r/CaughtMyEye • u/detectiverobert • 20h ago

A middle school custodian was suspended and later resigned after secretly living above the school auditorium for six months. He furnished the space with beds, furniture, and a mini-fridge, and had his four children stay with him on weekends because he had nowhere else to go.

Post image
• Upvotes

96% Upvoted

1.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

•

u/Therealdickdangler 19h ago edited 14h ago

Poor fucker just trying to survive. 

Thank you to the many kind redditors who have given me awards. 🙏🏼

•

u/JJKahnn 19h ago

Sounds like they were getting some free extra security to me? I'd have plumbed in running water for the lad and made it official. Make it a permanent love in role. Win win.

•

u/Callidonaut 17h ago

Historically, it's far from unheard-of for people whose job it is to watch over a building to have been given lodgings on-site for exactly that reason.

•

u/Helpful_Space_6793 16h ago

In the UK old schools generally had a "caretakers" cottage on-site for this reason. Unfortunately appears to have died out in new build schools though.

•

u/Mountain-Singer1764 15h ago

Caretakers now share a flat 45 minutes away.

•

u/Legendary_Carcass 6h ago

Above a Gregg's!

•

u/EmploymentKind6113 6h ago

We have a old school in our country like 150 years old it is kinda huge but it has a little village/town for the staff to live in.

•

u/Eleglas 17m ago

I went to school right over these eras. The caretaker's house was actually on the roof of one of the buildings. We would go past it regularly when moving to/from our english and foreign languages classes that were on a taller, connected building.

I don't think I ever spoke with him, but he was like a landmark of the school himself - you'd see him all over doing maintenance, cleaning, etc. I vaguely remember him also doing a like "work experience" type talk to some of us in a class one day. He seemed nice, if quiet and kept to himself.

Then, in 2009, we got a whole new building and I'm pretty sure he was laid off because I never saw him again. Contractors came in to clean and do upkeep when needed but only after school hours so mostly never saw them unless I had stayed behind for whatever reasons.

I always thought school became cold and corporatist after that move, it never felt comfortable like the old buildings as flawed as they were. I wonder what happened to that guy.

•

u/LoopStricken 16h ago

Both schools I went to had live-in groundskeepers/security.

•

u/StraightBudget8799 6h ago

I have been on a university campus.

I have distinctly NOT seen a cleaner with her little son in the huge ass empty staff room with couches, TV, fully fitted kitchen, sorting out a meal of watermelon at 8pm. Nor did that proffered watermelon taste very nice as I went back to work on my assignment. I saw nothing, nope.

•

u/brideofpucky 1h ago

Remember: If you see something, no you didn’t!

•

u/Low-Car-6331 16h ago

This has started to fade out as laws around it became more complicated to the point it was generally not worth it unless the person is considered salary (well if you want to follow the law). Think about it this way, if a teacher or student starts asking the janitor questions, this means the janitor is now on the clock as an hourly employee, and if they live on site you have to carefully balance all of this.

It still happens with hourly, but generally its done by smaller company's and the way things happen, a lot of stuff is "off the books" and technically illegal in how they do it.

•

u/Veronica612 6h ago

And for property insurance reasons also

•

u/SardScroll 5h ago

Propery issurance, accident insurance, liability rules have made everyone hyper vigiliant.

•

u/No_Blacksmith_2591 15h ago

It goes beyond just labor compensation laws, you have now to factor in property laws in some places as they can bring a case where they can claim ownership due to living there uninterrupted for a long period of time. It's stupid legislation that ended up punishing people by not carving out an exception for these types of things directly.

•

u/Low-Car-6331 14h ago

Adverse possession is what you are thinking of, and the presence of a landlord/renter agreement stops that from happening. The way adverse possession works (in a broad sense) is that you need to be acting as the owner of the property for an extended period of time. The fact there is a written agreement, renders the argument that you are the owner moot right out of the gate.

The way a person can claim adverse possession is: They first have to move into a dwelling that is unoccupied/abandoned. Then once they are moved in, they need to start maintaining the place and improving the land and structure (or replace the structure even). While doing that, they need to assume all responsibilities of most owners including paying property taxes. A person who does these things out in the open for various lengths of time (it depends on the state) can assume the ownership of the deed to the land. One important rule though is that the deed retains many of the previous rights stripped from it (like an easement), which could mean the improvements you made might need to be torn down and could even make you financially liable for things (say the land is part of a HOA and you are in violation of the HOA rules... you are going to be getting fines and owe dues, and they might be able to foreclose on the land now as you just brought attention to it being in violation...).

The bigger problem with employer housing is eviction process and termination, but that is another rabbits hole in its own right.

