absences, I feel, is evidence enough that he’s discriminated against me by not allowing me to exercise my rights under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act, the New Jersey Family Leave Act and the New Jersey Workers’ Compensation Law."

In that evaluation, for which Antonucci was denied a contract renewal, Sardone listed Antonucci’s attendance record from the onset of her employment through 2001. According to Sardone’s records, from 1998-1999, she took 5 1/2 sick and 3 1/2 personal days.

In the 1999-2000 school year, she took seven sick days before Jan. 19, 2000. That same year, Antonucci was listed as being on workers’ compensation from Jan. 20 to April 30. From May 1 to June 30, Antonucci was listed as being on medical leave without pay, which she says was her maternity leave. During the 2000-01 school year, her record indicates she took nine sick and three personal days.

The discrepancy that Antonucci sees with the records is that the "medical leave without pay was under the Family and Medical Leave Act," according to her written response to her evaluation dated April 2.

"It was my maternity leave," she said. "Having this listed under the recommendation section of my evaluation leads me to believe that I am being discriminated against for my lawful leave.

"In no way have I misused or abused this time. In fact, on several occasions I have gone against doctor’s orders and returned to benefit my students and/or parents."

Yet another issue to be dealt with in Antonucci’s suit is the fact that she says she was not notified properly to attend the executive session of the Board of Education at which her fate was decided.

But the crux of the issue, she believes, is that she feels she’s being retaliated against for, in essence, telling on a board member who called her home-school student, a sixth-grader with special needs, and who allegedly made threats that Antonucci would be fired.

Antonucci said, "The student was very upset. We have a very good rapport and hearing that I might be fired from a board member really put this student in a terrible position. At all times, my priority was protecting the student. This is why I felt it necessary to report this board member immediately to deter any further occurrences."

Antonucci believes the board member made the calls as a means of intimidation because the student’s family is involved in a suit of its own against Hazlet schools.

The district’s administration acknowledged the inappropriate contact in letters to Antonucci and promised it would cease. In fact, in a letter dated April 26, addressed to the student’s parent, then-Superintendent Timothy Nogueira wrote that the board member "has provided assurances to the Board of Education that (the board member) will no longer initiate any contact with you or members of your family concerning any school-related issues, including your (child) and any of his teachers."

Regardless of what Antonucci believes the motivation behind the actions to be, she said she and her husband moved to Hazlet out of love for her job, and she intends to fight to keep that job.

Wednesday, February 01, 2006 3:57:00 AM
Downtowner said...

OK, how many out-of-county advisors does Fred need to screw in a lightbulb?

Answer: Three: One to screw in the lightbulb, one to hold the ladder and the third to ride roughshot over every municipal chairman in the county who wants a fair and democratic process to select the best possible candidates for the Fall election.

Mrs. Antonucci is a nice woman who is being led astray by some very "not bright" politicos and a county chairman that has no record to speak of by way of winning or even doing very well in office.

He was a mistake and this candidacy is a mistake. I'm not cynical about the future of the GOP. It will get better, but sometimes things get worse before they are better. There are enough strong Republican leaders to make for a strong party once "the King of Coasta Rica" is gone.

Thursday, February 02, 2006 3:21:00 PM
Downtowner said...

Mr. Seward:

There is someone going around, under "The Bayshore Courier," signing "Jim Purcell" saying that I am apologizing to Dan Gallic. Frankly, hell will freeze over first and that is simply a forgery, which reasserts absolutely everything I have stated.

Get a computer person to check ip's and this will all become very clear very quickly. If I had my "druthers" I would suggest banning that Ip from the site.

But, that is a request. It is NOT me who has lied about my identitiy. I'm not going around portraying myself as either Mr. Niemann or Mr. Gallic. I'd have to srop too many IQ points for that anyway.

Sunday, February 05, 2006 11:30:00 PM
Downtowner said...

Apparently, the fake blogger's URL is: www.blogger.com/profile/18282437. I tried to get ahold of the Blogger people about this guy or gal but will try again.

I jkust don't think it's right to say you're someone else in a blog or anywhere else. I mean, I understand "anonymous," but not outright lying. Isn't that the problem in so many areas anyway?

Monday, February 06, 2006 8:45:00 AM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)