Bill would strengthen teacher tenure rights

Friday, August 7, 2009

BY MICHAEL GIARDINA

State legislators are attempting to give a little more power to non-tenured teachers and teachers’ unions by extending the tenure evaluation process. Critics argue that the move would unfairly constrain school districts and increase their legal costs, with taxpayers ultimately paying the price.

The tenure issue is addressed in Assembly Bill A-4142, introduced last month by the Assembly Education Committee. The proposal has received much opposition in recent weeks by local school officials and the New Jersey School Boards Association (NJSBA).

Assemblyman Scott T. Rumana (R-District 40) said Wednesday that the committee’s intent to vote on the bill was meant to release it from the committee and therefore put it up for a vote on the Assembly floor. Rumana said he and his colleagues first received the bill information on June 22, the day the committee met and voted.

"First off, we didn’t even have copies of the bill until the morning we walked into the room," said Rumana. "So there basically was no time for real review of the bills, but I do have very grave concerns about bill 4142."

Gary Hall, manager of human resources for Ridgewood Public Schools, said that under current state law, teachers and administrators must be employed for three consecutive calendar years, or three complete academic years, in order to receive tenure.

Hall said once employees receive tenure, they go from being employed on a year-to-year basis to having an "entitlement to indefinite employment." That entitlement would end when a teacher or administrator decides to leave a district, or a district files tenure changes against the employee for inefficiency, incompetence or "unbecoming conduct." The school district would then litigate the charges and receive a decision from state Education Commissioner Lucille E. Davy declaring whether or not the employee’s tenure should be revoked.

The new proposed legislation defines "discipline" as including, but not being limited to, "all forms of discharge, termination and contract nonrenewal." It would also make binding arbitration the final step for the review of disciplinary action. Binding arbitration is when a disagreement between two parties is mediated by a third, independent party. The arbitrator’s decision is final and cannot be disputed or appealed.

"School districts have had wide latitude to make renewal and non-renewal decisions about their non-tenured employees as they see fit," Hall said. "Districts cannot make those decisions for arbitrary, capricious or illegally discriminatory reasons. The NJDOE [New Jersey Department of Education] and the courts do not have the authority to substitute their own judgments for the judgments made by each school district about who the district offers employment to and who it does not. There is no systemic history of abuse or dysfunction with the renewal/non-renewal process as it exists, and has existed for decades in New Jersey, so I am unclear about why the Assembly Educatio n Committee feels this change is needed."

According to the state teachers’ union, the New Jersey Education Association (NJEA), the purpose of the bill is not to add to the process, but to reinforce the importance of the collective bargaining agreements currently in place. NJEA spokesperson Dawn Hiltner said Wednesday that it worked with Assemblyman Joseph Cryan, the bill’s primary sponsor, to reiterate the importance of established agreements between the employer and the employee.

"It respects the original agreement," Hiltner said, "so it’s not exactly more power [for the employee]. It’s already there in writing, so when you have a way to refer to a disciplinary issue, why not refer to the contract that both parties agreed to at the bargaining table?"

But Ridgewood Superintendent of Schools Dr. Daniel Fishbein said Tuesday that districts can expect increased legal costs if the new legislation is passed. He said that as long as tenure decisions are not done with "prejudice," the district should have the right to make these judgments.

"I don’t know why they would do something like this, or want to do something like this," Fishbein said. "There’s a system of checks and balances in place already."

Ridgewood BOE member Sheila Brogan agreed.

"[The bill] will impact a board’s decision on retaining teachers," Brogan said. "If every time you made a decision on non-tenured teachers, you had to go to arbitration, it would add another layer to decisions that you are making on staffing your buildings, so I don’t see that as being helpful."

NJSBA spokesperson Michael Yaple said his organization adamantly opposes Bill A-4142 because the expected increase in districts’ legal costs could lead to increases in local school taxes, and the constraints and additional arbitration it calls for could impede school board operations.

"While this legislation is friendly to organized labor, it’s not very taxpayer-friendly," Yaple said.

In a June 22 press release, NJSBA’s Executive Director Marie S. Bilik said the bill "is a clear example of why the public needs to watch the Legislature, and watch it closely, during an election year."