(Mensaje se repite en Español)

One fundamental principal of any honest legal system is that those who are party to a dispute are not allowed to call all the shots as to what is relevant and what is not in investigating and fairly resolving the dispute. If this were allowed to take place, that party's own actions or interests in arriving at a predetermined unfair result would never be scrutinized by a truly neutral party. And yet that is precisely what has now gone on for years at the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) without any outside governmental intervention in a process where thousands of teachers have not only been removed from their jobs based on completely fabricated charges, but it has also subsequently led to their being blacklisted in a manner that almost assures they will never work again as a teachers in any setting.

The euphemistically named Student Safety Investigation Team (SSIT) at LAUSD- that sounds and seems to function in a manner similar to the Committee of Public Safety in the French Revolution- who determined those who were to be sent to the guillotine- now has 15 members, including six full-time investigators, four LA school police, two forensic specialists and one supervising investigator. However, the problem here is that SSIT is headed by 30 year LAUSD veteran José Cantu, who in no way shape or form is independent enough from LAUSD to be given the power of a sole arbiter as to whether predominantly senior teachers should lose their jobs- especially when LAUSD has the strong incentive of saving $60,000 a year for every top-of-the-salary scale teacher they remove.

One might also note as past LAUSD Board President Richard Vladovic pointed out that, "No exculpatory evidence of innocence or right-doing is ever presented to the LAUSD Board in actions brought before it to terminate [these expensive teachers]."

So what ensues is a completely one-sided process where a file is built that not only fabricates charges against teachers, it also solicits false statements in support of these fabricated charges, which LAUSD students and employees seeking to ingratiate themselves with their superiors are only too happy to give- especially since their statements are not verified under penalty of perjury as the law requires- but this fact continues to be ignored.

Faced with the daunting task of trying to defend oneself without any help from your union United Teachers Los Angeles (UTLA), most teachers without the financial or emotional ability to sustain and defend themselves for what becomes years against this formidable array of LAUSD power, jump at the chance to resign, when they are told by LAUSD, "We will take no further action against you if you resign." What they don't tell these teachers is that this "no action" doesn't include reporting them to California Teacher Credentialing (CTC), where they might have their credential suspended or lifted.

But if losing your job or having your credential lifted or suspended in this rigged process is not enough, what subsequently takes place is even worse. As teachers apply for other jobs with another school district or private school, they are faced with the following all too common job application questions that assure they will never work again as teachers. If they answer yes to any of them, their application will never make it past the initial screening. And if they answer no and are ultimately discovered, that is in and of itself grounds for teachers being fired by their new school:

Common Teacher Job Application Questions

- "Have you ever been discharged, dismissed, or not reemployed for the ensuing school year, pursuant to Education Code Section 44949, from any position because of misconduct or unsatisfactory service."

- "Have you ever had teaching or administrative credential suspended or revoked?"

- "Have you ever resigned a teaching position or other employment in lieu of disciplinary action?"

- "Have you ever left a teaching or administrative position without official approval of the governing board?"

- "Is any adverse action pending against any credential you hold which authorizes public school service or teaching in California or any other state?"

What these questions and others like them amount to is a presumption of guilt on the part of a teacher who has never received anything even remotely resembling due process of law in determining his or her guilt or innocence.

And of course, if a prospective employer calls LAUSD Human Resources, the conversation goes something like this:

New School: Did Leonard Isenberg ever work at LAUSD


New School: Can you give us the dates?

LAUSD HR: Yes, he worked from 1988 until 2010.

New School: Can you tell us anything more?


So in fact, if you resign, LAUSD will say nothing negative about you...but I don't think the silence is going to get you another job no matter how impressive your resume or teaching skills.

Robert F. Kennedy

"Each time a man stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope, and those ripples build a current which can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance."
― Robert F. Kennedy

If you or someone you know has been targeted and are in the process of being dismissed and need legal defense, get in touch:

Blogs We Love

Do you find the media and their "teachers-suck," "power to principals," "privatization is the best thing that's happened to public schools" disgusting and distasteful? The powers that be may "control" the main media but it's people like us who control the SOCIAL MEDIA. Hungry for more information about crusading educators going against the grain to do what's right for teachers, unions, communities, and children? Check out some more blogs below:

En Español

Un principio fundamental de cualquier sistema jurídico honesta es que los que son parte en una controversia no se les permite llamar a todos los tiros en cuanto a lo que es relevante y lo que no en la investigación y justa resolución de la controversia. Si esto se permite que tenga lugar, acciones o intereses propios de ese partido en llegar a un resultado injusto predeterminada nunca serían examinadas por un partido verdaderamente neutral. Y sin embargo, eso es precisamente lo que se ha prolongado durante años en el Distrito Escolar Unificado de Los Ángeles (LAUSD) sin ningún tipo de intervención gubernamental en las afueras de un proceso en el que miles de maestros no sólo han sido removidos de sus puestos de trabajo basados ​​en los cargos wholely fabricadas, pero También ha posteriormente llevar a su ser en la lista negra de una manera que casi asegura que nunca trabajar otra vez en cualquier lugar como maestro.

