Opinion

Duncan v. Rochester Area School Board

  • 524 Pa. 254
  • 571 A.2d 365
  • 1990 Pa. LEXIS 63
Court
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Filed
Mar 12, 1990
Status
Published
Author
Larsen
On the bench
Flaherty, Larsen, McDERMOTT, McDermott, Nix, Papadakos, Zappala
Cited by
1 cases
Authority
More cited than 8.8%

The opinion

LARSEN, Justice,

dissenting.

I dissent.

*259 The majority clearly errs in finding that section 11-1125.1 of the Public School Code, Act of March 10, 1949, as amended, 24 P.S. § 1125.1, does not “compel the school to seek and achieve the furlough of the least senior employee possible.” Maj. op. at 258.

Section 1125.1(a) provides in relevant part that “[professional employes shall be suspended under section 1124 (relating to causes for suspension) in inverse order of seniority within the school entity of current employment.” (emphasis added) A plainer statement of the intent of the Legislature to make seniority the touchstone for making necessary professional staff cuts could not have been made. And, in fact, the debate accompanying passage of the bill regarding the suspension of teachers convinces me that our legislators specifically rejected any attempts to permit school districts to base realignment decisions on anything other than seniority and certification. See Legislative Journal — House at 1117-21, 1134-35, 1212-15 (June 4 and 6, 1979). Once again, the majority is impermissibly subjecting such decisions to the “unbridled, arbitrary discretion” of local school administrators. See Gibbons v. New Castle Area School District, 518 Pa. 443, 451 , 543 A.2d 1087, 1091 (1988) (Larsen, J., dissenting).

Appellant herein, James Duncan, had sixteen years of seniority and was “bumped” from his position in the science department when an administrator with more seniority and with certification in science and in physical education was realigned to the science department at a time of declining student enrollment. There was a teacher in the physical education department with only twelve years’ seniority. Due to the fact that appellant had more seniority than this physical education teacher, the school board was required by law to realign its professional staff so that appellant would have retained his job and so that the professional employee with the least seniority would have been furloughed. This statutorily mandated result would have been accomplished by realigning the administrator with dual certification to the physical education department.

*260 Accordingly, I would reverse the order of Commonwealth Court and I would reinstate the order of the Court of Common Pleas of Beaver County.

PAPADAKOS, J., joins this dissenting opinion.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.