A Middleborough bus driver has sued her employer alleging that she lost hours and had other retaliation when she reported a potential child abuse incident involving her supervisor’s granddaughter.
.
Seemingly a little girl got on the bus and told the bus driver of an incident at home that sounded like abuse. The bus driver reported the incident to the assistant principal at the Burkland School. The bus driver – Colleen M. Anderson – knew the girl was related to her supervisor. Ms. Anderson claims that she had repercussions at work as a result:

Here’s where it gets interesting. The bus company is claiming Ms. Anderson has no right to sue because bus drivers are not “mandatory reporters” – people required by law to report child abuse – such as teachers, police, but clearly not priests. Anderson’s lawyer – our friend Adam Bond – is asserting that they are. What I’m confused about is why the mandatory reporting thing is even an issue? Let’s say for the sake of argument that the court decides that bus drivers are not mandatory reporters. How does that give the bus company a right to give the driver a hard time? There seems to be a whistle-blower component to the story – but it seems a simple case of the bus company creating a hostile work environment – if the allegations of retaliation prove to be true.
.
The comments on the article show overwhelming support for the bus driver’s actions except for one knucklehead whose comment is so nutty that I suspect it was written by a troll – or complete moron. I predict the bus company will roll over and settle this one real quick. Public backlash seems to be quick and unanimous in support of the driver. Give the lady her million bucks and make this go away as quick as possible. There is no upside to the bus company on fighting this. They should also immediately and publicly admit that they are wrong and implement training that sets their drivers as mandatory reporters.

One Response to “Bus driver kerfuffle”

1. Middleboro Review says:

   December 4, 2010 at 10:12 am

   “Next door neighbors” are not included on the list of mandatory reporters, but one would hope that if a ‘next door neighbor’ saw a child with bruises not easily explained, something similar or the child confided information that sounded like abuse, that the appropriate moral compass would compel a response.

   The intent is always, not to prosecute, but the find solutions that will protect the child and support the family with things such as counseling.

   Reporting shouldn’t be considered punitive, but rather constructive.