El eufemísticamente llamado Seguridad Equipo de Investigación Estudiantil (SSIT) a LAUSD- que suena y parece funcionar de una manera similar a la Comisión de Seguridad Pública en la Revolución Francesa determinaron que consiguieron sus cabezas cortadas off- ahora cuenta con 15 miembros, entre ellos seis investigadores de tiempo completo, cuatro policías escolares LA, dos especialistas forenses y un investigador supervisión. Pero el problema aquí es que SSIT está encabezada por 30 años veterano de LAUSD José Cantú, que de ninguna manera o forma es independiente bastante de LAUSD que dar el poder de ser el único árbitro en cuanto a si predominantemente profesores de alto nivel deben perder su empleos- especialmente cuando LAUSD tiene el fuerte incentivo de ahorro de 60.000 dólares al año por cada maestro más alto de la escala salarial que se deshacen de.

También se podría señalar como pasado presidente de la Junta del LAUSD Richard Vladovic señaló que, "No hay evidencia exculpatoria de inocencia o el derecho-hacer es cada vez presentará a la Junta del LAUSD en las acciones que se le presentan para terminar [estos maestros caras]."

Así que lo que sigue es un proceso completamente unilateral cuando los expedientes se construyó que no sólo fabrica cargos contra los maestros, también solicita declaraciones falsas en apoyo de estos cargos falsos, que los estudiantes y empleados del LAUSD que buscan congraciarse con sus superiores están más que feliz de Give-sobre todo porque no se verifican bajo pena de perjurio que la requires- ley, pero esto sigue siendo ignorado.

Frente a la difícil tarea de tratar de defenderse a sí mismo sin la ayuda de su sindicato de Maestros de Los Ángeles (UTLA), la mayoría de los maestros sin la capacidad financiera o emocional para sostener y defender a sí mismos por lo que resulta ser años en contra de esta formidable arsenal de LAUSD poder, salto a la oportunidad de renunciar, cuando se les dice por el LAUSD, "Nos tomará ninguna otra acción contra usted si renunciar." Lo que no dicen estos profesores es que este "no acción" no incluye los informes de Acreditación de Maestros de California (CTC), donde podrían haber su credencial suspendida o levantada.

Pero si la pérdida de su trabajo o tener su credencial levantado o suspendido en este proceso amañado no es suficiente, lo que posteriormente se lleva a cabo es aún peor. Como se aplican los maestros para otros trabajos con otro distrito escolar o escuela privada, se enfrentan con la siguiente todas las preguntas de solicitud de empleo demasiado comunes que aseguran que nunca trabajar de nuevo como profesor. Si responden que sí a cualquiera de ellos, su aplicación nunca será más allá de la evaluación inicial. Y si contestan que no, y en última instancia, se descubrieron, es en sí mismo motivo de la maestra de ser despedido por su nueva escuela:

Maestros Común Preguntas de aplicación de empleo

- "¿Alguna vez ha sido dado de alta, despedidos, o no vuelva a emplearse para el año escolar siguiente, de acuerdo al Código de Educación Sección 44949, desde cualquier posición debido a mala conducta o servicio insatisfactorio".

- "¿Usted ha tenido la enseñanza o la credencial administrativa suspendidos o revocados?"

- "¿Alguna vez has resignado un puesto de profesor o de otro empleo, en lugar de una acción disciplinaria?"

- "¿Alguna vez has dejado una enseñanza o posición administrativa sin la aprobación oficial de la junta de gobierno?"

- "¿Es cualquier acción adversa pendiente contra cualquier credencial usted sostiene que autoriza el servicio público de la escuela o la enseñanza en California o en cualquier otro estado?"

Lo que estas preguntas y otras similares equivalen a una presunción de culpabilidad por parte de un maestro que nunca ha recibido nada ni remotamente parecido a un debido proceso legal para determinar su culpabilidad o inocencia.

Y por supuesto, si un posible empleador llama LAUSD Recursos Humanos, la conversación es algo como esto:

Nueva Escuela: Did Leonard Isenberg toda obra en el LAUSD


Nueva Escuela: ¿Puede darnos utilizar las fechas?

LAUSD HR: Sí, trabajó desde 1988 hasta 2010.

Nueva Escuela: ¿Puedes contarnos algo más?


Así que, de hecho, si usted renuncia, el LAUSD va a decir nada negativo acerca de ti ... pero no creo que el silencio se va a conseguir que otro trabajo no importa cómo su curriculum vitae o de enseñanza habilidades impresionantes.


What's so grinding to me is that a union that I've paid dues to for 26 years refused to do anything about this situation. Their silence is deafening. After assuming a leadership position at my local school to help other teachers understand their rights, it turns out that they have none, at least none that the union will protect. For this situation, I blame the union as much as the district for not protecting its membership and becoming(because they have not been this way always) a mere dues collecting entity.

The only time I ever answered "yes" to any of those disclosure questions is if the question asks if I ever left before the end of my contracted term. Then I would say "illness or FMLA-related." It is the truth. I never committed misconduct and I wasn't kicked to the curb for "unsatisfactory performance." It was because HR decided to get rid of me when I got so sick and then used a form I submitted too early to railroad me out of a job. It turned into nothing but a free-for-all to trash my character in order to protect the screw-up by the HR head and the principal.

It was the district's fault, not mine, and I am not going to say "yes" to something that was not true.

The new district or school might ask if he is eligible for rehire. That usually is the killer right there.

There have been lawsuits filed against districts that use "no rehire" designations, however.

Leave a comment