The Herald Bulletin
ANDERSON, Ind. —
No boss will take kindly to criticism when an employee publishes his or her complaints in a newspaper.
But the boss must realize that in this democracy — the same land that is providing a livelihood for both boss and employee — that the employee has a right, though limited, to free speech.
To control speech, bosses write policies that limit an employee’s criticisms. Madison County has such a purely punitive policy that serves to protect elected officials.
The policy was thrown in the face of James Janes Sr., a county highway worker who wrote a letter — published Aug. 4 in The Herald Bulletin — that was critical of leadership among the three County Commissioners. He specifically cited Commissioner Paul Wilson for taking “county income tax money that is supposed to be for public safety, and pays to have dilapidated houses torn down in the county that the property owners and big banks that own them did not want to pay to have it done.”
Libelous, claimed County Highway Superintendent Scott Harless. His position is appointed by the county commissioners. Janes’ letter followed a commissioners decision to demolish three unsafe homes in the Hoppess addition. In each case, the public might wonder why an owner or bank wasn’t assessed the demolition fee.
Nevertheless, Janes received a 30-day suspension without pay.
Voters might think that politicians would have thicker skin. You’d think the commissioners would talk with Janes privately and see if his complaints were accurate — if they are of a political nature. Instead, the appointed County Highway Superintendent was sent to shoot the messenger.
But you’d also think that Janes would know of the policy since it was written as part of an agreement with the AFSCME Council 62 AFL-CIO Local 3609 — of which Janes is president.
The dilemma over a government employee’s free speech is tough to resolve. The U.S. Supreme Court did not sufficiently answer the question in two previous cases. Free speech has better application for employees making comments as private citizens. Government employees need to be cautious in publicly criticizing their bosses.
Like any employer, county commissioners don’t want questionable actions aired to the public. But here, we are also talking about politicians hiding behind policy when perhaps they should be evaluating the use of Madison County taxpayer public funds.
As voters, we don’t like to hear claims that county money is not going to its intended purpose. Perhaps this is the time to remind the County Commissioners that they, too, have bosses to answer to: the voters.
