[ Home ] [ September, 2000 ] [ November, 2000 ] [ February, 2001 ] [ April, 2001 ] [ June, 2001 ] [ December, 2001 ] [ May, 2002 ] [ June, 2002 ] [ October, 2002 ] [ November, 2002 ] [ December, 2002 ] [ February, 2003 ] [ June, 2003 ] [ May, 2003 ] [ September, 2003 ] [ January, 2004 ] [ February, 2004 ] [ March, 2004 ] [ April, 2004 ] [ May-June 2004 ] [ September, 2004 ] [ October, 2004 ] [ November, 2004 ] [ January, 2005 ] [ February, 2005 ] [ March-April, 2005 ] [ May-June, 2005 ] [ September, 2005 ] [ March, 2006 ] [ June, 2006 ] [ October, 2006 ] [ November, 2006 ] [ January, 2007 ] [ March, 2007 ]

ROEA REPORTER

Contract Feature

PERSONNEL RECORDS

All of us have a personnel file at the board office. The contents of our files are determined by the Michigan Tenure Act and our contract language. Refer to Article XIV of the contract (page 41) for specific information on what is kept in a teacher's file.

The specific focus of this month's contract feature is disciplinary records that are kept in the personnel file. In bargaining in 2000, we added language to the contract that allows teachers in concert with the ROEA to remove disciplinary records which are at least four years old from the file. The procedure is to petition the superintendent to remove the record of discipline. Although the removal of disciplinary material is contractually at the discretion of the superintendent, it's a good idea to make the request. By working together we will be able to make an effective appeal to the superintendent, especially if there is not subsequent discipline in the file. 

There are two important reasons for removing discipline from the file. First, older discipline, regardless of it's merits or accuracy, affects the perceptions of administrators when dealing with subsequent issues. The ROEA recently grieved a teacher's disciplinary suspension. The purpose of the grievance was to rescind the disciplinary action which we felt was entirely without cause. At step III of the grievance procedure, which is a presentation to the superintendent or designee, the administrator pointed to older letters of discipline one of which was 15 years old as a basis for denying the grievance. The administrator's perception of the current situation was largely based upon older disciplinary records which conceivably could have been expunged from the file. When a record is expunged from the file it is returned to you and there is no longer any official representation of that incident.

Expunging a record is based on the positive assumption that we are all capable of professional change and growth. If the discipline was for just cause (and in my estimation most of the disciplinary situations with which we have been involved have not been for just cause; most have amounted to little more than a bad day for a principal) then the teacher has had four subsequent years of success that demonstrates professional growth. The reward should be the removal of the discipline. In situations where the discipline was arbitrary on the part of the administration, it should be out of your file as it is not a fair reflection of you.

The other reason to remove past discipline is requests for records under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). If an outside party makes a FOIA request, the district is legally compelled to give them the records requested. There are some limitations on what can be sent out, but discipline and teacher evaluations are accessible to the public. We currently have a FOIA request from a parent who wants to see a teacher's file. The Administration is working to prevent unnecessary disclosure of records while complying with the law. At some point, however, they may be forced to disclose evaluations or other specific documents requested by the parent.

Do not allow embarrassment about having been disciplined to hinder you from taking action. Given our administration's managerial bent (as opposed to a more professional tone), we have many teachers whose files contain discipline. Most of what I have seen is unwarranted and unprofessional. Generally, a principal decides to write up a teacher. The administration, based on the imaginary doctrine of 'principal perfectionism' always (and I mean always) supports the principal. The union then grieves the discipline as unjust. Often, the mutually agreed upon resolution of the grievance is to expunge the record after a period of time in which there are no subsequent related situations, a year being typical. We generally accept this as an adequate resolution because it usually takes about a year to go to arbitration. If we win in arbitration (which is not a foregone conclusion) the result is the same: the letter is expunged from the file. Sometimes, unions do not go to arbitration because an employee is not tangibly harmed (i.e. there is no loss of income) by a disciplinary letter. However, the letter is a precursor to potentially greater harm, allowing tangible harm to occur more readily. We are more prepared to go to arbitration when a teacher is suspended without just cause as tangible harm has occurred. We presently have one such situation scheduled for arbitration. In my dotage, however, I am beginning to think that if a letter of discipline has no merit then we should go to arbitration if we can't agree to remove the letter within a reasonable time period. Arbitration is more protective of the teacher which I believe justifies the cost of arbitration.

I have two disciplinary records in my file. One is for leaving my building five minutes early. I wasn't AWOL. Ironically enough, I left to go to the board office to represent a teacher who wanted a disciplinary letter expunged from his file. The teacher was Tom Steeby. Tom had a letter from a principal dating back to the early nineties which mischaracterized the contents of a private conversation that Tom had with the principal. The district had no qualms about expunging the document. (I would say that Tom owes me one, but Tom has paid me one several times over.) My disciplinary letter is due to be expunged at the end of this year as a resolution of our grievance that it was without merit. The other letter that I have is a disciplinary letter for not using the SEMS system to call in an absence. Even though the building principal and secretary, as well as the social work secretary and substitute office secretary were all informed of my absence (in other words, about half of the district knew I was absent) the administration nevertheless enjoyed a disciplinary romp at my expense. The point of these examples is that lots of us are disciplined and the discipline is often without cause and pointless. 

Situations are not always within our control. No one plans on acting in a way which would provoke a disciplinary response. And any parent or older student can make a FOIA request to see a file. These are, "there but for the grace of god, go I," situations. Don't unnecessarily interpret discipline as a reflection upon you. If the discipline is a fair representation of something that occurred, and that something hasn't occurred for 4 years, then that is ample evidence of your professional growth. Spring is a good time for cleaning. So clean up, clear out, feng shui your file as some documents in it can damage your reputation or your career. 

Editor's note: For teachers who began their career prior to 1966, your file may contain material that was placed into the file without your knowledge. The contract stipulates that after 1966, teachers must be informed of any material that is put into their file. You may want to check your file for such material. Teachers can call Nancy Dougher, Sandra Standel's secretary, to make an appointment to review your file. You can also contact the ROEA.

Lay-Offs and Benefits

Due to a decline in student enrollment and reduced state funding, some of our newer teachers may be laid-off. If you are laid-off, keep in mind that your medical benefits are covered through August 31st regardless of whether you receive 21 or 26 paychecks. Additionally, your MESSA benefits may extend for a short period of time beyond that. Contact our MEA Uniserv Director, Paul Chambers at 248/358-4770 for information about MESSA benefits when laid-off. You're eligible for unemployment benefits after you receive your last paycheck.

In terms of unemployment compensation eligibility there is an advantage to receiving 21 pays as you are then eligible for unemployment benefits in June. There is another advantage to taking 21 pays. If you use direct deposit at the credit union, you will make a few dollars more interest over the course of the year. With direct deposit, your money goes directly to the credit union and whatever accounts that you designate for the deposit.

There are advantages to taking 21 pays and no disadvantages other than the need to plan summer finances more carefully. Newer teachers ought to consider it as the district may experience lay-offs in future years. You can call Marilyn Sokolowski in the finance office, 248/435-8400, extension 214 for the forms you need to make a change.

CLASSIFIED

All of the people who advertise in the REPORTER are connected to the ROEA. They are either members of the union, spouses of members, or retired teachers. You can expect a high quality of service and commitment to the needs of fellow union members as a result. Classified ads are also posted on our web site, ROEA.com!