Dear Editor,
If Eugene Brajkovich wants to summarize my position on an issue,
as he attempted to do in his letter published Sept. 6, you’d think
he’d at least have the decency to summarize my position somewhere
in the neighborhood of what I actually wrote in my column.
Dear Editor,
If Eugene Brajkovich wants to summarize my position on an issue, as he attempted to do in his letter published Sept. 6, you’d think he’d at least have the decency to summarize my position somewhere in the neighborhood of what I actually wrote in my column.
Brajkovich wrote that I “conveyed the perception” that “there is nothing wrong with the [Bonfante Gardens docent] program” and “also implied that everything was OK.”
Huh? That’s the complete opposite of what I wrote:
n Based on figures in a Dispatch new article on the firing, I estimated that ” … Bonfante Gardens lost almost 20 percent of its docents as a result of dismissing Ziegel and Soria. That’s a significant percentage. Any business that has a turnover rate of nearly 20 percent of workers in one position over a short period of time is going to notice that it has a serious problem.”
n “Attrition of that level is a significant indicator no matter how you try to spin it. And trying to say otherwise sets my eyes spinning.”
How Brajkovich could twist those comments to the exact opposite of their natural and obvious English language meaning boggles my mind. Perhaps a reading comprehension course is in order?
Lisa Pampuch, Morgan Hill
