Stealing top school district employees while your seat is still
warm doesn’t rank too high on the kosher list. But apparently
that’s what will happen with outgoing Superintendent Edwin Diaz and
Assistant Superintendent of Business Services Steve Brinkman.
Stealing top school district employees while your seat is still warm doesn’t rank too high on the kosher list. But apparently that’s what will happen with outgoing Superintendent Edwin Diaz and Assistant Superintendent of Business Services Steve Brinkman.
So be it. Brinkman may be following Diaz to the Pasadena School District, and there’s not much anyone can do about it.
But the Gilroy Unified School District Board of Trustees can make sure the community isn’t left in a lurch next time.
In the next superintendent’s contract there should be a clause that expressly deals with exactly this situation. It would be a twist on a non-compete clause used often in business acquisitions so that the outgoing superintendent would be financially penalized for “tampering” with the top employees in our district should he or she decide to take another job.
Without the express prior written consent of the school district board, a superintendent could not directly or indirectly employ or attempt to employ as an employee or consultant any person for a period of one year following the date of their departure. There would be a financial penalty for violation.
Including this in the contract protects the district from just such a meltdown situation currently underway within the GUSD administration office. A superintendent leaving mid year, two top administrators retiring and another apparently about to follow the district leader out of town is a recipe for disaster, and a ready excuse for poor performance.
Perhaps that will not be the case. By all accounts, the board has hired an able interim superintendent, Darrel Taylor, and maybe Diaz’s transition plan is solid.
How the situation plays out is uncertain, of course. We can hope for the best, but next time Gilroy should prepare for the worst.
A contract safeguarding our top employees for a period of time isn’t just prudent, it’s necessary.
It might even be a good idea to ask the applicants looking for the top job here what they thought of the idea.
For Gilroy’s greater good, we should tighten up the next superintendent contract.
