Of course, what is missing from news reports is what the employment contract and rules expectations were, and whether the teacher was deemed to be in violation of them. So any talk about the issue ends up being mostly about porn scandal type of stuff instead of employment contract and rules expectations.
1 Like
But then it’s - who reads it and knows it? We have this discussion at work. Everything should be one page, written for a 5th grader I say. Not 8 pages in 8 font.
We sign lots of things as consumers- at doctors, banks, credit cards, etc. often we do so under the gun time wise and really don’t read. Many don’t have the capacity to do so.
No one can truly read and digest all that legalese.
Is that a defense? - I don’t know.
So many people do so many things at work that likely violate rules - using work phones to call home, looking up stock quotes, being on the cc etc.
How can one truly be prepared for so much of the legal stuff.
It is interesting and we often see lawsuits after terminations so yeah lots of gray for sure. It at least in people’s minds.
Any word from the teacher’s union reps?
I don’t give a **** what she was doing if she could teach kids. We need teachers.
1 Like
Wow. Hadn’t heard that - that’s crazy and I’d for hope better. On the other hand, we have an Entrepreneurship program in our district and maybe that’s a real life teaching lesson although the topic might be questionable obviously.
How were they watching ? Maybe only fans needs to ensure minors can’t subscribe.
But she didn’t force them to watch and why is it her problem vs the students or parents ?
In some ways you have two people at work - a girl showing big cleavage. Another wearing a turtleneck.
Or a buff guy wearing a too tight shirt vs an overweight slob in a baggy shirt.
Even in front of you there are examples that people gawk at that might draw attention away.
I don’t know where the lines should be drawn.
But I do love Liberty.
Don’t love all the MAGA signs next door and people they are supporting. But it’s this neighbor’s right to have them.
When do we start interfering with personal choices I guess ?
It’s an interesting topic for sure…to me anyway.
Seems like she was well aware that it was a potential problem.
Coppage said it didn’t come as a surprise, as people in the area were beginning to find out about her OnlyFans page.
“It was kind of always like this cloud hanging over my head, like I never knew when I would be discovered,” Coppage said. “Then, about two weeks ago, my husband and I were told that people were finding out about it. So I knew this day was coming.”
“(The district says) they haven’t made a decision yet, but I’m just kind of putting the pieces together that I am not coming back,” Coppage said. “I’m very aware that I am probably never going to teach again, but that was kind of the risk I knew I was taking. I am sad about that. I do miss my students.”
2 Likes
I saw that but it’s sad (to me) she had to think like that.
On the other hand, maybe it’s a marketing ploy. I bet she’ll have a lot more subscribers now.
1 Like
She had to think like that because apparently she was doing something potentially that would jeopardize her “first” career. She was apparently aware of the situation. She chose to do it anyway.
I bet you’re correct though, her subscription base will probably grow and apparently she’s already charging more. Currently 8-10k a month income is a good sum. If it goes up from there, more power to her.
3 Likes
I think that employers have the right to restrict outside activities that affect one’s ability to represent the employer and do the job, but I think that these restricted activities should be very clearly identified in the contract or employee’s agreement. The problem is that there could be a huge gray area, of course – hence the need for clarity. But speaking as someone who’s been employed in public institutions for my whole career (first as a high school teacher and then as a professor for mostly public institutions), I do understand that some behaviors outside of work can hinder my ability to do my job and represent the institutions that have employed me.
This is not a free speech issue, and I think a lot of people get the two confused. As a state-employed professor, do I have a constitutional right to go on a racist, sexist, or homophobic screed in a public forum? Absolutely. Do I have a right to host a sexually explicit account on a site like OnlyFans? (I had to look it up to see what kind of content this site provides! I didn’t know.) Absolutely, within the limits of the law. Do I have the right to do these things and keep my job? I shouldn’t. I could not effectively teach or represent my university if I engaged in these activities. Employers do have the right to set limits on employment that are more stringent than constitutional limits on expression.
This is wholly different, in my view, than moonlighting in some other form of work that doesn’t compromise my ability to do my job (over the years, I’ve had colleagues hold outside positions as coaches, bartenders, construction workers, etc. - not a problem).
8 Likes
Why couldn’t you ?
1 Like
Because having outed myself as a racist or homophobe (for example), I could not purport to treat my students fairly. Treating my students fairly is foundational to teaching. Having gone public on an adult website providing sexual content that students could see, I cannot then maintain a productive teaching and learning environment in the classroom. Again – that’s the bare minimum standard in doing my job.
6 Likes
But then the question that is unanswered is whether the employer in this case actually had employment rules that the employee in question is in violation of.
True. I can’t speak to that question, of course.
But I’d disagree - in the sense that it would be the student’s issue if they are gawking at you, can’t stay focused, not yours.
You’d be punished for showing a certain side of you. That doesn’t impact your teaching.
Kids likely gawk at professors they deem attractive anyway. One Rate My Professor I read insulted a teaching style but said she’s easy on the eyes at least.
Even if you were racist or homophobic, as long as it didn’t impact how you teach, grading etc and your views weren’t part of your lesson per se (although many professors express personal views in class), then to me it shouldn’t be an issue. I’m sure there are many racist and homophobic teachers out there. It should be their right if it doesn’t impact their in class performance and treatment of kids.
I’m not in your position of course - but I hate that there are limits put on you in this regard.
It seems to me, no one ever gets in trouble for things til someone who is ‘offended’ complains.
Of course, aren’t there gray areas? Suppose a teacher is noticed to have a yard sign in front of their house for a politician who is widely seen as some type of bigot, or was noticed volunteering for a campaign for such a politician (not on the job or on school grounds, and not displaying or saying anything about the campaign or election on the job or on school grounds). Is that evidence that the teacher cannot purport to treat the students fairly?
1 Like
It’s always the teacher’s issue if a student can’t stay focused. In order to teach effectively, a teacher has to have all students working productively. Classroom management is the biggest part of a teacher’s job, imo.
Once a single student starts whispering about the teacher’s OnlyFans site, pretty soon all the students will start whispering and more. It won’t just be one student who is off task, it will be most of them.
2 Likes
What about their student colleagues who are on the site? And does this apply to college adults?
So at my work - I’m on linked in with people and I’ll get notes from linked in - congratulate Andrew on 10 years at Smith Insurance and I work for a car company. I’ll ask - what’s that ? And he’ll say I sell insurance on the side. And he’s got tons of internal people on LinkedIn getting the same message.
When I lived in CA, everyone was a realtor on the side. We have some at work with this also.
I guess to me it’s like - where does it end - having a second job and its level of appropriateness?
Obviously we all have different levels of acceptability.
Of course there are gray areas, and I agree that an employer cannot impose consequences for supporting a political candidate, as long as you don’t engage in partisan activities on the employer’s dime (especially if the employer is public). That’s a well-established rule. This is why there must be clarity.