Editorial: A hitch in the Teacher Tenure Act

Star Tribune Editorial

You might think a job title is less important than pay and seniority to a public-sector employee. The odd case of former St. Paul Arlington High School Principal Patricia Murphy suggests otherwise.

Earlier this month the Minnesota Court of Appeals ordered St. Paul school district leaders to rethink their decision to make Murphy an assistant principal at another school -- with no loss of pay or seniority -- after Arlington closed.

The court stopped short of ordering that Murphy be reassigned as a principal, saying the issue should be resolved by the district, but it did find that she was demoted without notice in violation of the state's Teacher Tenure Act.

Although the court followed the letter of the law, its ruling highlights why the act needs a revision.

School superintendents and other top managers should have the flexibility to assign school leaders based on student needs -- not because someone feels entitled to a job or is next in line on a seniority list.

Murphy served as principal at Arlington from 2005 until last year. Citing a $27.2 million budget deficit, the district closed Arlington and transferred her to an assistant principal position at Como Park High School.

Murphy contested the new title, saying she would accept the job only if her title was "principal on special assignment" or "co-principal."

In a letter, the superintendent said any title other than "administrator" or "assistant principal" would lead to ambiguity over who led the school. Murphy was told she would retain her rank in the administrator pool and the higher salary she earned as a principal.

In her lawsuit, Murphy countered that her seniority under the tenure act entitled her to a principal position or to a notice and a hearing in the case of a demotion.

The appeals court agreed, ruling that Murphy's transfer met the definition of a demotion under state statutes because she would be subordinate to Como's principal.

Shifting top administrators has been common practice for many years in St. Paul and other school districts. In some, building leaders are switched annually.

Retirements and school closings or additions can change the lineup of principals. When schools close, there often are simply more principals than there are buildings.

Though the court ruled in favor of Murphy, it noted in a final comment that the St. Paul district and a brief filed by the Minnesota School Board Association had strong arguments.

The court recognized that the act must be applied in a way that protects administrators from arbitrary demotions and discharges -- but that the law should not impair the rights of school boards and superintendents to manage their school systems.

As the school board association brief pointed out: "There is a great need for public schools to retain the inherent managerial authority to determine the assignment of their employees. ... If schools are subject to challenge for every teacher reassignment decision because the teacher believes the assigned duties are beneath his or her present position, the public school system would not be able to manage its resources effectively."

The court found those arguments compelling, but rightly concluded that its role is to apply the law and that changing statutes is the job of the Legislature.

Appropriately, the Minnesota Association of School Administrators is lobbying to amend the Tenure Act to say that if an educator is moved to a new job but receives the same pay, the reassignment would not constitute a demotion.

In the interest of common sense -- and to provide school districts with a basic level of administrative flexibility -- the Legislature should act quickly on the association's request.

_______

Readers: What do you think? To offer an opinion considered for publication as a letter to the editor, write no more than 250 words to opinion@startribune.com. Include your name and the city where you live.

Follow us on Twitter @StribOpinion

Facebook: facebook.com/StribOpinion