2 minute read
Publication Sneak Peek
Publication Sneak Peek: School Law Review
This segment features content from other AAEA publications. School Law Review is a quarterly publication available to subscribing districts. The following excerpt comes from the June 2022 issue.
RECENT COURT DECISIONS CONCERNING EMPLOYEES
Tabb v. Durham Pub. Schs., U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (March 2, 2022)
A drama teacher claimed that the district discriminated against him on account of his race in violation of Title VII when it refused to hire additional staff to assist him or pay him for additional work he performed. The district argued that it had legitimate reasons for not hiring an assistant or paying the teacher for extra work based on allotments determined by the district’s board that dictated hiring decisions, and those allotments were based on student enrollment, not race. Further, the teacher was not treated less favorably than other similarly situated white teachers since he received more supplemental pay than any other teacher and was not mandated to perform any extra work as part of his job.
The circuit court affirmed the lower court's dismissal of the case, concluding that the teacher failed to show that the district’s legitimate reasons for its actions were in any way based on the teacher’s race.
Cloutier v. Ledyard Bd. of Educ., U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut (December 17, 2021)
A teacher filed suit alleging the district violated Title VII based on her being subjected to a hostile work environment based on gender stereotypes involving repeated verbal and physical sexual harassment for over a year. The teacher identified as a male heterosexual and claimed that he was being harassed by eleven coworkers and supervisors who “branded” him regarding his sexual preferences based on male sex stereotypes and being different from the dominant form of masculinity.
The court declined to grant the district’s motion to dismiss the case, finding the teacher had presented significant evidence showing the harassment was severe and pervasive enough to warrant consideration by a jury.
