Sign Up For Our Newsletter

Bill Hetherman, Los Angeles Daily News

In a major blow to teachers’ unions, a Los Angeles judge ruled Tuesday that state laws governing tenure and the firing of teachers are unconstitutional, saying students and educators alike are “disadvantaged” by the statutes.

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Rolf M. Treu issued an injunction blocking tenure laws for public school teachers but placed a stay on the ruling pending an appeal.

“This court finds that both students and teachers are unfairly, unnecessarily and, for no legally cognizable reason — let alone a compelling one — disadvantaged by the current permanent employment statute,” the judge wrote in his 16-page ruling.

Treu noted that teachers have a right to due process when they are being targeted for dismissal.

“However, based on the evidence before this court, it finds the current system required by the dismissal statutes to be so complex, time consuming and expensive as to make an effective, efficient yet fair dismissal of a grossly ineffective teacher illusory,” he wrote.

The lawsuit was filed in May 2012 by an advocacy group called Students Matter on behalf of nine young plaintiffs, alleging the laws violate students’ constitutional rights to an equal education. The suit named the state and two teachers’ unions that later intervened as defendants — the California Teachers Association and the California Federation of Teachers.

Plaintiffs’ attorney Theodore Boutrous argued during the trial that five laws should be deemed unconstitutional, saying tenure and other laws made it too time consuming and expensive to dismiss ineffective educators.

“Teaching is the one profession in the world where you cannot tell a person they are not doing a good job,” he said in his closing argument.

But lawyer James Finberg, representing the teachers’ unions, countered that the laws help prevent faculty from being hired and retained for reasons involving favoritism and politics. In as little as three months, he argued, an administrator can make a “well-informed decision” as to whether a probationary teacher should be retained.

“The statutes should not be struck down on the basis of a handful of anecdotes,” Finberg said.

Joshua Pechthalt, president of the California Federation of Teachers, condemned the ruling.

“We are clearly disappointed by the decision of this judge,” he said. “We’re disappointed, but not particularly surprised, given his comments during the trial. We believe the judge fell victim to the anti-union, anti-teacher rhetoric of one of America’s finest corporate law firms.”

Alex Caputo-Pearl, president-elect of United Teachers Los Angeles, the union representing Los Angeles Unified School District teachers, also blasted the decision. “This decision today is an attack on teachers, which is a socially acceptable way to attack students,” he told KABC (Channel 7).

Boutrous, however, hailed the decision as a “monumental day for California’s public-education system.”

“By striking down these irrational laws, the court has recognized that all students deserve a quality education,” he said. “Today’s ruling is a victory not only for our nine plaintiffs, it is a victory for students, parents and teachers across California.”

LAUSD Superintendent John Deasy called the ruling “historic,” adding, “Every day that these laws remain in effect is an opportunity denied. It’s unacceptable and a violation of our education system’s sacred pact with the public.”

Deasy said he’ll be calling on legislators to create new laws and “a more expedited way to dismiss folks who are either incompetent or committed egregious acts.”

Still, he opposes plans to appeal the ruling, which leaves existing tenure laws in place. “I think it’s a shame for students. We’re going to go down the route of an appeal and continue to watch unconstitutional laws remain on the books.”

School board member Tamar Galatzan also supported the judge’s decision. “The Vergara ruling is the first step toward being able to guarantee that we have great teachers in every LAUSD classroom — and classrooms around the state,” she said.

“It is now up to the Legislature to pass laws that provide equal opportunity and provide equal access to a high-quality education.”

Today’s ruling will not affect ongoing negotiations with the district’s teachers’ union, United Teachers Los Angeles, Deasy said.

One of the plaintiffs, high school freshman Julia Macias, said the ruling “means that kids like me will have a real chance to get a great education and succeed in life. With this case, we have shown that students have a voice and can demand change when we stand together.”

Finberg, the unions’ attorney, argued during the trial that the plaintiffs based much of their arguments on teacher tenure histories in Los Angeles and Oakland and did not take into sufficient consideration how their performances are overseen in the more than 1,000 other districts statewide.

