Anderson

Anderson v. Los Angeles Unified School Dist. CA2/5

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 10, 2015B254806California6,498 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kriegler, J.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

There are no material disputes about the following facts. In 2009, LAUSD’s Governing Board authorized a reduction in force of over 3,000 probationary certified employees. The Board also initially authorized the layoff of approximately 2,000 permanent certified employees. However, all of the layoff notices for the permanent certified employees were later rescinded prior to becoming effective.

2 LAUSD had concerns that such a large loss of classroom teachers would negatively affect the stability of the schools and wanted to ensure the best possible continuity of instruction. Many substitutes only possess “emergency 30 day substitute teaching permits,” which prohibit them from providing services in any one classroom for more than 30 days in a school year. Utilizing these day-to-day substitutes serving under emergency permits would lead to constant teacher turnover in the classrooms. However, the recently laid-off probationary certified employees possess a California credential which authorized them to teach long-term substitute assignments of more than 30 days. The California Legislature determined that laid-off certified employees shall be offered priority for…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.