For years, rumors of a do-not-hire list were fueled by former Tucson Unified School District personnel after prospective employers suddenly eliminated them as candidates for jobs they were sure to get. It was more than a rumor however, it was real and it was doing real damage.
For at least two years, Tucson Unified School District (TUSD) Governing Board members Michael Hicks and Mark Stegeman have been trying to get to the truth about the list, but former Superintendent H.T. Sanchez and his team blocked or ignored their efforts. With Sanchez gone, and the truth is finally being told.
In a constituent news letter dated June 25, Tucson Unified School District (TUSD) Governing Board member Mark Stegeman reveals how the list came about, and how personnel came to be listed:
The do-not-hire code is a negative story, in the sense that something bad has been happening in TUSD for years, but it was hard to do anything about it. I requested information about do-not-hire three times over the course of 2016, with no success. All that others and I could do was to complain about a somewhat mysterious problem, based on anecdotal evidence. We had few solid facts.
In 2017 this becomes a positive story, in the sense that now we have much more information. I hope and expect that the new district leadership will soon take steps toward fixing this practice.
Dr. Trujillo finds answers.
After Dr. Trujillo was appointed interim superintendent, I submitted the same list of questions that I had been submitting for over a year. This time, Dr. Trujillo quickly found the written “guidelines” for the use of the do-not-hire code. This somewhat cryptic document (attached to this email) is neither a policy nor a regulation, and it is impossible to tell who approved it. It shows a date in 2012, with a revision in 2014.
The “guidelines” left many unanswered questions, which I resubmitted, and Dr. Trujillo squeezed more information from the Human Resources Department. This was challenging and Dr. Trujillo deserves credit for pursuing the issue. He sent more answers to the Board last week, and so we finally understand do-not-hire much better.
As part of his response to the Board, Dr. Trujillo acknowledged that TUSD’s unusual do-not-hire practices need reform. I expect the current Board to support major reforms.
What we now know about do-not-hire.
“Do-not-hire” is a permanent code attached to the personnel file of some former employees. Over 1,400 former TUSD employees currently have this code attached to their file. We do not have a chronological breakdown, but most of the codes appear to be predate the Sanchez administration. The practice continued through the Sanchez administration and apparently remains in place.
For site employees, the principal initiates the process of assigning the do-not-hire code, but the HR department is the final arbiter of who receives the code. An analogous process, again ending at the HR department, applies to employees in Central. The criteria for assigning the code are unclear, but HR’s responses (which are a public record) suggest that separation agreements often lead to the do-not-hire code, regardless of whether the employee’s file shows any disciplinary findings or action. HR states:
“When a separation agreement is signed there is always a provision which states, ‘Employee agrees that the decision to resign is irrevocable and cannot be rescinded or in any other manner revoked and that he or she will not apply for future positions.’ The only way to monitor this is to add the name to the do not hire list.”
A former employee can appeal the do-not-hire code, but TUSD typically does not tell the employee that he or she has received the code. So how does an employee know that there is something to appeal? HR states:
“we do not routinely notify the former employee …. they have been placed on the list. They usually call in to find out why they are not getting called for interviews and then told about their status as an applicant.”
The appeal right expires after five years, according to the written guidelines, a period which can be extended for “extenuating circumstances.” The appeal process is unclear, but the HR Director appears to be the final arbiter of all appeals.
The do-not-hire code has no subsequent review or sunset provision. Once entered, it remains in the former employee’s file forever (unless removed by appeal). Though the HR department does not disclose the code to the affected employee, it does disclose the code to prospective outside employers who ask about the employee’s rehire status.
One concern surrounding do-not-hire has been its possible use as retaliation against an outspoken employee. A related concern is that an employee may sign a separation agreement in the belief that this preempts a disciplinary process that could harm future employment prospects, not realizing that their file gets a negative entry anyway. I have no evidence that these specific scenarios have occurred, beyond anecdotal claims, but current practice seems to offer few protections against these possibilities.
Hicks is joining Stegeman in his call for “new policy concerning the do-not-hire code, which provides greater protection against unfair or excessive use of the code.” Hicks says it is no surprise that the administration hide the truth about the list. “It is hard to believe that anyone really thought that this was equitable. We have a lot of people in the District who claim to be for justice and the little guy, but their actions; like looking the other way or wanting to sweep this under the rug show that they have only paid lips service to those concepts.”