The other interesting thing is the state just recently changed the timeline for letting people off, which is today, April 15 (it used to be 45 days before the end of the school year, but because every one's school year ended different the constant date was put in place). So any certified teacher (tenure or no…
The other interesting thing is the state just recently changed the timeline for letting people off, which is today, April 15 (it used to be 45 days before the end of the school year, but because every one's school year ended different the constant date was put in place). So any certified teacher (tenure or not, RIF or dishonorable discharge) has to be let go by today, but to do RIF, there is a seniority order which comes into play (usually outlined in the contract). This becomes an HR nightmare because you have to take into account the various certifications people hold. For example, if they identified they have too many 3rd grade teachers, all of whom are tenured, and one has an English middle school endorsement, they could potentially bump a nontenured Middle school social studies teacher... this is a very simplistic example, but you can see how it becomes a domino situation when looking to RIF. This is why is is often easier to eliminate administrative positions, though the same theory applies.
The district is playing games and not being transparent at all. It's a shame because as the games continue the only ones being hurt are students. Bad leadership.
I hope the Union takes this cause up because my understanding is that the District assured the Union that there would be no tenured teached RIFs and this certainly seems to contradict this, no?
Sabbatical would mean tenure.
The other interesting thing is the state just recently changed the timeline for letting people off, which is today, April 15 (it used to be 45 days before the end of the school year, but because every one's school year ended different the constant date was put in place). So any certified teacher (tenure or not, RIF or dishonorable discharge) has to be let go by today, but to do RIF, there is a seniority order which comes into play (usually outlined in the contract). This becomes an HR nightmare because you have to take into account the various certifications people hold. For example, if they identified they have too many 3rd grade teachers, all of whom are tenured, and one has an English middle school endorsement, they could potentially bump a nontenured Middle school social studies teacher... this is a very simplistic example, but you can see how it becomes a domino situation when looking to RIF. This is why is is often easier to eliminate administrative positions, though the same theory applies.
The district is playing games and not being transparent at all. It's a shame because as the games continue the only ones being hurt are students. Bad leadership.
I hope the Union takes this cause up because my understanding is that the District assured the Union that there would be no tenured teached RIFs and this certainly seems to contradict this, no?
A contract year double-cross is pretty on brand for this board