He pointed to testimony of former El Monte Union High School District Superintendent Jeff Seymour, who said new teachers are carefully screened by administrators to ensure they are meeting the proper standards.

In his Jan. 27 opening statement, Deputy Attorney General Nimrod Elias said the laws protecting teacher tenure help school districts statewide attract educators who might otherwise be dissuaded by what they may consider low pay and difficult working conditions.

Elias said there is no evidence of a connection between the laws and the poor academic performances by students at some poor and minority schools.

In his ruling, Treu wrote that the plaintiffs proved the tenure statutes “impose a real and appreciable impact on students’ fundamental right to equality of education and that they impose a disproportionate burden on poor and minority students.”

Treu also lambasted “last-in, first-out,” the rules that govern seniority and teacher layoffs.

“The last-hired teacher is the statutorily mandated first-fired one when layoffs occur,” the judge wrote. “No matter how gifted the junior teacher, and no matter how grossly ineffective the senior teacher, the junior gifted one, who all parties agree is creating a positive atmosphere for his/her students, is separated from them,, and a senior, grossly ineffective one who all parties agree is harming the students entrusted to her/him is left in place.

“The result is a classroom disruption on two fronts — a lose-lose situation. Contrast this to the junior efficient teacher remaining and a senior incompetent teacher being removed — a win-win situation — and the point is clear.”

Daily News education reporter Thomas Himes contributed to this report.

Sean Higgins, Washington Examiner

A California Superior Court judge ruled Tuesday that the state’s teacher tenure laws were unconstitutional, dealing a severe blow to the public sector unions who had fought to keep the status quo intact.

Judge Rolf Treu ruled in favor of nine students who sued the state, saying the tenure policies undermined their education by making it almost impossible for bad teachers to be fired.

California law allows teachers to become eligible for tenure after less than two years on the job. Firing a teacher, on the other hand, could take as long as a decade and cost the state as much as $450,000 — when it even tries. In practice, dismissals are rare.

Teachers unions defended the laws as necessary for job security, persevering academic freedom and to attract talented educators.

The students countered that teachers often came to class poorly prepared and gave them little motivation.

Treu found the students’ case more compelling and noted that the current system hurts the disadvantaged the most: “Substantial evidence presented makes it clear to this court that the challenged statutes disproportionately affect poor and/or minority students.”

He relied heavily on this point, saying the evidence was not only clear but “shocks the conscience.” The decision even begins by citing Brown v. Board of Education, the landmark 1954 school desegregation case.

“There is also no dispute that there are a significant number of grossly ineffective teachers currently active in California classrooms,” Treu wrote. Citing the evidence presented in the case, he put the number at between 2,750 to 8,250, adding that this has a “direct, real, appreciable and negative impact” on students.

The case, named Vergara v. California, was filed in 2012. The state and the California Teachers Association, the state branch of the National Education Association, were the defendants.

The ruling orders that five state education code statutes relating to teacher tenure be stayed pending appeals court review.

California has one of the largest school systems in the nation with an estimated 275,000 active teachers and 6 million students.

The case has been closely watched, especially by the education community, state and local government officials and activists.

“It will encourage reformers and families in other states to file similar suits to end similar laws on the books,” said RiShawn Biddle, editor of the website Dropout Nation.

Kara Kerwin, president of the nonprofit Center for Education Reform, agreed, calling it a “monumental affirmation” but added that it will not mean overnight change, noting that the appeals process would have to play out first.

National Education Association President Dennis Van Roekel called the ruling “deeply flawed” and portrayed it as little more than an attack on teachers by conservative groups.

“Let’s be clear: This lawsuit was never about helping students, but is yet another attempt by millionaires and corporate special interests to undermine the teaching profession and push their own ideological agenda on public schools and students while working to privatize public education,” he said.

American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten tweeted: “Sad day in Cali- but not unexpected that lower court would find that for students to win, teachers have to lose #Vegara”.