Minnesota Department of Education. Senate Youth Program Application. Senate Youth Program brings high school students to Washington, D.C., for an onsite introduction to the federal government, particularly the.Myers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Connick v. Myers. Argued November 8, 1. Decided April 2. 0, 1. Full case name. Harry Connick Sr. Sheila Myers. Docket nos. Citations. 46. 1 U. S. 1. 38 (more). 1. ![]() S. 2d 7. 08. Argument. Oral argument. Prior history. Judgment for plaintiff, 5. F. Supp. 1. 98. 1), aff'd, 6. Chapter 8 Integrated Dual Disorder Treatment General information on integrated treatment for co-occurring mental illness and substance use disorders. The information on this page describes the experience of integrated. The concept of job satisfaction has received much attention in the past 65 years. Maslow's (1954) hierarchy of needs theory forms the basis of many researchers' discussions and assessments of job satisfaction. Alphabetical Index of 274 Labels for 463 IPIP Scales Each construct listed below is followed by links to those IPIP scales that seem to measure that same construct. The abbreviations for the link labels are explained in the. F. 2d 7. 19 (5th. Holding. Assistant district attorney's distribution of questionnaire on workplace satisfaction following an unwanted transfer was largely a matter of personal interest; her subsequent termination for that action did not violate her First Amendment rights. Fifth Circuit reversed. Recent interest on the use of nonfinancial measures (e.g. However, it remains unclear (1) if the. A SURVEY ON CONSUMER PERCEPTION: SOUTHEAST ASIAN RESTAURANTS IN MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA By Titima Vangvanitchyakorn A Research paper Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Master of Science Degree With a. Jouhial of Applied Psychology 1989, Vol. 2, 187-192 Copyright 1989 by the American Psychological Association, Inc. 0021-90IO/89/$00.75 Job Satisfaction: Environmental and Genetic Components Richard D. Court membership. Case opinions. Majority. White, joined by Burger, Powell, O'Connor and Rehnquist. Dissent. Brennan, joined by Marshall, Blackmun and Stevens. Laws applied. U. S. Myers, 4. 61. U. S. United States Supreme Court decision concerning the First Amendment rights of public employees who speak on matters of possible public concern within the workplace context. It was first brought by Sheila Myers, an Orleans Parish, Louisiana, assistant district attorney (ADA). She had been fired by her superior, District Attorney. Harry Connick Sr., when, after receiving a transfer she had fiercely resisted in private conversations with him and his chief assistant district attorney, she distributed a questionnaire to her fellow prosecutors asking about their experience with Connick's management practices. At trial, Judge Jack Gordon of the Eastern District of Louisiana found the firing had been motivated by the questionnaire and was thus an infringement on her right to speak out on matters of public concern as a public employee. After the Fifth Circuit affirmed the verdict, Connick appealed to the Supreme Court. The justices reversed the lower courts by a 5. Justice Byron White wrote for the majority that most of the matters Myers' questionnaire had touched on were of personal, not public, concern and that the action had damaged the harmonious relations necessary for the efficient operation of the district attorney's office. William Brennan argued in dissent that the majority's application of precedent was flawed. He argued that all the matters in the questionnaire were of public concern, and feared a chilling effect on speech by public employees about such matters would result. The case was the first in a line considering the right of public employees to speak contemporaneously with their employment that had started with Pickering v. Board of Education (1. Court sided with the employee. It introduced the test of whether the employee's speech had been on matters of public concern to the balancing of employer and employee interest prescribed in the earlier case. The two would guide the Court's interpretation of later cases such as Rankin v. In the 1. 99. 0s and 2. Waters v. Churchill (1. Garcetti v. Ceballos (2. Connick, would further clarify the Court's holding. Underlying dispute. She had been an effective trial attorney who had turned down promotions to remain in the courtroom. She had also participated in programs at law schools in the New Orleans area and participated in programs sponsored by Connick's office. A judge had also persuaded her to take part in a probation program for juvenile first offenders he ran. She enjoyed the position she was in at the time, in another judge's section, and feared that if she were transferred she would have to recuse herself from cases where she had counseled defendants in the program. She expressed these concerns to Dennis Waldron, the chief assistant district attorney, and Bridget Bane, the head of training for the office. The next morning she received the formal memorandum making the transfer. At another meeting with Waldron, she repeated her unhappiness and broadened her concerns to include other issues in the office she was concerned about. She said Waldron told her that those concerns were not shared, to which she responded that she would research that. She instead prepared a questionnaire about her concerns for distribution to her coworkers. Early the next morning, she made 4. Connick came in, canceling a day off, to discuss the transfer with her again. She told him she would . Waldron learned what was happening and called Connick about a . Connick was particularly disturbed by questions about whether respondents felt confident in Waldron, Bane and other supervisors, and about whether ADAs felt pressured to work on his political campaigns, feeling it would be damaging if it got into the media. He called Myers into his office and told her she was fired, effective at the end of the day. She continued to come in for another three days, putting her files and case notes in order. She alleged violation of her First Amendment rights and sought back pay, reinstatement and compensatory and punitive damages. At first she sought a preliminary injunction, but Judge Jack Gordon converted it to a trial on the merits. It was held before him two months after the firing. Myers argued that she had been fired for distributing the questionnaire; Connick claimed it was a matter of her insubordination in refusing to accept the transfer. Wessel was himself a former assistant district attorney, and had in that capacity been the first to interview Myers when she had applied to Connick's office. He shared his former superior's positive assessment of her prosecutorial skills. After recounting the facts of the case, he found for Myers. Only after Waldron's call about the questionnaire did he return and fire her. He applied the test from Mt. First, Myers would have to prove that her distribution of the questionnaire was constitutionally protected speech, and that her firing was a result. If she could establish that, the burden would then be on Connick to show that she would have been fired whether she had distributed the questionnaire or not. In that landmark 1. Court had unanimously overturned the firing of a teacher who had written a letter to the editor of a local newspaper criticizing the school board and superintendent for its allocation of school finances. Gordon quoted Thurgood Marshall's majority opinion: . Western Line Consolidated School District. These two cases, Gordon wrote, established the possibility that her distribution of the questionnaires was constitutionally protected. A 1. 97. 4 Fifth Circuit decision offered language that clarified this test: . He had claimed that Myers violated office policy and thus impeded her job performance by photocopying the questionnaires. Gordon said Connick had offered no evidence of an office policy on photocopier use. As an assistant district attorney, Gordon wrote, she was entitled to some latitude in her work hours. He cited a similar case where a college professor had alleged his contract was not renewed because of his role in disseminating a questionnaire. He thus found Myers had met her first test, and reiterated his finding of fact that she had been fired for the distribution of the questionnaire, which satisfied the second. Since that was the only possible reason he had found for her termination, it could not be alleged that she would have been fired without having done it, and thus she had won. He ordered her reinstated, although he worried that . He also ordered back pay, $1,5. Connick had shown reckless or wanton disregard for her civil rights. In 1. 98. 2 the Court granted the request. Oral arguments were held in November. The justices' questions to both were primarily focused on clarifying the facts of the case and distinguishing it from the precedent cases. They focused on the sequence of events, and whether Gordon had properly balanced the two interests at stake. Gordon had found differently, he said, because the record did not suggest that she had done so, and that she was planning to accept it. Strickler noted in reply that none of them had said that impacted their working relationship with Myers. Connick, he added later, hadn't even consulted her immediate supervisor before firing her. By a 5- 4 margin it had upheld Connick's firing of Myers, holding that her First Amendment rights had not been violated and the district court had imposed an overly onerous burden on him. Justice Byron White wrote for a majority that also included Chief Justice. Warren Burger, Lewis Powell, Sandra Day O'Connor and William Rehnquist. William Brennan's dissent was signed by Harry Blackmun, Thurgood Marshall and John Paul Stevens. Majority opinion. He noted that Pickering had been very emphatic in making that qualification, and reviewed the history of the law in that area. Around the beginning of the Mc. Carthy era in the middle of the century, as public employees were required to sign loyalty oaths and deny or repudiate past membership in the Communist Party or similar organizations, the Court sided with challenges to those laws, often by holding them too vague to be enforceable. These culminated in Keyishian v. Perhaps the government employer's dismissal of the worker may not be fair, but ordinary dismissals from government service which violate no fixed tenure or applicable statute or regulation are not subject to judicial review even if the reasons for the dismissal are alleged to be mistaken or unreasonable. These questions reflect one employee's dissatisfaction with a transfer and an attempt to turn that displeasure into a cause c. While, as a matter of good judgment, public officials should be receptive to constructive criticism offered by their employees, the First Amendment does not require a public office to be run as a roundtable for employee complaints over internal office affairs. For that reason the Court had to determine whether the firing was justified nevertheless. White found Gordon's burden on Connick . The district court judge, he wrote, had failed to take into account language in Pickering that said the state's burden in showing that the employee's speech impaired his or her ability to discharge official duties varies with the nature of the speech. Index Of Scale Labels. Each construct listed below is followed by links to those IPIP scales that seem to measure that same construct. Note. 5. 