•

u/HyruleVampire 16h ago

My uncle was provided a whole ass house to live in in a very desirable Chicago neighborhood. He works for a private school.

•

u/Unintended_incentive 15h ago

There are tax exceptions that businesses get for such an arrangement, and as I'm sure limited liability clauses for those living on-premises.

•

u/BlastFX2 8h ago

Still standard practice in Czechia. At my school, the caretaker's apartment was on the second floor. There was a storage room bellow and a classroom above.

•

u/Similar-Property-729 15h ago

This practice really should be brought back. It adds dignity to workers and a greater sense of purpose and added responsibility. Be perfect for older folks (i.e. 50+) pushed out of their jobs by evolving tech such as AI, who would find it difficult to change careers.

•

u/_araqiel 7h ago

I’m his age and my elementary school had a live-in custodian.

•

u/StraightBudget8799 6h ago

There’s a private school I worked at with a little three bed, one bath apartment attached to the staff room! You’d never know the door at the top of the stairs to the right of St Hilda’s led to the place.

How’d I know? Coworker who left husband with her tiny daughter from the UK got a job as a teacher, and the school helped out with a small rental fee so she could get herself sorted out without the added stress.

•

u/HoneyGirlLZ 6h ago

The last apartment I lived in had just that. The two building managers were a married couple who lived on the third floor. I'm sure they got a discount on top of their pay.

•

u/CoolDiscussion1020 6h ago

One of the first jobs I had out of college was working as a live in maintenance tech at a remote assisted living facility.

I worked regular shifts and was on-call for emergencies. Actual emergencies. I was called twice in the year I worked there. Once was to start a generator that had not come on automatically come on (which was really weird for me because my power was out in the apartment too and turning the generator on restored my power too), and the other time was during a medical emergency.

I signed a 1 year contract which included a 1 year rental agreement which basically said if you don't re-up the contract you are required to be out of the room on that date.

•

u/nalaloveslumpy 17h ago

Maybe lighthouse keepers and castle guards....

•

u/ElpisBouquet 16h ago

Nannies and housekeepers and caretakers and butlers and even quite a few pubs are just in front/below the owner's living space.

•

u/Callidonaut 16h ago

A lot of old-fashioned high street shops in the UK used to have an apartment for the shopkeeper to "live o'er t'shop," too.

•

u/Surroundedonallsides 16h ago

Nope, a LOT of careers had/have living setup as part of the compensation. Everything from farm hands to shopkeeps to landscapers, and on.

It can go the other direction though, and become bad in a "you cant quit because we take care of your food and lodging, so then youll starve and be homeless" way, but it can also be a boon for an otherwise difficult situation like the one in op.

•

u/Illiteritjenuas 16h ago

The Great Depression was a global event there was a lot of unions outside of America and I remember reading a lot of those unions simply just took over Factories and lived in them while they worked them because they had nowhere else to go.

•

u/nalaloveslumpy 16h ago

You've confused a month long sit in strike with "living in the factory". They weren't living there because they were homeless. They were occupying the factory (and held it with force) so that the owners couldn't reclaim it. There were so many of them that the police and the strike breakers were not able to force them out. Basically, the governor sent in the national guard to help protect the workers from police and strike breakers.

https://www.history.com/articles/flint-sit-down-strike-general-motors-uaw

•

u/navlgazer9 16h ago

When my uncle was a deputy , he lived in a mobile home on the grounds of an elementary school that had security issues .

School paid for his water and electricity ,
And had motion detectors and all the alarms and stuff in his trailer .

He busted a lot of kids breaking into the school .

•

u/Slacker_The_Dog 18h ago

They would have made a lifelong loyal ride or die employee. Instead they made a homeless person.

•

u/ffuca 18h ago

Or they would have massive legal liability and people are shitty

•

u/SleepingDragonSmiles 17h ago

Get outta here reality!

•

u/Aleashed 13h ago

He had a dream… and the guy above you squashed it

•

u/Upper-Reveal3667 16h ago

It’s a shame he’s poor or the legality of it wouldn’t have been an issue.

•

u/ffuca 16h ago

If he wasn’t poor he wouldn’t be there in the first place so not sure what your point is. The legality does not change depending on the person anyway.

•

u/jmatlock21 16h ago

Laws that have fines as punishments only apply to those who can’t afford to pay the fine. At this point, everyone has heard the story of Jeff Bezos’s hedge wall that is taller than city statutes allow but he pays the fine because he’s rich and he can. So you would be incorrect when you say that legality does not change based on the class of the person in question.

•

u/zouss 15h ago

The legality doesn't change. What Bezos is doing is still illegal. But he's able to pay the consequence of breaking the law since he's rich

•

u/DrFigSecret 14h ago

So what you're saying is that laws have no consequences if you're rich?

