DrJones wrote:LDSConservative wrote:Dr. Jones, I was reading through an old notebook that I used to take notes of various meetings I attended back in 2005/2006... This must have been shortly after you started speaking out about 9/11 in 2005, and I wrote the following:
"Your job is safe" and the brethren know what's going on. (regarding Steve Jones and BYU)
I can't remember know if I was quoting what you said, or quoting what someone else said that you said...
Did an administrator at BYU say this to you or could you shed some more light on this?
I recall that in 2006 I read most of the (thick) BYU policies/employees manual. I was encouraged to read that if a BYU employee did something that could cost his/her job, he/she would be informed IN WRITING -- also, what he/she must do to correct the situation. That plus the Dean said I had academic freedom to study what I thought was important, my choice.
HOWEVER, this did not apply in my case (evidently!). Later I spoke to the new Physics Dept chair, saying that if anyone else was "disciplined", that they really should be informed in writing as the Policy says. He said he would check on this with the Admin. building people -- just why I was put on Administrative leave. About a week later, he said that he had asked them, but they would not give him an answer... and further, they felt that they did not have to give that in WRITING, if an employee were disciplined etc.
Quite an eye-opener for me. (This new Physics chair has guts, btw... I appreciate him.)
So, they did what they did, and they did it in a dark corner in the dark of night as well....... No worries, there has been a revelation on how to deal with this:
We believe that men should appeal to the civil law for redress of all wrongs and grievances, where personal abuse is inflicted or the right of property or character infringed...
Then, write them and say: "I conditionally accept the position of the Brigham Young University (BYU) that Dr. Steven Jones was not wrongfully dismissed or wronged by BYU by the untimely dismissal of Dr. Steven Jones from BYU upon proof of claim that dismissal of anyone without
notice is not contrary to the BYU policies/employees manual,
Upon proof of claim that Dr. Steven Jones was not noticed in writing that Dr. Steven Jones was disciplined or dismissed, and that the actions of the administration are not contrary to what is written in the BYU policies/employees manual,
Upon proof of claim that the BYU administration has ever dismissed or disciplined anyone without notice in writing,
Upon proof of claim that the BYU policies/employees manual contains arbitrary rules, policies and procedures that can be circumvented at any time by the unilateral decisions of the BYU administration for any reason or none at all,
Upon proof of claim that the actions the administration took with regard to the discipline and dismissal of Dr. Steven Jones are documentable and can be supported historically by past actions of the BYU administration,
Upon proof of claim that the BYU, which is partially sustained by tithing dollars, does not have a duty to perform in an exemplary manner so as not to cause a loss of faith of any member in the what could be construed as wrongful spending of church tithing funds,
Upon proof of claim that the BYU performed due diligence in informing Dr. Steven Jones of his impending termination by exercising full disclosure with respect to it's discipline of Dr. Steven Jones, by it's own BYU policies/employees manual,
Upon proof of claim that the BYU noticed Dr. Steven Jones of his impending termination, giving Dr. Steven Jones both time and opportunity to cure,
Upon proof of claim that failing to give Dr. Steven Jones time and opportunity to cure is not a violation of the BYU's own operating policies,
Upon proof of claim that the termination of Dr. Steven Jones is not in violation of any State or Federal statute governing approved reasons, grounds, and patterns of dismissal,
Upon proof of claim that any of the currently unknown reasons for Dr. Steven Jones dismissal do not include, ironically, his religions beliefs,
Upon proof of claim the good name and character of Dr. Steven Jones was not infringed by the method and reasons (or lack of) for the discipline and termination of the employment of Dr. Steven Jones from professorship at the BYU,
.....
That is just a start off the top of my head. Such a letter and style of such a letter will flush out the truth (or lack of it) faster than you can say boo. Such a letter will also be prefaced and suffixed by other legal jargon to ensure the snakes (if there are any) have no hole to slither down. The nice thing about this style is you don't need a lawyer to do it. If you use this style and they ignore you, you will then need a lawyer or at least a notary who knows what a notary protest is and how to lodge a default judgment with the court if they continue to ignore you, but usually at that point they start talking when they see you not only are serious, but actually hold the higher ground.
I take quite seriously the admonition of the Doctrine & Covenants: "We believe that men should appeal to the civil law for redress of all wrongs and grievances, where personal abuse is inflicted or the right of property or character infringed..." I think sometimes we soft pedal things, but in reality, we should pursue what we can when we can since it is actually a form of one of the four boxes by which we remain free. (Soap, Ballot,
Jury, and Cartridge).