pine curtain Posted June 28 Report Posted June 28 10 hours ago, mat said: He didn’t think twice about cutting him. Right move. Seems like he did not think twice when he hired him....... setxathlete14 1 Quote
pine curtain Posted June 29 Report Posted June 29 This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up Didn't have anything to say about his hiring mistake...... Quote
2wedge Posted June 29 Report Posted June 29 It's a bit unfair to scrutinize Toby about this hire and not do the same to each of the other HC/AD who have hired him over the past several years while these same issues were present. Bass hired him a year ago at HJ, and several other districts in the years before. Clearly, it's a systemic problem that has permeated all of these districts in the area so trying to paint Foreman as the primary bad guy just because of the most recent issue seems a bit like recency bias. If social media is to be believed, the issue with Peveto and the young girl was a pretty well-known secret around HJ and Peveto's wife was the athletic secretary and Bass was in charge. mat 1 Quote
89Falcon Posted June 29 Report Posted June 29 For clarification: schools run a background check from the DPS database. If that comes back "clear", the school check references. Former employers are only technically allowed to provide 1. dates of employment 2. eligible for rehire yes/no 3. they may also provide safety info for DOT sensitive positions. Anything beyond the above listed information can expose the former employer to legal trouble. If they reveal unsubstantiated or unverified rumor type information that prevents a former employee from being hired, they can be subject to lawsuits. PlayActionPass, 2wedge and BBfan061 3 Quote
SmashMouth Posted June 29 Report Posted June 29 6 hours ago, 89Falcon said: For clarification: schools run a background check from the DPS database. If that comes back "clear", the school check references. Former employers are only technically allowed to provide 1. dates of employment 2. eligible for rehire yes/no 3. they may also provide safety info for DOT sensitive positions. Anything beyond the above listed information can expose the former employer to legal trouble. If they reveal unsubstantiated or unverified rumor type information that prevents a former employee from being hired, they can be subject to lawsuits. Not necessarily the case. If you're a prospective employee and you sign an "Employment Information Release" or "Authorization for Release of Information" with a prospective employer so they can vet you (pretty common practice these days), the document gives past employers explicit written permission to share details about your work history. It also acts as a liability release, protecting the previous company from lawsuits (such as defamation claims) for the information they provide. BBtater984 1 Quote
89Falcon Posted June 29 Report Posted June 29 1 hour ago, SmashMouth said: Not necessarily the case. If you're a prospective employee and you sign an "Employment Information Release" or "Authorization for Release of Information" with a prospective employer so they can vet you (pretty common practice these days), the document gives past employers explicit written permission to share details about your work history. It also acts as a liability release, protecting the previous company from lawsuits (such as defamation claims) for the information they provide. The release authorizes the new employer to conduct a background check. It does not release a "former employer" to say things that are confidential outside of what was identified. In the event that a former employer provides unsubstantiated (rumor based or opinion) information that prevents a person from getting hired there is exposure regardless of any signed document. Quote
BBtater984 Posted June 30 Report Posted June 30 15 hours ago, SmashMouth said: Not necessarily the case. If you're a prospective employee and you sign an "Employment Information Release" or "Authorization for Release of Information" with a prospective employer so they can vet you (pretty common practice these days), the document gives past employers explicit written permission to share details about your work history. It also acts as a liability release, protecting the previous company from lawsuits (such as defamation claims) for the information they provide. You can't argue with falcon. He or she is always right. He or she will always get the last word. SmashMouth 1 Quote
SmashMouth Posted June 30 Report Posted June 30 16 hours ago, 89Falcon said: The release authorizes the new employer to conduct a background check. It does not release a "former employer" to say things that are confidential outside of what was identified. In the event that a former employer provides unsubstantiated (rumor based or opinion) information that prevents a person from getting hired there is exposure regardless of any signed document. I'm sorry sir, you are incorrect on this one. I do this for a living. I'll keep the explanation as short as possible, but as long as your replies as the former employer are fact-based and not purposefully inflammatory, you can relay certain info about a previous employee to a prospective employer. Especially if the prospect in question has signed a release. Chapter 103 of the Texas Labor Code protects from defamation liability an employer who releases information about a current or former employee to a prospective new employer, unless "the information disclosed was known by that employer to be false at the time the disclosure was made or that the disclosure was made with malice or in reckless disregard for the truth or falsity of the information disclosed." Follow my guidelines, and it will serve you well: Release only factual information Supply Only What Is Requested Tell the Truth Avoid Inflammatory Terms Use a Written Release Form Reagan, BBtater984 and Bulldogs92 3 Quote
Bulldogs92 Posted June 30 Report Posted June 30 9 minutes ago, SmashMouth said: I'm sorry sir, you are incorrect on this one. I do this for a living. I'll keep the explanation as short as possible, but as long as your replies as the former employer are fact-based and not purposefully inflammatory, you can relay certain info about a previous employee to a prospective employer. Especially if the prospect in question has signed a release. Chapter 103 of the Texas Labor Code protects from defamation liability an employer who releases information about a current or former employee to a prospective new employer, unless "the information disclosed was known by that employer to be false at the time the disclosure was made or that the disclosure was made with malice or in reckless disregard for the truth or falsity of the information disclosed." Follow my guidelines, and it will serve you well: Release only factual information Supply Only What Is Requested Tell the Truth Avoid Inflammatory Terms Use a Written Release Form This is basic HR protocol and is correct. In that position, you absolutely cannot expose the entity you work for. BBtater984 and SmashMouth 2 Quote
AggiesAreWe Posted June 30 Author Report Posted June 30 6 minutes ago, PhatMack19 said: Cornell?!? 🤔 I am being told he is coming out of retirement for this one season until a hire can be made next year. He will be the DC if school board approves retire rehire. School district will have to pay at least 16% of his retirement plus his salary (whatever that will be) and will have to pay $500+ towards his retirement insurance. For one season I think that can be money well spent. Wouldn't recommend it for multiple years. Tiger33 1 Quote
Tiger33 Posted June 30 Report Posted June 30 18 minutes ago, AggiesAreWe said: I am being told he is coming out of retirement for this one season until a hire can be made next year. He will be the DC if school board approves retire rehire. School district will have to pay at least 16% of his retirement plus his salary (whatever that will be) and will have to pay $500+ towards his retirement insurance. For one season I think that can be money well spent. Wouldn't recommend it for multiple years. I was just told can’t believe it Quote
89Falcon Posted June 30 Report Posted June 30 2 hours ago, SmashMouth said: I'm sorry sir, you are incorrect on this one. I do this for a living. I'll keep the explanation as short as possible, but as long as your replies as the former employer are fact-based and not purposefully inflammatory, you can relay certain info about a previous employee to a prospective employer. Especially if the prospect in question has signed a release. Chapter 103 of the Texas Labor Code protects from defamation liability an employer who releases information about a current or former employee to a prospective new employer, unless "the information disclosed was known by that employer to be false at the time the disclosure was made or that the disclosure was made with malice or in reckless disregard for the truth or falsity of the information disclosed." Follow my guidelines, and it will serve you well: Release only factual information Supply Only What Is Requested Tell the Truth Avoid Inflammatory Terms Use a Written Release Form Read my last sentence in the comment you quoted. Quote
Bulldogs92 Posted June 30 Report Posted June 30 1 hour ago, Tiger33 said: I was just told can’t believe it Me either. The thought of that man wearing Jasper colors is crazy, but I love it. Quote
Tiger33 Posted June 30 Report Posted June 30 13 minutes ago, Bulldogs92 said: Me either. The thought of that man wearing Jasper colors is crazy, but I love it. Jasper gonna be good. Yall got a heck of a coach. I’m still going with Jasper Bulldogs in the playoffs! Quote
navydawg31 Posted June 30 Report Posted June 30 Wow didn’t see Cornell coming out of retirement… but hey $$$ talks. Good for him best of luck Quote
Matthew328 Posted June 30 Report Posted June 30 On 6/28/2026 at 8:10 PM, pine curtain said: This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up Didn't have anything to say about his hiring mistake...... He'd be insane to comment publicly about that situation Mr. Buddy Garrity, TxHoops and AggiesAreWe 3 Quote
AggiesAreWe Posted June 30 Author Report Posted June 30 4 minutes ago, Matthew328 said: He'd be insane to comment publicly about that situation I agree. TxHoops 1 Quote
AggiesAreWe Posted June 30 Author Report Posted June 30 Mr. Buddy Garrity, One4All, MELKIPER_0 and 2 others 5 Quote
BBfan061 Posted June 30 Report Posted June 30 God If Jasper makes the playoffs I hope we don’t run into them because I believe that man is undefeated vs the Slot T 🤣🤣🤣 Mr. Buddy Garrity and Tiger33 2 Quote
Tiger33 Posted June 30 Report Posted June 30 14 minutes ago, BBfan061 said: God If Jasper makes the playoffs I hope we don’t run into them because I believe that man is undefeated vs the Slot T 🤣🤣🤣 They struggled against Paris but I believe they were in the veer Quote
mat Posted June 30 Report Posted June 30 5 hours ago, AggiesAreWe said: I am being told he is coming out of retirement for this one season until a hire can be made next year. He will be the DC if school board approves retire rehire. School district will have to pay at least 16% of his retirement plus his salary (whatever that will be) and will have to pay $500+ towards his retirement insurance. For one season I think that can be money well spent. Wouldn't recommend it for multiple years. Cornell won’t return for money. He’ll probably return out of loyal commitment to Foreman. The salary could be reduced to offset the TEA cost, for multiple years. dj 1 Quote
mat Posted June 30 Report Posted June 30 Wow! What a combination. The WOS Jasper game will be fun. Mr. Buddy Garrity 1 Quote
Mr. Buddy Garrity Posted June 30 Report Posted June 30 Ok i might change my reservations for Jasper now. ☕ Quote
WOSdrummer99 Posted June 30 Report Posted June 30 52 minutes ago, mat said: Wow! What a combination. The WOS Jasper game will be fun. Mark your calendar OCT. 30 Jasper @ WOS. Legendary event in the making. Season ticket sales start Monday WOS fans Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.