Martin Luther King Jr.

Probably not, depending on the School District.  A few years ago Pennsylvania enacted a law which really tightens up background checks on anyone who deals with children in a work setting.  It was further fallout from the Jerry Sandusky/Penn State scandal which is ironic because even he would not have been discovered by the intensive background checks in place now.  The law is intended to do good and to protect children and who can argue against protecting children.  But laws usually are subject to what is known as the “law of unintended consequences” and this law is no exception.   The problem isn’t the law but it’s application by some school districts.

I have been driving a school bus for fifteen years in the Lower Moreland School District.  I work for a contract company, First Student , a company that has many faults but in this case they too are victimized.   Lower Moreland School District is located in Huntingdon Valley, a suburb that borders Philadelphia in Montgomery County.  The demographics have changed quite a bit since 2000.  It is an upper middle class area with doctors, lawyers and a few Indian Chiefs.  The nice suburban neighborhoods now have McMansion neighborhoods intermingling and their school taxes are very high.  The school district is in the top five in the state and is proud of it’s educational prowess.  The problem that arises with this law and this school district in particular is in the Administration of the Lower Moreland School District.

The law allows school districts to have access to all employees criminal background checks.  There are a few problems with that which admittedly does not occur yet in most of the school districts but the opportunity is there for abuse as in the LMSD.  To begin, the LMSD in order to control costs has contracted with a third party in this case First Student.  The school district avoids the cost of vehicle maintenance and the labor cost;  notably wages and benefits (retirement pensions especially).  Economically it makes sense for the taxpayer, which though I am not a resident of Lower Moreland I am a taxpayer.  What this law allows now blurs the lines of who does the drivers actually work for; are we employees of a private company, subject to lower wages and no benefits or are we in fact employees of Lower Moreland School District?  If the employment or termination of employment of a driver is not determined by the company but rather the school district then who is the true employer and is Lower Moreland School District skirting labor laws?

Most people are not aware of the requirements needed to drive a school bus in Pennsylvania.  It has changed quite a bit and is no longer a job where a person can just go and get a couple hours training in the morning and then do a route in the afternoon.  Hours of classroom and then driving education is only a start and it could take up to 6 weeks to get licensed.  Criminal background checks are a big part of the process to insure that children are safe from the sexual predators that are allowed to roam society.  Lower Moreland School District has taken that law to the extreme and it causes one to question if there is not other motives behind their actions.

In 2014 they started with their own version of cleansing by informing First Student that a driver was no longer able to drive for LMSD because of what they found in his records.  Did he do some perverted act with a minor that no one knew anything about?  No.  In the late 1960’s he moved with his family from Alabama to West Philadelphia.  He was in his late teens and he got involved with some rough characters and was caught in a stolen car (as a passenger) and was involved in some fights.  He did a small amount of time in the pokey and that experience changed him.  He had been driving a school bus for over 35 years without incident and had been driving for Lower Moreland School District for the bulk of that time.  Well liked and one of the nicest guys I know; and just like that the administrators at Lower Moreland decided that his character was not good enough for them.  In their explanation to me (as the shop steward I wanted to know how this travesty came about) they kept repeating the mantra “It’s the law.  We are only following the law.”  We advised him to seek a legal remedy but this gentleman refused to go that route.  Such is his character.  To their credit First Student offered him a position at another location but he opted to leave the field.  In another case a young mother who was driving a route in Lower Moreland for 2 years with exceptional performance was suddenly told she no longer met the criteria for Lower Moreland as she was charged with shop lifting prior to her employment.  She paid the fine that was levied and learned her lesson.  Nothing to do with the welfare of the children she transported which was the purpose of the law.  What was the Lower Moreland School Districts reply to our questions?  “It’s the law.  We are only following the law.”  It seems like the mistake that this young lady made was not getting her record expunged and her “character” would have been intact.  I was approached by two other drivers who were very worried because they too were caught shoplifting in their earlier days and also paid a fine but they had their records cleared which made all the difference in their “character”.  There are two other cases Lower Moreland  School District removed drivers because of “character” flaws in which they did not use “the law” as it didn’t allow them cover for what can be seen as an ethnic cleansing, I only note them in passing to point out what looks like what they are using “the law” to achieve.  And it is not student safety.

In the effort to hire more drivers to alleviate the shortage (in part created by LMSD) several applicants submitted to background checks.  Prospective drivers were turned down by the Lower Moreland School District for things like a 1999 conviction of trespassing (a landlord/tenant dispute); another for driving without a license in 2003 in which a fine was paid and should have been the end of the story.  These are incidents that First Student would not consider and would have employed these two individuals but Lower Moreland School District refused because of “character” issues.  That is why I know that Martin Luther King Jr. would not be able to gain employment within the Lower Moreland School District as a bus driver or anything else because of his arrest record.  I had a bus monitor several years ago, a wonderful lady who was arrested when a youngster for daring to go swimming on a “whites only” beach in Florida.  The thought that something like that can preclude employment is ludicrous and has far reaching implications.  One of the more immediate consequences is the creation of a labor shortage.  The unreasonable and intentional dismissing of qualified drivers and applicants will only drive the cost up for the taxpayers.  As a driver, I see that as a plus of course but I also see the downside of higher tax bills and a strain of providing adequate service.

That is one of the more visible consequences but it is the quieter societal consequence that is most bothersome.  Drivers like my friend with all that experience and prospective drivers who are erased from the labor pool due to mistakes made earlier, sometimes decades earlier, have a path to economic sustenance pulled out from beneath them.  It relegates them to both psychologically and physically “poverty” stations in life.  It is wrong and as a Nation we use to be more forgiving of poor choices made especially when the “criminal actions” were youthful indiscretions or minor offenses and the price was paid.  Lower Moreland School District evidently believes one punishment is not enough and that people cannot change or better themselves.  It is an attitude that is always prevalent with bureaucrats that have no accountability because they are only “following the law”.  History is replete with examples of this kind of excuse for poor management at best or tyrannical actions at worst.

Anyone who knows me knows my low view of politicians.  I have been pleasantly surprised at the interest of my State Representative Tom Murt who responded to a letter concerning the problem this law has created.  He has stated an interest in putting a fix in the law that would curtail abuses and keep the intent of the law intact and not the intent of faceless bureaucrats.  I have tried to get my manager at First Student in touch with him and have approached our union to get involved.  There are issues that may hinder First Student, mainly keeping a contract and I wouldn’t be surprised if there isn’t fallout from this but I can not accept a wrong just because “it’s the law”.  I would hope that other drivers or readers would contact their State Representative also in order to correct a well intentioned law.  If interested here is a link to find your State Representative:   http://www.house.state.pa.us/ .  On that site you will see where you can look up you Rep. numerous ways.

In short, is not liberty the freedom of every person to make full use of his faculties, so long as he does not harm other persons while doing so?      Frederic Bastiat