A California Superior Court has invalidated the state’s teacher tenure, dismissal and layoff statutes in Vergara v. California (June 10, 2014). The Court held these statutes had a disproportionate effect on low-income and minority students, depriving them of their fundamental constitutional right to equality in education, by subjecting them to a disproportionately large share of ineffective teachers.
The California teacher tenure statute provides for tenure after less than two years (notification of non-renewal by March 15th of year 2), even before a new teacher completes the two year induction program. Most states provide for a longer review period before tenure is granted. The Court gave significant weight to the detrimental effect a grossly ineffective teacher can have on a student’s income potential and educational growth – loss of lifetime earnings of $1.4 million and loss of 9 months of educational development in one school year.
The Court ruled the tenure statute unconstitutional because it provided insufficient time to evaluate a teacher’s performance, and invalidated the dismissal statute because it set out a “tortuous process” (costing $50,000 to $450,000 during a 2-10 year process) to dismiss a tenured grossly ineffective teacher. The Court also threw out the layoff statute which provided for the last hired teacher to be the first fired when layoffs occur irrespective of qualifications. The Court stayed its decision pending appeal, which means the statutes challenged shall remain in effect for now.
This California decision has no direct impact upon Massachusetts statutes. However, the case may encourage similar challenges to the constitutionality of teacher tenure and dismissal statutes outside of California. Of course Massachusetts laws lack many of the features found intolerable by the Vergara Court, but many school districts have complained about the difficulties encountered when attempting to part ways with low performing teachers.
