Waiters v. Board of Education, Amityville Union Free School District, 46 N.Y.2d 885 (1979)
r
r
A school district cannot retroactively establish a special tenure area, particularly during times of fiscal constraint, to the detriment of teachers’ existing tenure and seniority rights; adequate notice must be given to teachers if a position is intended to be in a separate and distinct tenure area.
r
r
Summary
r
The Court of Appeals reversed the Appellate Division’s order, reinstating the Supreme Court’s decision. The case centered on remedial reading teachers whose positions were terminated. The Board of Education attempted to compute their tenure and seniority in a newly created, special remedial reading tenure area. The Court held that the school district could not retroactively create this tenure area to negatively impact the teachers’ pre-existing rights. The court emphasized that teachers must be adequately informed if their positions are designated within a separate and distinct tenure area. Since the teachers’ initial appointments indicated seniority would be measured in the elementary tenure area, the Board’s attempt to create a new tenure area was deemed impermissible.
r
r
Facts
r
r
Plaintiffs were employed as remedial reading teachers in the defendant’s elementary schools during the 1973-1974 and 1974-1975 academic years.r
In 1975, the Board of Education terminated their positions.r
Defendant computed the plaintiffs’ tenure and seniority rights in a special remedial reading tenure area.r
Plaintiffs argued their rights should be determined in the broader elementary tenure area.r
r
r
Procedural History
r
r
Plaintiffs initiated an action seeking a declaration regarding their tenure and seniority rights.r
The Supreme Court, Suffolk County, ruled in favor of the plaintiffs.r
The Appellate Division reversed the Supreme Court’s decision.r
The Court of Appeals reversed the Appellate Division’s order, reinstating the Supreme Court’s original order.r
r
r
Issue(s)
r
r
Whether a school district can retroactively establish a special tenure area during a period of fiscal exigency to recalculate teachers’ seniority and tenure rights when the teachers were not initially informed that their positions fell within a separate and distinct tenure area.r
r
r
Holding
r
r
No, because the school district failed to provide sufficient notice to the teachers that their positions were considered part of a separate and distinct tenure area. Furthermore, retroactive restructuring of tenure areas is not permitted. This is especially true when done during a period of fiscal constraint.r
r
r
Court’s Reasoning
r
r
The Court reasoned that while a school district could establish remedial reading as an independent tenure area, it cannot do so retroactively, particularly during times of fiscal exigency, to manipulate teachers’ seniority and tenure rights. The court emphasized the importance of providing teachers with clear notice if their positions are intended to be within a separate tenure area.r
r
The Court relied on the precedent set in Steele v Board of Educ., 40 N.Y.2d 456, stating that individuals hired for a position must be