Late May and Early June are known as the best months of the year as the weather warms and teachers see the goal line to the end of the school year and hopefully enjoy the summer months. Unfortunately, this time period is also marked by the DOE's issuance of 3020-a termination charges to far too many teachers due to incompetence, time and attendance, and minor misconduct. In, the last couple of years has seen a rise in teachers getting 3020-a charges due to field supervisor "flyby observations" to rotating ATRs, appointed teachers receiving two consecutive "ineffective" ratings and Principal directed minor misconduct such as insubordination, lateness, and even buying and charging for books!
The question is who decides on 3020-a charges against a teacher? The Principal? The Superintendent? Chancellor Carmen Farina? The answer is the DOE's Office of Legal Services. This Office of lawyers and support staff exploded during the Bloomberg years going from a dozen or so lawyers to 200. Many of them filing and prosecuting the charges against the teacher in the 3020-a termination process. While the other actors can recommend termination, its solely up to the DOE's Office of Legal Services to actually approve the filing of 3020-a termination charges.
The Office of Legal Services is split into two parts The Administrative Trials Unit (ATU) that prosecutes alleged misconduct against teachers and the Teacher Performance Unit (TPU) that goes after teacher incompetence. Both groups ask for teacher termination and few cases are settled under the new approved 3020-a process jointly agreed to be the DOE and our disconnected union leadership. The more favorable rules for the DOE lawyers has resulted in teachers no longer able to call in character witnesses unless they were involved in the charges and the union quietly agreeing to allow field supervisor observations and recommendations to be used as evidence against the teacher in the 3020-a process.
At one time the Office of Legal Services were much more discriminating about the cases they prosecuted and settled many cases before going into the 3020-a hearing or wanted more evidence from the Principal before wasting time and money on these cases. However, under Bloomberg and Klein that started to change as Principals clamoring to get rid of their veteran or trouble making teachers by contacting the Office of Legal Services on frivolous charges in the hopes that they get permission to remove the teacher and their high salary. Principals are dumping teachers into the ATR pool by filing a Technical Assistance Committee (TAC) memo and get rid of the teacher once and for all from the school. More often then not the Office of Legal Services complied and had the teacher removed.
Under Chancellor Carmen Farina nothing has changed, the Office of Legal Services has not shrunk and the 3020-a process against teachers has become more difficult to survive termination, previously it was a 25% termination rate, however, the latest numbers are higher (55% left the DOE after their hearing) and that's before the new, more stringent rules in the 3020-a process that favors the DOE were enacted this February.
While administrators can recommend 3020-a charges its only the Office of Legal Services who can actually file such charges and they are happy to do it as they attempt to take a teacher's livelihood away.
11 comments:
Chaz, in your many years of experience, do most teachers "see it coming" when it comes to 3020a charges? In other words, do most teachers get multiple letters to file, counseling memos, etc, before the DOE brings 3020a charges? Or rather, do you see many teachers get hit with 3020a charges "out of the blue" around May/June?
You mixed apples and oranges in your data. 25% terminatedvs 55% leaving. Those are not the same. btw.. Is there such a thing as a teacher deserving of termination? Or, to quote Kipling (I think) are all the brothers valiant and all the sisters virtuous?
There is a process to open you up to 3020a charges so you'll know when they are working their way to charge you. When you see mny lies and fabrication...usually an indicator of them moving towards 3020a.
What is that process? As mentioned above, do many teachers who otherwise have effective ratings get hit with 3020a or is there usually a link with developing ratings? I would especially like to hear stories of effective rated teachers who might have been hit out of the blue with 3020a at the end of the year. Does this happen? Specific examples would help.
Anon 4:02 Anybody can be hit with 3020-a charges for misconduct but the DOE would not waste their time and energy to try to terminate an "effective" rated teacher on incompetence charges.
From my understanding, arbitrators want to see that admins provided assistance for any struggling teachers before they bring up 3020a charges. Is this true?
Part of that process is getting older.
Avoid birthdays like the plague. Also, approaching retirement or a higher pay scale will get you under target.
yes very true anon 604. They have a playbook plan of assistance they have to follow to show they attempted to help you improve.
3020a charges= either two developings, two ineffectives, a dev and ineffective or misconduct charge. Any of these 3 may lead to 3020a charges.
Hi Chaz,
I am a veteran DOE teacher in Manhattan [HS]. I am starting to hear rumors that there will be a big announcement in the next few days concerning classroom observations next year - especially that Sups and others will be doing observations unannounced in all schools as "outside observers." Are you hearing about anything like this?
Can a teacher who is charged under 3020a return to their original school, after serving their penalty? Can the Principal ask for that teacher to be returned to the school?
My husband was recently terminated, as a veteran teacher with over 25 yrs of service with of course a high pay tier, but based on incompotence and misconduct, which is obviously their bases for terminating high salaried teachers. We have recently appealed his termination with the NY Supreme Court and are now waiting for the next step. We hired outside counsel and an advocate, as we knew going into the 3020A that the Union aand DOE systematically pick Arbitrators that by the way get paid by the DOE, making it biase for the DOE. What have you seen as far as teachers getting their jobs back based on the Supreme Court decision? Favorable or not?
Post a Comment