Sentences with phrase «teacher layoff law»

Trenton, NJ — A group of Newark parents yesterday filed a formal request to appeal a trial court judge's dismissal earlier this month of their lawsuit challenging the state's «last in, first out» teacher layoff law.

Not exact matches

Key reforms include fostering more effective charter schools, merit pay for teachers, more aid to parochial schools and the elimination of stultifying laws such as «Last in first out» for teacher layoffs.

«There's a simple test that we're going to apply to anything that he does... any proposal, and it is this: does it repeal the Last In, First Out law that would allow the city to layoff teachers based on merit this year?»

ALBANY - Mayor Bloomberg and Gov. Cuomo's war over the law governing teacher layoffs went nuclear on Wednesday with verbal bombs dropping from New York City to Albany.

Washington (CNN)- President Barack Obama on Tuesday signed into law a $ 26 billion measure to help avoid teacher layoffs - a move Democrats claim is necessary in the wake of state and local government cutbacks.

In a stunning decision, a judge in the California Superior Court has ruled that, because education is a fundamental right of California youth, the laws governing teacher tenure, teacher dismissal and rules for layoffs are unconstitutional.

And, when layoffs are required, a final law requires that decisions can not take into account a teacher's effectiveness but must be based entirely on seniority.

As Stephen Sawchuk notes, there has been a great deal of debate over whether teacher layoffs should be based on inverse seniority («last in, first out,» which many union contracts and state laws require) or based on teacher effectiveness.

In April, the California Court of Appeal overturned the trial court's ruling in Vergara v. California [i], in which a group of families had challenged the constitutionality of state laws governing teacher tenure [ii](California state law automatically grants tenure to teachers after sixteen months, provides extra due process protections to teachers over and above those available to other state workers, and requires schools to use seniority rather than competency in layoff decisions.)

(California state law automatically grants tenure to teachers after sixteen months, provides extra due process protections to teachers over and above those available to other state workers, and requires schools to use seniority rather than competency in layoff decisions.)

The suit also challenged the «last hired, first fired» laws that require districts to follow seniority during layoffs and dismiss the least - senior teachers first, with exceptions for those with needed and specialized skills.

View key facts and statistics from the Vergara v. California trial, including information about Plaintiffs» witnesses, the long - term impact of ineffective teachers and the harm caused by California's permanent employment, dismissal and «last - in, first - out» layoff laws.

According to the Court, the laws in question — laws that govern teacher tenure, dismissal, and layoffs — impose substantial harm on California's students by forcing administrators to push passionate, inspiring teachers out of the school system and keep grossly ineffective teachers in front of students year after year.

Maine's school boards are being urged to eliminate seniority clauses from teachers» contracts as the result of a state high - court decision, handed down this summer, that state law does not protect tenured teachers at the expense of nontenured teachers in layoff decisions.

The plaintiffs — nine students in five California public school districts — argue that five laws governing teacher dismissal, tenure, and «last in - first out» layoff...

Keep great teachers when budget cuts hit: Eliminate the law that requires all teacher layoffs to be based solely on seniority.

When filed by attorneys on behalf of students at three Los Angeles Unified middle schools in 2010, the lawsuit challenged the state law mandating teacher layoffs based on seniority.

Villaraigosa also supported the Vergara v. California lawsuit that challenged state laws regarding teacher tenure, dismissal, and layoffs.

Each state sets its own laws governing teacher tenure, dismissal and layoff policies, and the rights the students assert are given under the state constitution, so similar efforts will come in state courts.

In a subsequent post on its website, the union went bonkers, claiming, «Corporate millionaires and special interests have mounted an all - out assault on educators by attempting to do away with laws protecting teachers from arbitrary firings, providing transparency in layoff decisions and supporting due process rights.»

The Wright v. New York case was first filed in 2014, when nine families from across the state brought suit against the State of New York and others, claiming that teacher tenure, dismissal, and quality - blind layoff laws deprive New York children of their right to a sound basic education as guaranteed under the New York State Constitution.

The 2010 law requires districts to reimagine their talent - management and educator - support systems by requiring annual performance evaluations, ensuring tenure is earned and not the guarantee of lifetime employment, and ending both seniority - based layoffs and the forced placement of teachers into schools where they neither want to be nor fit well.

By state law, those layoffs would have been conducted on a last - hired, first - fired basis, meaning most teachers hired after 2007 in New York City would lose their jobs, no matter how they performed in the classroom.