Sounds like the law IS different based on the person.

•

u/ffuca 14h ago

No, the consequence is the fine. And it applies to him. Don’t confuse two issues.

•

u/zouss 14h ago

There is a consequence. He has to pay a fine. But since he's rich, he doesn't care and keeps doing it. But the consequence is the same for everyone. Which you could argue is unfair, I heard in some Scandinavian countries they make fines proportional to income and I think that's a smart way to address this issue

→ More replies (0)
→ More replies (1)

•

u/East_Insurance_1037 15h ago

Illegality is supposed to be “you can’t do this”. This is a specific example of, “yes I can”. The money loophole turns something you shouldn’t be able to do into something you can

→ More replies (22)

•

u/New_Classroom7456 11h ago

Yea that isn’t true. It is taller than city statues normally allow but they got an approved extension rather than paying a fine. It’s crazy how often you find people regurgitating bullshit and never verify anything. 

•

u/fresh_peetz 15h ago

Buddy, nobody is going to be able to live inside a school regardless of whether they can afford to pay the fines.

•

u/omgFWTbear 13h ago

Yeah, no rich person has to tied up any misbehavior in court motions for years that they’ve frustrated any attempt to prevent them from just doing what they want.

/s

•

u/WZAWZDB13 14h ago

Thinking legality does not change depending on the person is insanely naive.

The mere fact that someone can pay an expensive lawyer and someone else can’t ensures that one person won’t face consequences for the same - and often far more egregious - illegal behavior

•

u/ffuca 14h ago

The law, and therefore legality, applies to everyone. The law does not say: does not apply to rich people. Whether they can afford a legal defense does not change the law.

•

u/WZAWZDB13 14h ago

It doesnt change the law, but it does change how the law is applied. So while in theory legality does not change, in practice it depends strongly on who commits the behavior.

•

u/SN27A1 14h ago

👏👏

•

u/Subject_Telephone_56 15h ago

What wealthy person squats?

•

u/omgFWTbear 13h ago

Oh man, you ready for a whole thing on water rights? Or how most rich people got “their” land in the first place?

→ More replies (5)

•

u/GngrbredGentrifktion 5h ago

Billionaires. Forcing data centers on everyone's cities and neighborhoods.😁 You're welcome.

•

u/Low-Car-6331 16h ago

If he wasn't poor, the charges probably wouldn't have been dropped.

•

u/TheOneTonWanton 16h ago

If he wasn't poor he wouldn't have been living in the fucking school. Nobody just chooses to do that.

•

u/EdinMiami 15h ago

Trespass requires you be told you are not allowed on the property. A janitor, even one who stays after hours, has expressed permission to be on site.

•

u/Low-Car-6331 14h ago

Not necessarily.

New York for example, doesn't require a person be told if a reasonable person could figure out they are suppose to be there. This is why in many states, if you hope a fence, you are legally trespassing, as a closed off fenced area is clearly an area that the public isn't welcome to enter.

In this particular case though, New York (where this happened) has a provision that changes it from an infraction to a criminal charge if certain buildings are involved (like a school).

NYS § 140.05 (infraction trespass) and § 140.10 (third degree criminal trespass)

(there is also second degree and first degree trespass which is what you are probably thinking of)

•

u/13thmurder 16h ago

Laws are shitty. But laws are made by people, so...

•

u/Electronic-Stick-161 12h ago

Live in caretakers are everywhere.. this is a stupid take.

•

u/Lunar-opal 8h ago

Ok but they didn’t need to fire him he was there because he had no other place to go, and clearly don’t pay a living wage

•

u/SuperCruisePanther 3h ago

Just write a contract. Legal liability goes away.

•

u/mojizus 16h ago

Just further proof most people on this site live in a fantasy land, you’re absolutely right.

•

u/ffuca 16h ago

It’s the same as when they say to renovate a dilapidated shopping mall to be apartments for homeless people

•

u/Fit-Database1134 16h ago

For real. That's a massive no no. No you cannot sleep and bathe yourself above my learning children.

•

u/Badass_Bunny 16h ago

Wait, why do you have an issue with that part? I get school avoiding liability, but your comment I don't get.

•

u/Common-Bend-2093 16h ago

Yeah, the kids would obviously not be there when he’s sleeping lol he works there

→ More replies (11)

•

u/Fit-Database1134 16h ago

Humans are monsters

•

u/RecentClothes2654 14h ago

It might have been the district instead of the school. You'd be surprised by how often Principals and staff are told how to go about things by the district. I could be wrong though.

•

u/CharmingMechanic2473 14h ago

Why fire him? This should be a PIP.

