Summary of Arbitration Awards

Issued Pursuant to General Laws Chapter 71 And Related Judicial Decisions

1. Introduction
2. Description of Awards
   1. Teacher Dismissals Pursuant to Section 42
   2. Supervisor Dismissals or Demotions Pursuant to Section 41
   3. Employee Suspensions Pursuant to Sections 42D and 42
   4. Teacher Lay-offs Pursuant to Section 42
   5. Procedural and Arbitrability Issues
3. Judicial Decisions

---

II. Description of Awards

D. Teacher Lay-offs Pursuant to Section 42

General Laws c. 71, § 42, ¶ 7 provides, in part:

Neither this section nor section forty-one shall affect the right of a superintendent to lay off teachers pursuant to reductions in force or reorganization resulting from declining enrollment or other budgetary reasons. No teacher with professional teacher status shall be laid off pursuant to a reduction in force or reorganization if there is a teacher without such status for whose position the covered employee is currently certified. No teacher with such status shall be displaced by a more senior teacher with such status in accordance with the terms of a collective bargaining agreement or otherwise unless the more senior teacher is currently qualified pursuant to section thirty-eight G for the junior teacher's position.

1. Holbrook Public Schools — June 14, 1996

   Teacher with professional teacher status [PTS] could arbitrate whether his lay-off for fiscal reasons violated section 42 because he asserted that the district retained a teacher without PTS with the same certificate. The arbitrator also ruled that the teacher's petition was timely because it was filed within 30 days after he learned that the teacher without PTS would be retained. The arbitrator upheld the lay-off because the teacher with PTS was not qualified to fill any other position. [13 pages]

   AAA# 11-390-01478-95
   Arbitrator Mark M. Grossman

2. Reading Public Schools & A.B. — December 3, 1996

   Termination of a social worker's position was based upon a reduction in force and not reorganization and notice was adequate under the contract. [Six pages]

   AAA# 11-390-02094-96
   Arbitrator Roberta Golick

3. Dedham Public Schools — July 31, 1998

   Chapter I teachers with certificates in elementary education, were not entitled to PTS and could not "bump" non-PTS elementary school teachers. The arbitrators found that other elementary school teachers were subject to far more rigorous hiring and evaluation procedures and had more responsibilities. In addition, the Chapter I teachers were paid a single salary rate which was much lower than the rates paid to the other elementary teachers. [Joint decision, 27 pages].
   

   AAA# 11-390-01698-95
   Arbitrator Gary D. Altman

   AAA# 11-390-01977-96
   and Arbitrator Mark L. Irvings

Last Updated: March 7, 2019