10/06/2014

By: Brittany Flaherty Theis

Administrator contracts often include provisions regarding tenure. As debate and concerns regarding Illinois Pension Reform have grown over the past several months, many school districts in Illinois reviewed their administrator contracts, so tenure provisions are likely fresh on the minds of many administrators and school boards. The Illinois Third District Appellate Court recently reiterated that school districts may require teachers who voluntarily seek promotions to non-tenured administrative positions to relinquish the ability to return to the tenured teaching staff. The issue arose in Medina v. Board of Education of the City of Chicago, where Lillian Medina, who was dismissed as an assistant principal for failing to obtain the necessary certification, claimed she was entitled to a tenured teacher position and could only be terminated for cause and after a hearing pursuant to section 34-85 of the School Code.

Medina began working for the Board as a teacher in 1984 and accepted a position as an assistant principal in 2007. When she accepted the position, she signed a form acknowledging that she was required to possess a Type-75 certificate and that by accepting the administrative position she was relinquishing the right to bump back into a teaching position. Medina had not obtained the requisite certification by 2011 and was terminated following an assistant principal dismissal hearing. At that hearing, Medina argued she was still a tenured teacher and could not be terminated except for cause related to her performance as a teacher. She also argued that the Board’s rules providing for a tenured teacher’s relinquishment of that status upon acceptance of an assistant principal position run contrary to the provisions of the School Code and her property interest in her tenured position. Thus, the primary issue on appeal was whether Medina retained her status as a teacher to which she would revert upon being dismissed as an assistant principal, which the appellate court held she did not.

Specifically, the court stated “[i]t defies logic to suggest that when the Board has cause to terminate an administrator, it is nonetheless obligated to continue to employ that person as a tenured teacher.” Further, “Medina’s argument would mean that no matter the cause for an assistant principal’s dismissal, that employee would always, and without exception, revert to a tenured teacher position. This is so because the grounds for dismissal of an assistant principal (or any other managerial employee) will always relate to conduct in that administrative position and not as a tenured teacher.” Such a construction is contrary to the strict construction of teacher tenure mandated by Illinois law. Notably, Medina’s loss of tenure resulted from her voluntary decision to seek and accept a promotion to a non-tenured position, and at that time she was aware that: 1.) her decision resulted in the relinquishment of her right to return to a tenured teacher position, and 2.) her right to remain in the assistant principal position was contingent on her obtaining a Type-75 certificate, which she failed to do. The court affirmed the decision of the Board dismissing Medina as an assistant principal.

Whitt Law has multiple attorneys with experience drafting administrator contracts, the dismissal process applicable to administrators and teachers, and various other facets of employment law. Whitt Law closely follows the developments regarding teacher tenure laws. Please contact Whitt Law Partner Rick Petesch with questions or for more information on these or other school law topics.