25 = A set of the most familiar English person- descriptive adjectives (Saucier, 1. PF = Cattell's 1. Personality Factor Questionnaire (Conn & Rieke, 1. FPQ = Six Factor Personality Questionnaire (Jackson, Paunonen, & Tremblay, 2. AB5. C = Abridged Big Five- dimensional Circumplex model (Hofstee, de Raad, & Goldberg, 1. BFAS = Big Five Aspects (De. Young, et al., 2. CAT- PD = Computerized Adaptive Test of Personality Disorder (Simms, et al., 2. CPI = California Psychological Inventory (Gough, 1. HEX = HEXACO Personality Inventory (Lee & Ashton, 2. HPI = Hogan Personality Inventory (Hogan & Hogan, 1. IPIP- IPC = IPIP Interpersonal Circumplex (Markey & Markey, 2. JPI = Jackson Personality Inventory- Revised (Jackson, 1. MPQ = Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire (Tellegen, 1. NEO = Revised version of the NEO Personality Inventory (NEO- PI- R: Costa & Mc. Crae, 1. 99. 2). ORAIS = Oregon Avocational Interest Scales (Goldberg, 2. ORVIS = Oregon Vocational Interest Scales ((Pozzebon, Visser, Ashton, Lee, & Goldberg, 2. TCI = Temperament and Character Inventory (Cloninger et al., 1. VIA = Values in Action (Peterson & Seligman, 2. References. Barchard, K. Emotional and social intelligence: Examining its place in the nomological network. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation: Department of Psychology; University of British Columbia; Vancouver, BC; Canada. Broadbent, D. F., Fitz. Gerald, P., & Parkes, K. Behavioral inhibition, behavioral activation, and affective responses to impending reward and punishment: The BIS/BAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 6. Cloninger, C. The Temperament and Character Inventory (TCI): A guide to its development and use. Louis, MO: Center for Psychobiology of Personality, Washington University. Conn, S. The 1. 6PF fifth edition technical manual. Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing. Costa, P. T., Jr., & Mc. Crae, R. Revised NEO Personality Inventory (Neo- PI- R) and NEO Five- Factor Inventory (NEO- FFI): Professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources. De. Young, C. C., & Peterson, J. Between facets and domains: 1. Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9. Eckblad, M., & Chapman, L. Development and validation of a scale for hypomanic personality. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 9. Foa, E. D., Leiberg, S., Langner, R., Kichic, R., Hajcak, G., & Salkovskis, P. The Obsessive- Compulsive Inventory: Development and validation of a short version. Psychological Assessment, 1. Foa, E. The development of markers for the Big- Five factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4, 2. Goldberg, L. The Curious Experiences Survey, a revised version of the Dissociative Experiences Scale: Factor structure, reliability, and relations to demographic and personality variables. Psychological Assessment, 1. Goldberg, L. Personality, demographics, and self- reported behavioral acts: The development of avocational interest scales from estimates of the amount of time spent in interest- related activities. Kelly (Eds.), Then a miracle occurs: Focusing on behavior in social psychological theory and research (pp. New York: Oxford University Press. Gough, H. CPI Manual: Third Edition. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Hogan Personality Inventory Manual (2nd ed.). Tulsa, OK: Hogan Assessment Systems. Hofstee, W. B., de Raad, B., & Goldberg, L. Integration of the Big- Five and circumplex approaches to trait structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 6. Hoyle, R. T., Palmgreen, P., Lorch, E. Reliability and validity of a brief measure of sensation seeking. Personality and Individual Differences, 3. Jackson, D. V., & Tremblay, P. Measuring thirty facets of the Five Factor Model with a 1. Development of the IPIP- NEO- 1. Journal of Research in Personality, 5. Lee, K., & Ashton, M. Psychometric properties of the HEXACO Personality Inventory. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 3. Levenson, H. Lefcourt (Ed.), Research with the locus of control construct (Vol. L., Guan, L., Carter, N. A test of the International Personality Item Pool representation of the revised NEO Personality Inventory and development of a 1. IPIP- based measure of the Five- Factor Model. Psychological Assessment, 2. Markey, P. A brief assessment of the Interpersonal Circumplex: The IPIP- IPC. Assessment, 1. 6, 3. Paulhus, D. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures of Personality and Social Psychological Attitudes: Vol. Measures of Social Psychological Attitudes (pp. Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and classification. New York: Oxford University Press/Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Pozzebon, J. C., Lee, K., & Goldberg, L. Psychometric characteristics of a public- domain self- report measure of vocational interests: The Oregon Vocational Interest Scales. Journal of Personality Assessment, 9. Radloff, L. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 6. Simms, L. E., Watson, D., Welte, J., & Rotterman, J. Computerized adaptive assessment of personality disorder: Introducing the CAT- PD project. Journal of Personality Assessment, 9. Snyder, M. A., Earleywine, M., & Strybel, T. Confirming the factor structure of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder symptoms in adult, nonclinical samples. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 2. Tellegen, A. Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
December 2016
Categories |