LOYAL DAILY DAWG READERS: WE’RE ZOOMING THIS THURSDAY AT 10:00 A.M. HOPE YOU CAN JOIN ME AND MY SPECIAL GUEST, HALEY TURNER. HALEY IS JOINING ME ON THE ANNUAL “BACK TO SCHOOL” TOUR THIS YEAR. WE’LL GIVE YOU A PREVIEW OF WHAT TO EXPECT.
Mr. Romero, a teacher/coach, admitted to some inappropriate behavior. Late at night, while intoxicated, he sent some “non-work related electronic communications to female students.” The court’s opinion tells us that some of these communications were “sexually suggestive.” He also “invited two female students to his home to drink alcohol.”
The district accepted the man’s resignation which would be effective as of the end of the 2018-19 school year. But since the resignation was submitted on March 1, there was still a good chunk of the school year to go. The contract ran to the end of the year. The district did not want to pay Mr. Romero for the remainder of the year, and so it suspended him “without pay.”
It’s that “without pay” part that became a legal issue. After receiving notice of this action, Mr. Romero requested a hearing as per Chapter 21 of the Texas Education Code. Teachers are entitled to a hearing when the school proposes to terminate a term contract. They are also entitled to a hearing when the school proposes to “suspend without pay.” Notice that the district suspended Mr. Romero prior to any hearing.
The Court of Appeals for the First District of Texas ruled in favor of Mr. Romero. Citing prior rulings the court said:
We agree with the Commissioner’s position that, once a teacher has requested a hearing, the provisions of subchapter F, including the holding of an IME [we’re pretty sure the court means IHE, Independent Hearing Examiner] hearing, must be complied with before the District can suspend the teacher’s pay.
This puts school boards in an awkward position sometimes. Consider this situation, where the teacher has admitted to conduct that clearly amounts to “good cause” sufficient to justify termination of employment. Consider the fact that it could have been worse. What if the students had joined the educator for a few drinks? What if the facts showed not just “sexually suggestive” comments, but sexual misconduct? Regardless of any of that, this case holds that districts cannot cut off the teacher’s pay until a formal hearing has been conducted. That takes time.
But that’s the ruling of a Court of Appeals. It’s Sheldon ISD v. Romero, decided by the Texas Court of Appeals for the First District on July 14, 2022. It can be found at 2022 WL 2720462.
DAWG BONE: WANT TO SUSPEND WITHOUT PAY? CALL YOUR LAWYER!
Got a question or comment for the Dawg? Let me hear from you at jwalsh@wabsa.com.
Tomorrow: Toolbox Tuesday tackles bullying…