•

u/Glittering-Walrus228 17h ago

The cruelty is the point

→ More replies (1)

•

u/BLF402 11h ago

Right. I mean if he was slacking at his job or involved in any criminal activity I would understand. The fact it took them 6 months to find out and by accident would be more alarming to me as a parent.

•

u/Korachof 16h ago

He was already homeless

→ More replies (3)

•

u/Cosmo_Seinfeld 18h ago

"Welcome home, bruv"

•

u/Livid_Restaurant7848 18h ago

There's a lot of risk in letting him stay, and throughout human history humans haven't been good at being kind in the face of risk.

•

u/PeaceSoft 17h ago

Humans invented hospitality and loyalty in 1992, in response to the release of Michael Jackson's "Black or White" video late the previous year

•

u/WinIll755 17h ago

I think this is my favorite comment I've ever read on Reddit

•

u/ExperienceSoft3892 17h ago

I can picture Cunk saying this verbatim

•

u/badhatharry 17h ago

"It was the single most important event in musical history since Technotronic released 'Pump Up the Jam' three years earlier."

•

u/ExperienceSoft3892 16h ago

YES! Ahahaha

•

u/BDidds 17h ago

History is amazing isn't it? But for the Berlin Wall coming down in 1989, Jackson would have not had the inspiration for the lyrics and hospitality and loyalty would have therefore remained undiscovered.

•

u/navlgazer9 16h ago

Mr Gorbachov , tear down this wall !

•

u/oorza 17h ago

Yeah is no one considering having adults live inside a middle school, where they're likely to do and have adult things, is probably not a great idea? This wasn't a warehouse or a store, it was a middle school!

•

u/Mando_Mustache 17h ago

You mean like at home where all of these kids also live with adults who do and have adult things?

Kids arent harmed just by being in the vague proximity of adult stuff. As long s the guy isn't having loud sex or getting shit faced during school hours I don't see a problem. 

For that matter having known a few teachers inappropriate adult things have likely gone on unseen in proximity to those kids already.  

•

u/Korachof 16h ago

So…

You don’t see a problem that he let his kids stay in the school and created a massive liability problem? You don’t see an issue with him trespassing on property that isn’t his when he isn’t allowed to be there?

You don’t see a problem that the school didn’t detect someone living in it for that long?

You don’t see a problem with someone living in the school without parent’s knowledge?

You don’t see a problem with someone using the school’s resources like electricity and plumbing to fully live inside of it, without getting permission?

Do you have this same energy about all businesses or people’s homes? That if a homeless person breaks in and lives in my crawl space, it should be okay if they are quiet?

What are you talking about? How can you see literally no problems here. 

•

u/ManifestoEnjoyer 16h ago

The only problem I see is that we allow people to be homeless in the richest country in the history of the world. The way we treat each other is inhuman. Maybe save your outrage for the fact that a state employee wasn't able to afford a home.

•

u/SimbasTripRip 13h ago

You can have "outrage" at two things. I mean I get why they wouldn't let him stay at the school, though I don't think he should have been suspended honestly. I also think America is a dogshit low tier country

•

u/marzipancetta 1h ago

As an American I agree with this comment. It’s insane how inhumanely folks are treated in our country.

•

u/0theHumanity 16h ago

I find issue with people who start with so.

Its like no your ergo is presumptive & wrong but ok.

Clock it, happens every time. You can't marry those people because the incorrect SOening never ends.

•

u/Mando_Mustache 15h ago

There are two seperate issues here

  1. Living in a school or other business without permission

  2. A custodian/caretaker having official living quarters in the school where they work being somehow bad or dangerous for kids.

My comment was very clearly about point 2, as the comment I replied to also seemed to be, and I think there is nothing especially dangerous or harmful about the situation.

Regarding point 1 no we do not want people setting up house on the sly. 

Having said that I don't particularly give a fuck up about liability. Baring further evidence it seems like this was a man in a precarious and desperate situation trying to find a way to get by. I'd rather try and help him through his troubles than compound them.

•

u/VanCurious779 16h ago

You’re subhuman.

•

u/ShwaGrl 15h ago

Potential fire hazard, depending on how he cooked his food, if wiring there was up to code or not. Could have been carbon monoxide for him and his 4 children.

•

u/pockpicketG 12h ago

You really sound heartless.

•

u/SuperCruisePanther 3h ago

Schools aren't businesses or private property.

•

u/whereismymind86 2h ago

No, I don't. Stop assuming the worst of people.

•

u/oorza 14h ago

At home is different than at school where you've created a situation where a power imbalance is incredibly easy to exploit and create an abusive situation. The fact that the dude's living quarters are literally in a school make it more-or-less the ideal living scenario for a child predator, and if you start allowing people to live in schools, those are the people you are going to attract.

