Paul Blume's Columns - More excellent laws to help the schools (November 2003) Last month we cruised through the changes in the grievance laws. This month, we look at more attempts to help schools operate more efficiently as educational institutions. No, schools are not being turned into mere employers, with considerations of education being set aside. We really mean that. Really. In that vein, let’s look at the new law, Act 1120 of 2003, which amends A.C.A. §6-17 201 (personnel policies). The pre-amendment statute is located on page 166 of the green law book (or should it be Green Law Book?). You might want to peruse the statutes through 6-17-207 while you’re there, to familiarize yourself with the personnel policies committee laws. Act 1120 greatly expands what must be included in a school district’s personnel policies. Rather than allowing the elected board members to decide what should – and should not – be included in the personnel policies of the district they were elected to run, the new law imposes new requirements on you, none of which inures to the advantage of your district in terms of avoiding additional costs, inefficiencies and litigation. (Note: the ASBA’s Model Policy Service has been updated on this law). I have been preaching the gospel of putting as little as possible in your personnel policies for many years (and that is a guiding principle of the ASBA’s Model Policy Service, too). Act 1120 adds new requirements for things that have to be included in your policies, making it even more difficult to avoid lawsuits, etc. What Act 1120 requires is for your personnel policies to include: benefits, compensation, designation of work days (whatever that means), holidays and non-instructional days, the annual school calendar (so much for flexibility), methods of evaluations, extra duties (whatever that means), leave; grievances, dismissal or nonrenewal, reduction in force, and assignment of teacher aides. The upshot of all this is that all of these items are part of teachers’ contracts. A.C.A §6-17-204(a). (Page 167 in the Green Law Book). Since the personnel policy provisions are part of their contracts, we (and the teachers) have a contractual obligation to substantially comply with whatever is in our policy; and, if we don’t, we may be sued. We’ve recommended for years that districts avoid including dismissal laws in personnel policies. There’s a very good reason for that: Probationary teachers don’t have the right to appeal dismissal under the Arkansas Teacher Fair Dismissal Act. They may, however, sue a district for breach of contract. If there is no means of making a contract claim, there is, therefore, no lawsuit. The new law simply gives potential litigants more opportunities to sue you. Of course, the dismissal requirement isn’t the only part of the law that gives employees new ways to sue you. Almost any of those things on the list does the same thing. Not only that, but, prior to the enactment of Act 1120, you could take care of most of those things on the law’s list with considerable speed, flexibility, and efficiency. Now, each one of those things is dropped into the quagmire of the personnel policies law. That means that, if you want to change any of the things on the list above, (school calendar, for example), the board must go through the procedures as for any other personnel policy, requiring two votes by the board, a waiting time of at least ten working days between the votes, with any change not going into effect until the next July 1. Unless the personnel policies committee wants to set up a vote for all of the certified personnel to see if they’ll vote to make it effective right now. Not that that’s a cumbersome procedure. (I didn’t mean “quagmire.” I meant . . . well, yes, I did). Just goes to show you. Just because someone has what he thinks is a good idea doesn’t mean that it should become law. |
Get ready for the |