The defendants lost the case last June when Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Rolf Treu struck down California's laws regarding teacher tenure, layoffs and dismissals by saying they deny students access to a quality public education.

By state law, districts must send preliminary layoff notices for the following school year to teachers by March 15.

Colorado's debate over the same themes was just as passionate, partly because thousands of teacher layoffs are on the horizon here, and teacher effectiveness will be considered before seniority in deciding who gets pink slips once the new law takes effect in 2014.

Likely on the list is an effort to abolish the state's reverse seniority law that essentially guarantees that veteran teachers keep their jobs during layoffs regardless of their performance at the expense of talented but-less senior colleagues; more money for early childhood education may also be on the table.

Teachers union critics say the tenure and seniority laws that were hobbled by the June ruling protect longtime educators who are ineffective while more proficient ones with less experience face layoffs first.

However, a new bill in the Legislature would change the law to give schools the power to take into account factors besides seniority, such as a teacher's performance, when making layoff decisions.

Unlike Torlakson, who has been endorsed by California's two main teachers unions and the state Democratic Party, Tuck opposes California's generous teacher tenure system, has challenged the law that bases teacher layoffs on seniority and believes strongly that student's standardized test scores should be a factor in teacher evaluations.

Under California state law, teachers with the least experience must be the first to go during budget - based layoffs, meaning seniority — rather than classroom performance, or a school's needs — dictates who stays and who goes.

Represented by Los Angeles law firm Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, the plaintiffs allege teacher protections such as tenure, seniority rules in layoffs and other teacher dismissal statutes disparately keep ineffective teachers in the classroom in violation of the state constitution's equal protection clause.

We are a team of 11 teachers who met together for four months to thoroughly review the teacher contract, New York State education laws, relevant research, recent legislative funding changes and alternative layoff policies across the country.

The California Supreme Court will decide this summer whether to take up an appeal by nine students in the historic Vergara vs. California case challenging our unusually protective teacher tenure laws, as well as a seniority - based layoff system that often keeps ineffective teachers in district classrooms while letting more talented but less senior teachers go.

The case of Vergara v. California seeks to overturn five laws involving teacher tenure, dismissals and the last - in, first - out layoff policies.

Last month, my organization, Students Matter, issued its support of California's AB 934 — a state bill that, though imperfect, honestly attempted to address the grave defaults in the state's teacher tenure, dismissal and layoff laws challenged by the student plaintiffs in Vergara v. California.

The lawsuit was filed by nine students in 2012 from different areas in California and challenge five specific state laws that involve teacher tenure, dismissal procedures and layoff laws.

California's employment laws are considered among the most generous in the country to teachers, allowing them to be granted permanent employment status after 18 months on the job, for example, and making layoff decisions based largely on seniority.

Yet to take center stage: Tenure reform and whether state law should allow teacher effectiveness to be a factor in layoffs — a virtual certainty during the next biennium.

The plaintiffs said the school system did not follow teacher tenure law in the layoffs, and that they should have been systematically rehired as schools reopened, either in the Orleans system, in the state Recovery School District or as charters.

Citing the constitutional rights of its public school student plaintiffs, the suit seeks to overturn state laws that schedule tenure consideration after two years of teaching, dictate the use of seniority when budget cuts force layoffs, and impose due process rules on teachers» terminations.

The landmark case in which in which a court found the state's laws regarding teacher tenure, firings and layoffs are unconstitutional has become a litmus test for public officials.

The law, titled SB7, makes teacher tenure and layoffs contingent on student achievement and makes it easier for school districts to dismiss tenured teachers deemed ineffective based on student performance.

Detroit's layoffs are not unprecedented, but they could signal a new trend toward mass layoffs for large school districts unsure of their finances but required by state laws to notify teachers of potential dismissals.

State laws defining teacher tenure, layoffs by seniority and dismissal procedures are at stake.

In the past year, a lawsuit challenging state laws on teacher tenure, dismissals and layoffs by seniority has consumed much of the debate over education in California.

Vergara v. State of California, in which a Superior Court judge struck down California's teacher tenure, layoff and dismissal laws, may be headed for a lengthy appeals process.

Via Edweek by Stephen Sawchuck A second lawsuit challenging New York laws governing teacher tenure, layoffs, and dismissals has been filed on behalf of seven schoolchildren in the state.

In part, the new law removed protection for tenured teachers during layoffs.

To make matters worse, New York's laws also make it illegal for schools to keep their best teachers when layoffs become necessary.