•

u/Mando_Mustache 14h ago

There is no power imbalance easier to exploit than the power imbalance at home. 

As demonstrated by the attitudes in this thread I expect a live in custodian would be subject to constant suspicion, warranted or not. Single men in socially marginal jobs are often viewed with inherent suspicion.

You also dont need living quarters to engage in abuse. If anything they are less useful.  There are also much better options for jobs if you are a predator who wants access.

•

u/ImpatientNursing 26m ago

I would have a problem with him getting shit faced or having loud sex outside of school hours on school grounds tho. And this is the slippery slope. You have to have a certain conduct on children's public school property but can you dictate a person's free time outside of working hours. Do young single men usually prove to have responsible habits?

•

u/Spirited-Hurry3668 17h ago

You think he moved in his fleshlight and was leaving it around for people to see?

•

u/mydaycake 16h ago

I don’t think he was bringing his dates there

He had his kids there which seems appropriate

•

u/Initial-Reading-2775 16h ago

Meanwhile, principal could have been banging his secretary in some quiet storage room right in the middle of school day.

•

u/arose321 16h ago

Bro, put down the porn.

•

u/Initial-Reading-2775 13h ago

Such porn as news?

•

u/Ppleater 14h ago

The only time kids are there is during the day, which would also be his working hours, so they wouldn't have been in the building with him at any time they wouldn't already have been if he wasn't living there. This argument just doesn't make any sense. The liability argument sure, as much as it sucks I at least understand it, but the "it's a middle school!" one is just stupid. Every time a kid is in school they're there with an adult and those adult will do and have adult things in the same building, just like any other building. That's just a normal aspect of life. As long as the adults aren't doing anything inappropriate in front of or to kids, then it makes no difference to the kids. Let alone when they're not even in the building.

•

u/brothersp0rt 17h ago

You are weird.

•

u/FilthyThanksgiving 14h ago

What exactly are the risks?

•

u/sentence-interruptio 13h ago

Matt Damon and his men could be hiding in him.

•

u/Lonely-Cap3569 17h ago

Back when boilers had to be always maintained, libraries would contain apartments for their custodian. As much as having your housing be controlled by your employer sounds like a bad idea, it could have helped this guy.

•

u/ittoh2083 17h ago

A school cant have a janitor just shacking up in the auditorium, what is wrong with you deviants?

•

u/Adonoxis 16h ago

Yup, I feel bad for the guy but people can't just be secretly living in schools.

All the people in here defending this would be losing their minds at the school if the mini-fridge short circuited and caught fire during the school day and dozens of children were killed.

•

u/hellion1965 11h ago

But a school can have a janitor living in their car and pissing into bottles? 

•

u/SophieCalle 7h ago

They could have told him he had to go and PAID HIM MORE, enough to cover rent.

•

u/ThisSiteSucks8485 17h ago

Why not

•

u/CyberneticFennec 16h ago

I imagine safety concerns are a pretty big deal, it isn't likely the space would have been rated for actively living in. Proper fire escapes, lack of plumbing and cooking appliances, etc, etc that are required by law in most places for residential spaces.

It's a shitty situation for everyone involved, but realistically it couldn't have turned out any other way. There's no way the school would have retrofit the area to be habitable, I imagine the legal red tape would make this very difficult (and expensive). Even though it seems harmless enough, they were still breaking the law on school grounds as well, so it's not like they could have just turned a blind eye once the news got out either.

•

u/ManifestoEnjoyer 15h ago

They could also have increased his pay, or fought to find him affordable housing. It didn't say he was fired for anything else but trying to have a roof over his head.

•

u/CyberneticFennec 14h ago

Sure there's other stuff they could do, but that wasn't the question, and none of those would have still permitted them to live inside the school

•

u/ManifestoEnjoyer 13h ago

That's not your question. To me, the outcome is way more important than the rule. The rules we live under are the reason the guy was homeless in the first place.

•

u/CyberneticFennec 13h ago

I meant literally, they were asking why not let the janitor shack up in the auditorium

•

u/Korachof 16h ago

Uh a lot of reasons. Liability is a big one, especially because he brought people like his kids onto school property without permission without anyone else present. They literally stayed there on the weekends 

But beyond that, you don’t find it creepy that the school didn’t know someone was living in it for 6 months? That someone could avoid detection that long? 

•

u/SimpleAffect7573 16h ago edited 16h ago

Agree with the first part. On the last part: not really. Maybe his shift extended past school hours, so he could mop the floors and such when the buildings were empty. If so, it wouldn’t have been odd for him to be the only one there after-hours (to an extent). And you don’t normally pull surveillance footage unless there’s been an incident (as happened here). I don’t think it’s that crazy that he managed to fly under the radar for a while.

