West Jefferson Hills settlement with principal released | TribLIVE.com
South Hills

West Jefferson Hills settlement with principal released

Gill Hall Elementary school

The West Jefferson Hills School District agreed to pay an $85,000 settlement to former Gill Hall Elementary Principal Tina Mayer when it parted ways with the longtime employee.

Details of the settlement agreement approved by school board members on Aug. 13 were released to the Tribune-Review on Sept. 20 through a Right-to-Know request sought from the district under the state’s Open Records law.

Neither Mayer nor her lawyer, D. Scott Lautner, responded to requests for comment.

West Jefferson Hills solicitor Robert McTiernan of Tucker Arensberg said the district had no comment.

District leaders have remained silent on Mayer’s departure. She resigned effective Aug. 31.

Board members in August approved the hiring of longtime Pleasant Hills Middle School educator Adam Zunic as the new principal of Gill Hall, starting in the 2019-20 school year.

The settlement with Mayer outlines how she will be paid the $85,650 to settle with the district “all pay, benefits and/or disputes, controversies, and differences between them,” according to the settlement.

As part of the settlement, Mayer will continue to receive her 2018-19 salary — totaling $54,044 — on a bi-weekly basis until Dec. 31. If she obtains other employment, the amount will be paid in a lump sum, the settlement states.

The district also agreed to pay Mayer $8,469 for days that she was on unpaid leave during the 2018-19 school year; $15,537 for accrued vacation benefits; $6,600 in compensation for sick and personal days; and $1,500 of her legal fees to Lautner, according to the settlement.

In the settlement provided to the Trib, the district “redacted personal identifying information … and information regarding the discipline, demotion or discharge of a district employee that is maintained in the employee’s personnel file,” Tracy Harris, the district’s Open Records Officer stated in the response.

School board members in June approved a “statement of charges providing for the proposed discharge of a professional employee,” a requirement under the state’s Public School Code for a permanent tenured employee facing dismissal. District leaders would not name the employee, other than to say the employee’s name was on the district website. The district denied the Trib a copy of the statement of charges. The Trib is appealing the decision to the state’s Office of Open Records.

On Aug. 13, board members approved a resolution, withdrawing the statement of charges and approving a confidential settlement with the unnamed employee.

The Trib sought a copy of that settlement on Aug. 15 and was provided with Mayer’s settlement on Sept. 20.

The settlement releases the district from all claims, complaints, grievances, liabilities and obligations. However, the settlement states, that nothing in the document is intended to interfere with or deter Mayer’s right to challenge the waiver of an Age Discrimination Employment Act claim or state law age discrimination claim, or the filing of any such discrimination claims.

Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas records indicate Mayer filed a writ of summons for an employment dispute with the district in March. The dispute was not directly mentioned in the copy of the settlement provided to the Trib.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.