Solving the Puzzle of Reduction in Force

Page 1

Reduction In Force Karen Haase Harding & Shultz Lincoln, NE (402) 434-3000 khaase@hslegalfirm.com H & S School Law


Solving the Puzzle of Reduction in Force


The Statutes < Every board must have a reduction in force policy Â’ The policy is not bargainable Â’ Timing of amendments to RIF policy


The Statutes < Probationary teachers must be reduced before tenured teachers < Board, by policy, may determine criteria for retention < If evaluation is a criterion, the policy must specify: frequency of evaluation evaluation forms, and number & length of observations


The Statutory Mantra Before a reduction in force can occur--

< Present evidence showing: A change of circumstances Necessitating a reduction in force Specifically related to riffed teacher


Required Findings < Board must find: Â’ There are no vacancies on staff for which the employee is qualified Â’ RIF affects classroom as a last resort


RIF’d Teacher’s Rights A Teacher Who is Terminated by RIF

< Considered dismissed with honor On request gets a letter to that effect < Recall rights for 24 months < Recalled on length of service < Must be qualified by endorsement or college preparation to be recalled


Waiver of Recall Rights “. . .an employee under contract to another educational institution may waive recall but such waiver shall not deprive the employee of his or her right to subsequent recall.�


The Statutes Reorganization of School Districts and Reduction in Force

< Statutes apply to all mergers and unifications < Notice by March 15 or 30 days before merger Â’ Staff Development Assistance Â’ Retirement Incentive Program


Notice of RIF < Must notify of possible amendment or termination by April 15 Â’ Comply with any earlier dates in policy or handbook < Teacher has 7 days to request hearing


Hearing Notice < Hearing must be held within 30 days < At least 5 days prior to the hearing, the teacher is given: Specific reasons for RIF Exhibit list Witness list Summary of witnesses’ testimony Copies of documents


Board Decision < Board must make final decision on or before May 15 < There is no vacancy < RIF affects classroom as last resort


Dykeman v. Board Dykeman v. Board of Education (1982)

< Board Policy considered: Certification and endorsements Program to be offered Contribution to activity program Length of uninterrupted service Special qualifications Part-time employees get lowest priority


Dykeman v. Board < < < <

Two business administration teachers Board reduces from 2 teachers to 1 Dykeman had more seniority Other teacher contributed more to extra-curricular activities < Nebraska Supreme Court: boards may differentiate on basis of contribution to extracurricular activity program


Dykeman v. Board The Nebraska Supreme Court held: In the absence of statutory or contractual restrictions, the decision of a school board in such a matter [RIF] is generally subject to but a limited review.


Dykeman v. Board The Nebraska Supreme Court held: “School boards should have broad discretion in such matters free from judicial interference in the absence of a finding that their actions were arbitrary and capricious.�


Cross v. Board < < < <

Board eliminated machine shop program Ross only shop instructor Board RIF’d Ross Supreme Court -- affirmed board -responsible for curriculum and employment


Reduction In Force Karen Haase Harding & Shultz Lincoln, NE (402) 434-3000 khaase@hslegalfirm.com H & S School Law


Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook
Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.