•

u/b-rar 16h ago

I would say in general an adult having access to a secret hidey hole in a facility where he works around children is a bad idea. Not to cast aspersions on this dude in particular because I believe when he says he was just desperate for a place to live and his job didn't pay him enough to survive on. As usual, the problem is capitalism.

•

u/dumpsterfire_account 16h ago

Gross, there’s a huge amount of live-in education institutions where adults and children live in proximity. Get your head out of the gutter.

•

u/b-rar 14h ago

Yes, and in such institutions, access to private areas is strictly controlled and monitored, because of the fact that sexual abuse of children by adult authorities is a real thing. Acknowledging this is not having your head in the gutter.

•

u/Gordo-- 15h ago

I mean, he was there for 6 months with seemingly no issues.

•

u/Korachof 16h ago

Unfortunately it’s a major liability, especially with him bringing his young kids to stay with him.

It’s also pretty creepy in a way as a parent to know that someone could just be living in the school for 6 months and no one knows. If I was a parent at a school there, I’d be livid they let that happen. Unfortunately, the custodian himself seems like he took the entire fall, and not the people in charge who were so blind to what’s happening around them they let it go on

•

u/Clueless_Otter 15h ago

I mean, to be fair, it wasn't just some random guy who snuck into the school. It was the custodian who was normally there anyway all workday and even after kids/staff leave. He just.. didn't leave. If you're the guy trusted with locking up, there's no one to know if you actually do or just stay there.

I agree it's a liability issue, but I don't really think it's some huge safety issue parents need to be mad about.

•

u/nalaloveslumpy 17h ago

Having his kids there on the weekend is a HUGE legal liability.

•

u/tangerineTurtle_ 16h ago

In a space that is not meant for habitation.

•

u/lostintransaltions 16h ago

My primary school had an apartment for the custodian… it was part of the compensation, the building was really old and had lots of small things needing fixing all the time so having the custodian onsite meant he would notice if something was working right over the weekend and it was fixed by Monday morning. They also had several apartments for teachers. That was just how the school was built, school building, gym hall and a building with I think 6 apartments for teachers and the custodian.
I only knew the custodian lived there as my parents house was right next to the school, the custodian prior to him didn’t live there as he had a rather big family and the apartments were only 1-2 bedrooms. I am 44 now and the custodian who started there when I was 8 is still their current custodian and will retire from that job.

•

u/Hateful-Mix-67 18h ago

Insurance companies and government ordinances / district policies are probably the bigger problem there and would have considered it a liability, or such nonsense. Common sense isn’t allowed in government you know.

•

u/ittoh2083 17h ago

I don't think you understand the word common sense. Common sense prevailed.

•

u/Hateful-Mix-67 13h ago

The key words here are “make it official”. That’s more than just an okie doke. Organizations having the self awareness to realize they can’t provide adequate pay for people but can offer other perks that are mutually beneficial if someone would put in some work to apply a few appropriate safeguards and additional vetting would be nice.

•

u/nalaloveslumpy 17h ago

Tell me you don't understand liability or common sense in fifty words or less.

•

u/Hateful-Mix-67 13h ago

You’re the kind of lazy person that just hand wave it “it won’t work” without applying any brainpower or effort and cause the world to be worse for people.

•

u/unfinishedtoast3 15h ago

Having a grown man living in a school isn't common sense. Common sense is Not having a man secretly live in a place children gather near daily.

•

u/Hateful-Mix-67 13h ago

I get on the sketchy side yes, this is a recipe for disaster. However, having an on side grounds keeper who is sanctioned and properly vetted and monitored though seems like a good thing.

Hand wringing government types who apply zero thought to the issue or willingness to change the system is what I’m griping about.

•

u/Redshittt 17h ago

They dont want someone having sex above the kids or jorkin it

•

u/Perfect-Squash3773 16h ago

My old highschool actually had a costodian's cottage on the property. It was there as long as the school was, 200 years before the cottage was torn down. The school has since been closed to.

•

u/ThrowAwayAccountAMZN 15h ago

Not sure a custodian should have a "love in" role in a middle school. /s

•

u/turningtogold 15h ago

It’s not residential zoned. Nothing is that simple.

•

u/ginandtonicsdemonic 15h ago

Neither are fire departments. Yet people still live and sleep there

•

u/Baltimoreisnotcreepy 14h ago

They don't have the power to grant that in the public school system, and technically it's a safety hazard.

•

u/SuperHooligan 14h ago

Do you really think a school can just start allowing anyone to live in the school? Especially when he has his family there too? Its a liability for so many different reasons.

