Appeals Court Answers a Question “Left Open” for Forty Years and Decides That School Districts Cannot Withhold Professional Teacher Status from Teachers Who Had Time of Service Interrupted by Protected Leave Once the Teacher Works the Number of Missed School Days to Complete “Three Consecutive Years”

On October 25, 2024, the Massachusetts Appeals Court issued a decision in Chaloff v. Westwood Public Schools, 105 Mass. App. Ct. 13 (2024). The decision reversed a ruling by the Superior Court which denied a claim brought by a teacher who argued that taking parental leave under G.L. c. 149, §105D should not require her to work an additional year to qualify for Professional Teacher Status (“PTS”). This was a previously unanswered question and many districts, like Westwood, relied on the cases decided under the “tenure” statute that pre-dated the 1993 Education Reform Act as well as the language in G.L. c. 71, §41. The latter statute provides that a teacher must serve “three previous consecutive school years” in order to obtain PTS.

PTS elevates a teacher from “at-will” employment and carries procedural and substantive safeguards from adverse employment actions, including a requirement that the teacher can only be dismissed for “just cause”. It is achieved when a person completes the required three previous consecutive school years unless the teacher is notified no later than June 15 that employment will not be offered for the next school year. (Some School Committees have a date for notification that is earlier than June 15.)

The teacher in this case was initially hired through a one-year contract for the 2016-2017 school year. Upon completion of the first school year, she received a second contract for the 2017-2018 school year. The teacher then submitted a request for maternity leave to be taken during the fall of that second year, and Westwood granted the leave in accordance with G.L. c. 149, §105D. She returned to work after taking leave for fifty-six days, completed that second school year, and was then hired under a third contract for the 2018-2019 school year.

During the third school year, the teacher met with her school’s principal and was informed that because she had taken a maternity leave of absence during the 2017-18 school year, she would be required to work another year in non-professional teacher status. The teacher was also informed by the assistant superintendent that requiring an extra year in non-professional teacher status was regular practice for teachers in Westwood whose employment had a significant interruption. The teacher also signed an agreement acknowledging she was in a provisional teacher status.

The teacher received a fourth contract extending her employment for the 2019-2020 school year and worked the remainder of that school year. In May she was notified she would not be hired for the next school year ending her employment with Westwood.

The teacher’s lawsuit and appeal claimed that she had achieved PTS by working fifty-six days into the fourth year.

The Appeals Court answered “a question of law that was expressly left open in Solomon v. School Comm. of Boston, 395 Mass. 12, 19 (1985)”. Westwood contended that by working fifty-six days in the fourth year the teacher could not obtain PTS because Westwood required an evaluation of teacher performance based on a complete school year of at least 180 days.

The Court disagreed. It held that by working fifty-six days into the fourth school year the teacher had accumulated the necessary length of service to satisfy the requirement of three consecutive school years in § 41. The Court reaffirmed that protected leave does not interrupt a teacher’s service for the purpose of obtaining PTS. It further ruled that “excused” absences do not weigh against calculation of the three years, that an employee’s service is safeguarded when the employee takes leave under the protected leave statute, and that it was unlawful to impose any other penalty as a result.

The decision shows that courts will consider a teacher to have attained PTS even if completion of the “three consecutive years” occurs in the midst of a school year so long as the missed days being worked were covered by protected leave

This decision emphasizes the need for school districts to accurately calculate the number of days a non-PTS teacher misses during a school year due to statutorily protected leave. School districts have full authority to non-renew a non-PTS teacher for any lawful reason but may inadvertently lose that right if they fail to properly calculate the three years of service. It is important to note that there appear to be other related questions that have not been resolved by this decision. It is essential that school districts that have questions about a specific circumstance consult with counsel.

We are pleased to provide advice to employers regarding when employees have earned an entitlement to PTS including issues involving breaks in service due to protected leave.

This update is provided for informational purposes only and should not be considered legal advice.