Member Login

Lost your password?

Not a member yet? Sign Up!

City Recreation Director Terminated for Viloation of Child Labor Laws

August 16, 2011

08/17/11 Violations of child labor laws led to the termination of the Plymouth Park Department Recreation/Pool Director last week. Gina Young had held the position since October, 2009. Prior to that time, she was a member of the Park Board.

As a part of the duties of job, Young was responsible for 11 staff members of the summer camp program and 24 pool employees. The number of hours, number of consecutive days that employees under the age of 18 can work , and break requirements are spelled out in handbooks given to both supervisors and employees.

According to information obtained from city offices, excess hours recorded on time cards during the July 4-July 17, 2011pay period and excessive consecutive days during the July 18-July 31, 2011pay period documented the excesses that led to the violations. The information also noted similar violations during June and July of 2010.

Young said she was notified by email of the 2011 problems on July 22 and immediately took steps to correct the situation. She contends that, in part, the appearance of excess hours and consecutive days was due to last minute cancellations of pool openings due to weather conditions and private swimming lesson instructions.

The information from the city entitled “factual basis for disciplinary action” also included violations of city policies. Among other items, it is noted that there were failures to provide cash register receipts on July 16-17 and failures to properly maintain city equipment on the same dates. According to Young the cash register ink ran out over a weekend and a replacement was not available at the time.

Included in the documents provided by the City on the matter were portions of the Code of Conduct and disciplinary steps outlined in the Personnel Manuel to support the decision for termination.

In remains unclear whether the members of the Park Board were apprised of the matter prior to the termination or received notification after the fact. Park Superintendent Mike Hite said it will be up to the Park Board to decide how or when to fill the year-round/ full-time position.

Carol Anders Correspondent


Tags: ,

7 Responses to “ City Recreation Director Terminated for Viloation of Child Labor Laws ”

  1. AnnF on August 18, 2011 at 7:09 pm

    I have been very pleased with the new opportunities the Parks Department presented the last few years. I marveled at how more diverse age groups as opposed to just the children which had been the primary focus were being offered different services.

    As for the child labor laws, I think everyone will agree with me, this has been one crazy Summer. My husband is paid a full shift if the company closes due to snowstorms; was this a factor in the overage of consecutive days? Child labor laws are very important. I believe we all cringe at that dark piece of American history.

    Ink for cash register receipts? Wouldn’t the pool’s manager be responsible for maintaining inventory? Is there a pool manager? There has to be some type of supervisor in that department. If not, I believe that, perhaps, a reshuffling of job descriptions would be in order.

    I’m not looking at the parties involved here. I am narrowing my view to the Personnel Manual and how future discrepancies could be avoided.

  2. plymouth resident on August 18, 2011 at 8:46 am

    Gina Young did a great job at the park. She brought in more people over the last few years than ever before. She handled the big red 3 which brought the park department a large some of money. So those who believe she wasn’t extremly committed to her job are very disinformed. It’s also interresting the park department waited until the end of summer to let her go. Seems no one there wanted to do the job she had to do. Just saying “Marge” don’t be so quick to judge, that’s why we have God.

  3. winged_citizen_avenger on August 17, 2011 at 1:46 pm

    It’s still unlcear to me. Was the park board involved?

  4. jeffhouin on August 17, 2011 at 12:24 pm

    Ryan -

    I don’t think the question is whether the Park Board is legally implicated in the decision. Rather, were the board members consulted prior to the decision, or were they simply informed after the fact?

    -Jeff Houin

  5. Marge on August 16, 2011 at 11:17 pm

    I was raised that cleaning up the trash in the parks was a good thing! Now, come on, we all know that this was not the real reason for firing Mrs. Young.( She still goes by Mrs. Young, doesn’t she? ) It was just the legal way to get rid of her. How many problems have we had over there since she took office? Morally… quite a few. Will this help check that small town ego syndrome she so loudly has? No way… she is like the many cock roaches we all see in life that will survive no matter what.. at least long enough to hop on someone elses coat tails in order to get what she wants! Wonder what she will get her hands on next…literally

  6. plymouthinrocks on August 16, 2011 at 11:06 pm

    Can you investigate why the park superintendent was suspended for 30 days and why the recreation director was let go? Something doesn’t seem right here……

  7. ryanripley on August 16, 2011 at 9:09 pm

    Indiana Code 36-10-3 states that the PARK BOARD has the following powers:

    IC 36-10-3-10
    Board of park and recreation; duties
    Sec. 10. (a) The board shall:

    (1) exercise general supervision of and make rules for the department;
    (2) establish rules governing the use of the park and recreation facilities by the public;
    (3) provide police protection for its property and activities, either by requesting assistance from state, municipal, or county police authorities, or by having specified employees deputized as police officers; the deputized employees, however, are not eligible for police pension benefits or other emoluments of police officers;
    (4) appoint the necessary administrative officers of the department and fix their duties;
    (5) establish standards and qualifications for the appointment of all personnel and approve their appointments without regard to politics;
    (6) make recommendations and an annual report to the executive and fiscal body of the unit concerning the operation of the board and the status of park and recreation programs in the district;
    (7) prepare and submit an annual budget in the same manner as other executive departments of the unit; and
    (8) appoint a member of the board to serve on another kind of board or commission, whenever a statute allows a park or recreation board to do this.

    With that said, how can it be unclear whether or not the Park Board was involved with the situation? They are involved by statute!

    Link to the statute:

    –Ryan Ripley