LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: IF GOAL IS TO BUILD LOYALTY AND RESPECT, SCHOOL LEADERS ARE GOING ABOUT IT IN STRANGE WAYS

To the Editor,

Your recent article about the reprimand the school secretary received from the school superintendent prompted me to write this letter. There are many aspects of this graduation affair that have troubled me. What troubles me the most is the seeming lack of support this administration has generated. By reading all the correspondence in this newspaper, it is apparent that the overwhelming majority of the community felt the graduation decision was the wrong decision. This administration, however, continues to press THEIR feeling that it was the right one.

If I were elected to represent a group of people and I made an arbitrary decision that offended the majority of the group, I feel it would be necessary to make one of two decisions. I would either acknowledge that my decision was wrong, or if I felt strongly about the decision, I would resign, recognizing I could not represent the group's interest. The present administration has a history of doing neither and they wonder why they have such a public relations problem.

After reading this article, I was puzzled by school board member John Campbell's comments regarding the lack of support from the staff members. He implied that three recent ballot measures failed because "staff members are shooting us in the foot." Does he really think that the community is influenced solely by what staff members have to say, rather than the merits of the administration's decisions?

He also states that the superintendent is trying to build loyalty within the school system. If so, I question the methods. Loyalty and respect are earned by strong, fair leadership, and Dr. Clark's method of reprimanding Mrs. Keys will certainly not enhance his position. In light of the reprimand, I would be surprised to see another letter from any of Dr. Clark's staff, but I can assure the superintendent that it would not be because of any loyalty.

This brings me to my final thought. I am an employee at Southeast Missouri Hospital, and I would have to disagree with the superintendent's comment that if a similar letter had been written by a hospital secretary she would be out of a job. Jim Wente, the hospital administrator, has an "open door policy" that pertains to everyone from department heads to volunteers. I'm sure not everyone takes advantage of this policy, but I can assure you he listens and makes you feel important. You do not always get satisfaction, but you do get an answer with an explanation. He also schedules a yearly meeting with the entire hospital staff in which he outlines the hospital's financial status and any other "hot" topic which may be circulating around the community. There is staff participation at these meetings and some of the meetings are not always friendly. Yet to my knowledge, no has been fired or reprimanded because of what they said. I am sure Mr. Wente has many faults, by I do not believe he would stoop to waving a letter in front of someone's face threatening to inform his or her supervisor of a lack of loyalty.

Dr. Clark states his actions with Mrs. Keys were not meant as a threat. But how else could a subordinate interpret this type of action? The hospital administrator makes decisions that are not always popular with the staff, but because they keep their doors open for friendly communication, most of the staff supports their actions.

I do not get that feeling about the school administration.

JOE RODRIGUEZ

Cape Girardeau