The controversial interpretation of teacher tenure rights being invoked to move
MPS teachers this last week is based on a MN Supreme Court case called the Strand
case. I haven't been able to find the specific language of that case. - anybody have
Lexis access?
Neither have I been able to find out whose #$%*#$ idea this was. This can't be
good for anyone other than those few tortured souls who might be coveting the jobs of
those teachers who, in many cases, quite by accident, may have another license in
addition to the one under which they have been practicing. Assigning teachers to a
job that they don't have experience doing or a desire to do is not the way to close
the achievement gap or increase enrollment.
There's gotta be a better way.
Article 22, Section C, of the Moorhead, MN teachers' contract (below) is an
example of a school board and a union agreeing that the doctrine of the Strand case is
not a good idea. (There are probably more examples of exclusions from contracts; it's
the only one I could document at this time.) Could this be used as a precedent to
avoid the invocation of this process at this very precarious time in our district? I
would think that the likelihood of grievances and challenges outside the grievance
process by those who won't be able to be contacted in a timely manner would be reason
enough by itself to attempt to find a way to get around this interpretation of teacher
tenure rights, not to mention the horrendous disruption it will cause in the lives
teachers, and by extension the lives of their students.
http://www.moorhead.k12.mn.us/www/district/human_resources/tchr.htm
C. (1) Layoff and recall shall be on the basis of seniority with the
District as defined in this Article and shall be according to the provisions
set forth in this Article.
Seniority shall not entitle an employee to a position for which the employee
is not licensed and qualified.
(2) Nothing in this Article shall require the District to reassign a senior
teacher to a different area of licensure in order to accommodate the
seniority claims of a junior teacher. The doctrine enunciated by the
Minnesota Court of Appeals and Supreme Court in the Strand case shall not
apply.
Another question that comes to mind for me, but which is not necessarily related
to an immediate solution is, was the Strand case discussed in any recent MPS teacher
contract negotiations? It is very likely to come up in the next round.
Dan McGuire
Ericsson
REMINDERS:
1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
before continuing it on the list.
2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
