LBReport.com

Read Ruling: Trial Court Strikes Down CA Laws That Make It Difficult -- Some Say Virtually Impossible -- To Remove Bad Teachers, Rules Sac'to Enacted Provisions Unfairly, Unnecessarily And For No Legally Cognizable Reason Disadvantage Students And Teachers

Ruling Stayed Pending Expected Appeal By Teachers Unions And State



(June 10, 2014, 1:05 p.m.) -- In ruling with sweeping impacts for parents, students, teachers and administrators in CA public schools if it stands on appeal, a Los Angeles County Superior Court this morning (June 10) struck down as unconstitutional five provisions of the CA Education Code (Sacramento enacted statutes) that have for years made it complex and difficult -- critics say virtually impossible -- to remove teachers accused of doing a poor job of teaching.

Ruling in the case of Vergara vs. California, the Court found unconstitutional five provisions of the CA Education Code, ruling that they violate the Equal Protection clause of the CA constitution by adversely affecting the quality of education afforded by the state. The provisions ruled unconstitutional are CA Education Code sections 44929.21(b) [permanent employment statutes], 44934 and 44938(b)(1) and (2) and 44944 [dismissal statutes] and 44955 ("last in, first out" statute].

The plaintiffs in the case were a diverse group of students attending schools in Los Angeles Unified School District, Oakland Unified School District and Alum Rock Union School District (San Jose). In a 16-page ruling following a 33 day trial (began Jan. 27, ended May 27), Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Rolf M. Treu found that had met their burden of proof on all issues presented.

"The evidence is compelling. Indeed, it shocks the conscience. There is also no dispute that there are a significant number of grossly ineffective teacher currently active in California classrooms," the Court found.

"This court finds that both students and teachers are unfairly, unnecessarily, and for no legally cognizable reason (let alone a compelling one), disadvantaged by the current Permanent Employment Statute...All Challenged Statues [listed above] are found unconstitutional," the court ruled. LBREPORT.com provides the text of the Court's full ruling below:

Vergara vs. CA (Superior Court ruling)

The state's two largest teachers' unions -- the CA Teachers Ass'n and the CA Federation of Teachers -- had both intervened to oppose the students' lawsuit. The State of CA also fought the students' lawsuit, defending the current statutes.

In response to today's ruling, CTA stated on its website:

[CTA text] Like the lawsuit itself, today’s ruling is deeply flawed. CTA, CFT and the state of California will appeal. We will appeal on behalf of students and educators. Circumventing the legislative process to strip teachers of their professional rights hurts our students and our schools. This lawsuit has nothing to do with what’s best for kids, but was manufactured by a Silicon Valley millionaire and a corporate PR firm to undermine the teaching profession and push their agenda on our schools. Today’s ruling would make it harder to attract and retain quality teachers in our classrooms and ignores all research that shows experience is a key factor in effective teaching.

The CA Federation of Teachers had no immediate reaction by the noon hour June 10, but the day before the ruling (June 9), it issued a release saying the lawsuit was "initiated by Silicon Valley millionaire David Welch and a high powered public relations firm" which "targeted basic professional rights for teachers that that help improve student learning." It called the suit "meritless" and called the lawsuit "not pro-student" and "fundamentally anti-public education."

Joe Boyd, Executive Director of the Teachers Ass'n of Long Beach (TALB) [the Long Beach affiliate of CTA] commented that the trial court's ruling is "a stop along the road of where these issues eventually end up. It's not clear yet how this is going to play out; it's a fluid situation." Mr. Boyd said (as has CTA previously) that a bill is now working its way through Sacramento (AB 215) that he said addresses these issues. (The bill's proponents say it streamlines the dismissal and appeal process.) "There's going to be change, whether it comes through the courts, the legislature or the initiative process, it's just a question of what form that change will take."

Mr. Boyd said that locally, LBUSD and TALB have worked together "to provide the most effective classrooms we can have. We've worked together to make for good schools here and we've succeeded."

LBUSD's administration had no immediate reaction to the Court ruling as of 1 p.m. [we'll add reaction here if issued.]

The Court ordered a stay (halt) on its decision, pending expected appeals.

The plaintiffs were assisted in their court action by Students Matter, an advocacy group that states on its website,

"We believe Californians shouldn’t have to choose: we can create an education system that gives every child a passionate, motivating and effective teacher and gives effective teachers the respect and rewarding careers they deserve." The group says on its website: "[When it comes to educating our kids, there should only be winners.

[Students Matter website text] It's common sense: reward and retain passionate, motivating, effective teachers and hold those accountable who are failing our children. By striking down the permanent employment, dismissal and "last-in, first-out" layoff laws, Vergara v. California will create an opportunity for California to embrace a new system that’s good for teachers and students. Because when it comes to educating our kids, there should only be winners.

...Permanent Employment Statute: The permanent employment law forces administrators to either grant or deny permanent employment to teachers after an evaluation period of less than 16 months -- before new teachers even complete their beginner teacher induction programs and before administrators are able to assess whether a teacher will be effective long-term.

Dismissal Statutes: The process for dismissing a single ineffective teacher involves a borderline infinite number of steps, requires years of documentation, costs hundreds of thousands of dollars and still, rarely ever works. Out of 275,000 teachers statewide, 2.2 teachers are dismissed for unsatisfactory performance per year on average, which amounts to 0.0008 percent.

"Last-In, First-Out" (LIFO) Layoff Statute: The LIFO law forces school districts to base layoffs on seniority alone, with no consideration of teachers’ performance in the classroom.



blog comments powered by Disqus

Follow LBReport.com w/

Twitter

RSS

Facebook

Return To Front Page

Contact us: mail@LBReport.com



Click for VIDEO and see how Diversified Threat Management private security can help protect your neighborhood and your business. Affordable group rates available.


Need A Plumber, NOW? DrainPros Does It All; Click This Text To See Their Many Services AND Click Below To See Their Current Specials









Ad above provided in the public interest by:

















Carter Wood Floors
Hardwood Floor Specialists
Call (562) 422-2800 or (714) 836-7050




Return To Front Page

Contact us: mail@LBReport.com


Copyright © 2014 LBReport.com, LLC. All rights reserved. Terms of Use/Legal policy, click here. Privacy Policy, click here