School employees: teachers: termination: reappointment: seniority deviation.
Summary
Existing law provides that, when the services of employees are terminated pursuant to a reduction in workforce, a school district is required to terminate the employees in order of seniority. Existing law further provides those employees with a preferred right to reappointment and an opportunity for substitute service in order of seniority. Existing law authorizes a school district to deviate from the order of seniority for those purposes for specified reasons, including compliance with constitutional requirements related to equal protection of the laws. This bill would provide additional reasons for which a school district may deviate from terminating employees in order of seniority, including authorizing school districts to terminate an employee on the basis of performance evaluations and on the basis that the employee is assigned to a schoolsite that has implemented specific models of intervention and has been selected by the governing board of the school district for exemption from certificated reductions in workforce, based upon the needs of pupils in the educational program. The bill would provide an exception to this authorization for an employee who has 18 months or less from his or her date of retirement, or is on medical leave. The bill would prohibit a school district that deviates from the order of seniority for purposes of terminating a certificated employee from taking into consideration whether an employee has exercised any of the rights guaranteed in the Educational Employment Relations Act. The bill would also authorize a school district, during the period of an employee's preferred right to reappointment, to deviate from the order of seniority in offering the opportunity for substitute service for either of specified reasons. The bill would specify that the equal protection exception to the general requirement that terminations and reappointments occur in order of seniority applies to equal protection as that protection relates to pupils. The bill would make various nonsubstantive and clarifying changes.
Bill status
failed
1 of 4 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2013
Committee Review
Floor Vote
Governor
Introduced Feb 22, 2013
Last action Feb 3, 2014
Floor votes
How they voted
No floor votes recorded yet.
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
11
Key actions
2
Committee
5
Amendments
2
Jan 15, 2014
Lower · Passed
In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.
lower
May 16, 2013
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on ED.
lower
May 15, 2013
Introduced
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on ED. Read second time and amended.
lower
Apr 1, 2013
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on ED.
lower
Mar 21, 2013
Introduced
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on ED. Read second time and amended.
lower
Mar 21, 2013
Committee
Referred to Com. on ED.
lower
Feb 24, 2013
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 26.
lower
Feb 22, 2013
Introduced
Introduced. To print.
lower
1 primary · 7 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 947
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 947. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline