Layoffs

Layoffs, also known as reductions-in-force (RIFs), occur when a budget shortfall at the district level results in position cuts. In such a case because the shortfall is district-wide, and not the result of a school specific change in enrollment or budget as would be the case for excessing, districts are no longer contractually obligated to find new assignments for teachers. Teachers lose not just their current assignments, but their jobs within the district. In most districts, teachers are entitled to their positions when and if the district later resumes hiring.

States usually determine what aspects districts must consider in deciding who to layoff. 18 states require districts to consider performance, 22 states do not allow districts to use seniority as the sole factor, but 10 states require seniority to be considered or that it is the only factor considered. 19 states leave the layoff criteria up to the district?s discretion. For more information about state level policies see the last in first out (LIFO) section on the state policy issues page.

Teacher Contract Database Our database explores both layoff protocol and identifies the factors considered in layoff decisions as well as the length of time teachers are entitled to return to their jobs if the district later resumes hiring. For an overview of district policies in our database, see our most recent Teacher Trendline on the topic.

What the research shows

An analysis from the Center on Reinventing Public Education asserts that seniority-based layoffs cause more damage to programs and students than if layoffs were determined on a seniority-neutral basis. For example, if a district must cut its budget by 10 percent and lays off the most junior employees, it will need to layoff 14.3 percent of its workforce. On the other hand, if that district followed a seniority-neutral layoff policy only 10 percent of the workforce would need to be laid off.

Managing the Teacher Workforce by Dan Goldhaber looks at the consequences of LIFO and models a more progressive option to teacher layoffs in which teacher effectiveness rather than seniority drives the selection process (2011). While examining teacher layoffs in Washington State from 2008-2010, the authors demonstrate how teachers targeted for layoffs earned, on average, $15,000 less than those teachers deemed safe from layoffs. Had the districts looked at effectiveness rather than seniority, 10% fewer teachers would have faced possible layoff. Furthermore, the authors' research shows that layoffs by teacher effectiveness results in roughly 2 1/2 to 3 1/2 additional months of learning progress each year by students in affected classrooms..

Works Cited

Goldhaber, Dan. ?Managing the Teacher Workforce.? Education Next (2011).

Roza, Marguerite. "Seniority-Based Layoffs Will Exacerbate Job Loss in Public Education." Center on Reinventing Public Education (2009).