EMPLOYER DISCRIMINATION; DEFENSES – In General

Single Topic for Decision 1880E


View all topics for Decision 1880E

Full Decision Text (click on the link to view): Full Text

505.00000 – EMPLOYER DISCRIMINATION; DEFENSES
505.01000 – In General

The District met the burden of showing that it would have placed the teacher on administrative leave even if he had not engaged in protected activity. The District was unable to show that it would have non-reelected a probationary teacher regardless of his participation in protected activities, because there were discrepancies in the formal and informal evaluation forms offered to support the District’s position. An employee cannot cloak his or her own personal agenda in the veil of protected activity, and then seek the same insulation which such protected activities are afforded under EERA. Despite some troubling questions surrounding a teacher’s grading practices, the Board held that the District failed to carry its burden in showing that it would have chosen to non-reelect him regardless of his engagement in protected activities, because there were glaring inconsistencies underlying the District's decision to non-reelect him.