Friday, May 01, 2009

SUPREME COURT JUSTICE SLAMS DOE FOR REFUSING TO REMOVE “DISCIPLINARY “LETTER TO FILE

In a strongly worded decision Justice Sheila Abdus-Salaam has criticized the DOE for its failure to remove a letter to the file and arguing, as it had before, the same legal argument that was rejected by the court last year. As we reported here before Justice Salaam was one of the Justices who forced the removal of disciplinary letters as no due process hearing was afforded the tenured teacher.

In the current case, PS 41’s physical education teacher, Helen Hickey brought an Article 78 proceeding to challenge her principal’s placement of a letter that led to a “U” rating. The letter concerned Hickey’s actions during a May 2008 Field Day. According the Court, “The thrust of the letter is that Hickey did not competently organize and set up the equipment and that as a result, the activities began 20 minutes late. The letter states, among other things, that Ms. Hickey’s conduct demonstrated her incompetence and her “unsatisfactory professional attitude’’ and advises that “. . this incident may lead to further disciplinary action including unsatisfactory rating and charges that can lead to your termination.” (June 3, 2008 letter, p. 2.) Petitioner has alleged, and respondent has admitted that this letter is a reprimand

“Given that the letter speaks of “further disciplinary action,’ the court concludes that the letter is at least, in part, a disciplinary reprimand and not simply a critical administrative evaluation.”

The Court ordered the removal of the letter but would not reject the “U” rating since Hickey’s administrative appeals were not exhausted.

Hickey v. NYC/BOE, Index No. 112353/2008, New York Supreme Court, 1/29/09 Click here for the full decision.


7 comments:

  1. I had a similar problem but my union rep would not refer my case to the lawyers. What do I have to do, pay for my own lawyer.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I am in a same situation as anon, how to proceed with lawsuit?

    ReplyDelete
  3. If the Union isn't helping, what can we do? We are not lawyers.

    ReplyDelete
  4. If the UFT won't provide legal assistance, could you call NYSUT directly?

    ReplyDelete
  5. I had a letter just like this put into my file. I t had exactly the same wording. what do these principals do use a fill in the blank form when tthey write letters in the file.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Shy isn't the UFT taking every one of them to court?

    ReplyDelete
  7. This case was brought by a private attorney from Brooklyn.

    ReplyDelete

●Comments are moderated.
●Kindly use your Google account. ●Anonymous comments only from Google accounts.
●Please stay on topic and use reputable sources.
●Irrelevant comments will not be posted.
●Try to be respectful; we are professionals.