Teacher layoffs ahead: Should seniority prevail? Six considerations.

Thousands of teachers are being notified this spring that their jobs are in jeopardy – and many of those layoffs may actually occur, given the severe budget crises affecting state and local governments. The result is renewed scrutiny of the seniority rules that govern layoffs in many states. Just in the past month, Florida has done away with such rules, and Georgia is on its way.

- Amanda Paulson, Staff writer

Christian Science Monitor

1. How do seniority-based layoff rules work, and why is seniority a hot issue now?

It varies from state to state – often from district to district – but many superintendents are required to let people go strictly on the basis of seniority, with the most recently hired being let go first, regardless of performance.

For the first time in a couple of decades, teacher layoffs are likely to be both widespread and severe. Moreover, a great deal of attention has been paid recently to how much teacher effectiveness matters to student achievement.

There has also been renewed focus on attracting and training a cadre of talented, eager new teachers – many of whom now face the ax.

"When you put all this energy into developing new teachers … and suddenly you have to make substantial layoffs, and there's no system in place to do that in any other way than seniority, then people will challenge that," says Susan Moore Johnson, a professor at Harvard's Graduate School of Education.

2. What are the arguments for abolishing seniority-based layoffs?

Critics of "last in, first out" (LIFO) laws say that getting rid of them is a no-brainer. Why should a district have to lose one of its best teachers, while keeping a teacher whom everyone knows is a dud simply because the latter has put in more years? Such laws may seem fair to some teachers, they say, but they perform a huge disservice to students.

Moreover, LIFO laws can disproportionately affect high-needs schools, which typically have more new teachers. And they mean that more teachers will need to be laid off, since the newest teachers are also the cheapest for the district.

Michelle Rhee, founder of the advocacy group StudentsFirst and former chancellor of District of Columbia schools, has made getting rid of LIFO a core issue. "Right now we know that 85 percent of the people we're laying off shouldn't be laid off," she says. "We need to work at getting to a system that's rigorous, but also fair."

3. Why keep seniority?

The big defenders of seniority-based layoffs are, not surprisingly, the teachers unions. Seniority is a common tool for ensuring that layoffs aren't arbitrary, and that those who have put in the most time have the most job protection.

But even unions say they'd be open to other systems – once credible evaluations exist. In the absence of those, they believe that seniority is not only the most impartial way to conduct layoffs, but also gives weight to classroom experience.

"Experience does have value," says Rob Weil, director of field programs and educational issues for the American Federation of Teachers (AFT). "Is it a complete proxy for teacher quality? No. But it's the best we have as we move forward to get a better system."

Mr. Weil and others worry that more experienced – and more highly paid – teachers will be more vulnerable without protections.

4. If not seniority, then what?

While defenders of LIFO say no good alternative exists, critics disagree. A handful of states and districts already use performance as the main criteria – some for the first time this year.

No one believes teacher evaluation systems are where they need to be, but critics of LIFO say that isn't enough reason to omit performance-based factors when deciding who goes. Most districts still have some sort of evaluation system in place.

One proposal from The New Teacher Project, a nonprofit that advocates ranking performance over seniority, outlines a score card that would consider attendance, performance rating, classroom-management rating, years of service, and extra school responsibilities for each teacher, giving each a certain weight (with performance rating counting the most).

A number of the new laws already give metrics for ranking teacher performance: Typically, student learning growth – when it can be measured by tests – counts for a portion.

5. Are compromises possible?

Unions – the AFT in particular – have indicated a willingness to work toward better evaluation systems and, when they're agreed upon, to have those play a part in layoff decisions.

Those advocating for quality-based layoffs sometimes suggest using seniority as a sort of "tiebreaker" when deciding between two apparently equally able teachers.

Districts can also give themselves more leeway in firing decisions when they narrowly define qualifications and licensing categories, says Harvard's Professor Johnson. In some districts, a teacher displaced from one position has the right to displace a more junior teacher from another position, even if he or she is only barely qualified for that job. The more narrowly districts define job qualifications, the less likely that is to happen.

6. Which side has the momentum?

Some states are using the budget crisis and antiunion sentiment to move away from seniority rules. In recent months, Florida, Idaho, Utah, and Ohio have done away with LIFO, Georgia is on the verge of doing so, and a dozen or so other states have either introduced such legislation or are considering it.

"Prior to [StudentsFirst] getting started [in December], only three states across the country had what we considered the best LIFO language," says Ms. Rhee. "I think we'll see that number jump almost fourfold by the end of this legislative season."

Polling tends to show support for doing away with seniority-based layoffs. A recent StudentsFirst poll showed 74 percent of voters in favor of changing LIFO rules, and 43 percent of teachers wanting to change it. And a poll of teachers that The New Teacher Project conducted in two urban districts a year ago found 3 of 4 teachers believed factors other than seniority should be considered in layoff decisions.