•

u/5ch1sm 13h ago

Old schools used to have an apartment for their custodians. It was a two in one as they were assuming the building maintenance, cleaning and surveillance, while also having a place to live.

The practice pretty much died down when the alarm systems and security camera became more accessible. Now the schools see it as a liability to have someone living on site because of their responsibility if something happen, the zoning issue in some places and the insurance cost of having someone living full time there.

•

u/Firefly_Magic 12h ago

This is exactly what I was thinking. That’s some dedication right there.

•

u/FlipZip69 8h ago

Zoning does not allow it and if they make an exception, then if there is some incident, insurance can deny any claims even if the incident had nothing to do with person living in said location.

I wanted to move into a nice loft in my commercial building because of the amount of theft we were seeing in the yard. The loft already had kitchen and shower and couch/pull out bed. That was legal. But if i moved in there and there was a fire in the building, my insurance company could deny my claim because the building was no longer used what it was zoned for. And being commercial zone, you cannot get no residency there. Cannot even rezone as there is no type of zone like that.

And thus the commercial zone continues to be plagued by crime in my particular area.

•

u/GngrbredGentrifktion 5h ago

S/Lol: Insurance would deny the claim regardless.

•

u/Kodak333 7h ago

You don’t see how that’s very problematic

•

u/CosignCody 17h ago

Really though a live in custodian like a caretaker to a mansion, it should be more common that schools have some rooms or living situations for even kids or parents in distress.

•

u/Mando_Mustache 17h ago

Various instances of vandalism and trespass allegedly commited by me and my known associates in 90s would have been a lot harder to pull off with a dude on site.

•

u/Zedilt 15h ago

Or just paid a living wage.

•

u/WormedOut 14h ago

That’s not how insurance works. Or permits. This is a fantasy.

•

u/mightylordredbeard 16h ago edited 16h ago

Yep, being poor is expensive.

There was a teacher several years back that was fired for being homeless. She was living out of her car and a friend at the school, who she confided in, ratted her out to the school administrators and she was let go for having an “unprofessional life style” or something like that.

•

u/Therealdickdangler 15h ago

That’s the kind of shit that should get motherfuckers riled up for a rebellion. 

•

u/IgnatiusRileyFreeman 18h ago

Meanwhile where's the news story blasting the school district for underpaying staff?

•

u/frisbeethecat 16h ago

If you had read the article posted by OP, you would have learned that this custodian's salary is $64k and he actually earned $80k in 2025 with overtime. The article cited child support for his 4 children and associated costs being the reason for not having money for an apartment.

•

u/Ill_Morning_4282 11h ago

Okay, so that is still the school's fault. Someone working full time should be able to support their family.

•

u/Longjumping_Wolf_912 2h ago

So you are saying that a person’s salary should be based off of their relationship status and how many children they have?

•

u/baconator_out 10h ago

So I have 12 kids and get a janitor job. Because the school doesn't pay me 150,000 or more a year, it's their fault I have financial problems?

Something about this seems poorly thought out. Maybe it's the ALL OF IT.

→ More replies (14)

•

u/MKZZX 17h ago

What makes you think they are underpaying staff? That's absurd

•

u/IgnatiusRileyFreeman 17h ago

Check the post you're ultimately replying under. There's a news article and everything 

•

u/MKZZX 16h ago

The guy who was making $80k/year for a job that should be making 30? Yeah I don't think that's underpaid.

•

u/IgnatiusRileyFreeman 16h ago

Should be making 30k? Are you a stupid person or just a really awful person? You believe anyone working for a school system deserves to be making that small amount of money, or do you believe schools shouldn't exist?

•

u/MKZZX 16h ago

He was a custodian who was making more than many of the teachers. It sounds like you are the awful person because you are just suggesting everyone should making that amount of money.

•

u/IgnatiusRileyFreeman 16h ago

I believe anyone who works at a school deserves to make enough money to live, to support children & pay rent. If you believe schools should exist, but believe the people who work there don't deserve to make living wages, then logically, that means you believe people who work at schools don't deserve to live. Just support people earning a living wage, teachers deserve at least 80k

•

u/MKZZX 16h ago

then logically, that means you believe people who work at schools don't deserve to live.

😭😭😭

Right so the logical fault here is that all wages are living wages provided they cover the cost to eat, so that breaks down very quickly. 80k a year is well in excess to the cost of living, and it's a massive overpay for custodial personnel. The guy had 4 kids he was paying child support, it's not the schools fault that he made poor life choices.

Most of your argument is not even an argument, it's just you spamming a reddit narrative and then ignoring the fact that it does not even fit the facts of the example that you chose as your hill to die on. Whoops.

→ More replies (8)

•

u/ImNotABotScoutsHonor 11h ago

/r/AwardSpeechEdits

Embarrassing.

•

u/Therealdickdangler 11h ago

Your mom said that about you but I urged her to keep you, now here we are. 

I understand the awards are silly. 

I just was taught manners and to thank those that have given me something. 

Get fucked with your silly problems with people you don’t know editing their comments to appreciate those that have shown appreciation. 

•

u/ImNotABotScoutsHonor 8h ago

Oh spare us, please.

Nobody's buying that bullshit excuse.

Reddit lets you thank people who give you awards directly.

You think they're just going to come back on the off chance you edit your comment to "thank" them?

No. They've already moved on.

•

u/Therealdickdangler 4h ago

Ya had to delete your “shut the fuck up” comment. Then came back to write this? 

Seems everyone has moved on but you. 

•

u/BoBingles 18h ago

I read this in the Johnny Silverhand voice.

•

u/lDezIlI 14h ago

Shouldn't be having 4 kids if he cant afford it tbh

•

u/jaynor88 10h ago

His life may have been very different back when he had his children.

It’s shocking how quickly things can fall apart when there is a job loss, divorce, death, or some tragedy in a persons life.

•

u/NotABot1000101 6h ago

Oh you can predict the future?

•

u/lDezIlI 1m ago

Having 4 kids in your early 20s is pretty much asking for trouble lmao

•

u/ThatFatGuyMJL 14h ago

I deliver to a lot of schools.

And a lot of old schools used to literally have a house on the grounds for the custodian. It was a perk of the job

•

u/Baltimoreisnotcreepy 14h ago

I'm surprised and wonder if he had other serious debts. School custodians are paid very well and make more than the teachers do, with great benefits to boot. But housing is so expensive nowadays. It's so sad to see this.

•

u/LukewarmJortz 14h ago

They can't have the guy living on campus. It's a liability.

I wouldn't have fired him but him living there would have to stop.

•

u/stryker511 14h ago

Was always on time too, never late to work.

•

u/GODDAMNFOOL 14h ago

Thank you to the many kind redditors who have given me awards. 🙏🏼

'and thank YOU for buying these worthless things!'

- reddit investors

•

u/Farucci 13h ago

I can see both sides of this, the liability issue for the school, but in the end the system punishes people for trying to survive.

•

u/Previous-Soft-8127 13h ago

As a teacher, I agree, but I’m concerned at having teenagers stay there. They are not employees they are a security risk (they’d have access to master keys to every room), and they’d open the school up to lawsuits if something happened to them or the school while they were there. If the kids were students in the same school, I’m sure they’d be tempted to get up to shenanigans. 

Schools are strapped for cash and have to do what they have to do, including what their insurance says they have to do. HAVING SAID THAT, I worked in a rural school where I think the admin would have looked the other way (because it’s a town of 600 people and everybody knew everybody), but they again would have had issues with the kids being there. 

•

u/Therealdickdangler 13h ago

“Schools are strapped for cash and have to do what they have to do, including what their insurance says they have to do.” 

What makes schools any more important than the people that work there and keep it running? This man was “strapped for cash and doing what they have to do.” but now are met with another hurdle to clear just to survive. 

A school doesn’t perform, no one takes it away. 

Solutions that better people need to start being made instead of solutions that benefit Government, Institutions and Companies. 

•

u/Previous-Soft-8127 12h ago

And how would it benefit the people if a school is sued? Altruism is great, but this could lead to services being taken away from students (those paid with discretionary funds), and it’s usually the students on the fringes who lost services first. Paras will  lose jobs and the remaining ones will have more students added to their already heavy case loads. Electives classes would be dropped and their teachers let go. 

We live in a litigation-heavy society, and while the feel-good story would be to let the guy and his kids stay there, you have to weigh that against the risk this opens them up to.

•

u/Therealdickdangler 12h ago

What would the suit be? They have an employee living on premises? Have you ever heard of boarding schools?

•

u/Previous-Soft-8127 8h ago

If something were to happen in the school (something gets broken or catches fire, a kid breaks or steals something), you are open to being liable if you knowingly allowed that person to live there, especially if it’s not within code for a living space, and you could be sued by the city/county/ag for allowing someone to live in the school. 

This is not a boarding school situation, obviously. 

•

u/Migueleiv3 6h ago

Survival’s a scam; the mop always wins. Cheers to the pity pixels.

•

u/BigTechnology4369 3h ago

Sadly, he probably deserves them better.

But, more insight is needed. Till then, take my upvote in support of your sentiments

•

u/MontazumasRevenge 17h ago

But think of the billions trump made for us instead!

/s

•

u/TrueNorth257 13h ago

Considering he procreated four times with that mug, I’d say he is blessed.

→ More replies (106)