When Susan George first started teaching at the Susanville Elementary School District, she had five years of prior teaching experience. The District compensates teachers according to a salary schedule based on their training and years of experience. The relevant collective bargaining agreement stated that new unit members with no experience would be placed at step one of the salary scale. New members with prior teaching experience would receive one year of credit for each year of experience, up to a maximum of 12 years of credit and a maximum placement on step 13. When the District hired George, it placed her on step six of the salary scale. George worked for the District for seven years and achieved permanent status. She then resigned to work outside the District. When she left the District, she had worked for one year at step 12 of the salary schedule.
George was rehired within 39 months of resigning. When she returned, she had completed 14 years of teaching experience. The District rehired George as a permanent teacher but placed her on step 13 of the salary schedule, which did not account for the two years of experience she had gained outside of the District.
George filed a petition for writ of mandate, requesting that the trial court order the District to place her at step 15. She argued that, by placing her at step 13, the District violated the uniformity requirement of Education Code section 45028 and the restoration requirement of the Education Code section 44931. The uniformity requirement mandates that when teacher salary schedules operate based on education and experience, the salary schedule must be “uniform.” This means that groups of teachers with the same level of training and years of experience must be treated the same. The restoration requirement mandates that when a permanent certificated employee resigns from a school district and the district rehires the employee within 39 months, the district must classify the employee as a permanent employee and restore all the rights, benefits and burdens of a permanent employee.
The trial court held that the collective bargaining agreement prevented George from acquiring credit for the two years worked outside of the District. It held that the uniformity requirement did not afford George the relief she sought and that the District had complied with the restoration requirement by restoring her to her prior position. George appealed the trial court’s decision.
The court of appeal explained that under the restoration requirement, when a certified permanent employee resigns from a school district and is rehired within 39 months, the district must “classify him or her as, and restore to him or her all of the rights, benefits and burdens of, a permanent employee, except as otherwise provided in this code.” The District argued that the restoration requirement only required that it restore George to the status that she had achieved at the time of her resignation. The court of appeal agreed and held that the District had not violated the restoration requirement.
Next, the court of appeal held that the District had violated the uniformity requirement by failing to place George at step 15 of the District’s salary schedule.
The District argued that the uniformity requirement did not apply because George’s placement on the salary schedule was determined by the restoration requirement, which only required that they restore rehired teachers to their prior status. The court of appeal disagreed. The court of appeal noted that the uniformity requirement lists exceptions, but the use of the restoration requirement was not one of those exceptions. Additionally, the restoration requirement stated that its rules apply “except as otherwise provided in this code.” Therefore, if there is a conflict between the uniformity requirement and the restoration requirement, the uniformity requirement would control.
The court of appeal found that George was not treated uniformly to all other teachers hired by the District. The District argued that it was not required to count the out of district experience that George gained after her resignation, because she was a returning teacher and the collective bargaining agreement did not permit crediting out of district experience for returning teachers. The court of appeal held that uniformity can only be waived when a salary schedule is created pursuant to Government Code section 3543.2(d)-(e), which permits salary schedules based on factors other than experience and training. The District and union had not created a salary schedule pursuant to section 3543.2.
The District then argued that it treated George uniformly, because it did not recognize out of district experience for any rehired teachers. The court of appeal stated that the Education Coder permits school districts to impose limits on the crediting of experience, but the limitations must be applied uniformly to all groups of teachers. The District permits newly hired teachers to receive credit for a maximum of 12 years of prior experience. This means the District permits teachers a maximum of 12 years of out of district experience. Therefore, the District must also allow George to receive up to 12 years of out of district experience.
The court of appeal reversed the trial court’s decision and remanded the case. The court of appeal directed the trial court to issue a writ ordering the District to place George on the salary schedule at step 15 and to provide her with backpay and benefits. The District was ordered to pay costs on appeal.
George v. Susanville Elementary School Dist. (2024) 103 Cal.App.5th 349