Oregon Administrative Rules Chapter 586 - OREGON DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, FAIR DISMISSAL APPEALS BOARD
Overview of Chapter 586 FDAB
The FDAB handles appeals from teachers or contract educators who have been dismissed, disciplined, or non-renewed.
The Board examines whether the school district’s grounds for dismissal are valid, and whether procedural requirements were properly followed.
Statutory grounds for dismissal include inefficiency, neglect of duty, insubordination, immorality, or failure to comply with reasonable directives.
The Board can either uphold the dismissal, modify it, or reinstate the teacher with or without back pay.
Detailed Case Examples
1. Cooper Case (1977)
Facts:
Cooper taught woodworking, drafting, and geography. His courses were eliminated due to declining enrollment, and the district terminated his contract.
Board Decision:
The FDAB upheld the dismissal, finding that the elimination of his courses was a legitimate, documented economic decision.
Significance:
Shows that economic or programmatic reasons for dismissal can be valid if the proper procedures are followed.
2. Edwards Case (2006)
Facts:
Edwards was an athletic director dismissed by the district, which argued he was not a “teacher” and therefore ineligible for FDAB protections.
Board Decision:
The FDAB ruled that Edwards’ duties qualified him as a teacher for purposes of a dismissal hearing.
Significance:
Job title alone does not determine eligibility; the actual responsibilities matter.
3. Bellairs Case (2006)
Facts:
A long-term teacher was dismissed for insubordination and neglect of duty, based on performance criticisms.
Board Decision:
FDAB found the district’s evidence credible and upheld the dismissal.
Significance:
Demonstrates that when a school district presents well-documented performance issues, dismissal can be justified even for tenured teachers.
4. Bergerson Case (2006)
Facts:
A teacher was dismissed for alleged immorality and neglect of duty. FDAB initially ordered reinstatement.
Court Action:
The Oregon Court of Appeals reversed and remanded, citing incorrect application of statutory standards regarding “unreasonable” or “clearly excessive” remedies.
Significance:
Highlights the importance of applying the correct legal standard in Board decisions; courts review FDAB actions for proper interpretation of law.
5. Rogers v. Douglas County School District (1975)
Facts:
Teacher dismissed for inefficiency and insubordination.
Board Decision:
FDAB upheld the dismissal after reviewing documented evidence of poor classroom performance.
Significance:
Evidence of repeated performance deficiencies can justify dismissal even if procedural requirements are met.
6. Jones v. Vernonia School District (1977)
Facts:
Teacher dismissed for performance issues.
Board Decision:
FDAB reversed dismissal because evidence was insufficient to support statutory grounds.
Significance:
Lack of sufficient or credible evidence can overturn a dismissal, protecting teachers from arbitrary action.
7. Carell v. Glide School District (1978)
Facts:
Teacher dismissed; the district claimed neglect of duty.
Board Decision:
FDAB found that evaluation processes were flawed, evidence inadequate, and reinstated the teacher.
Significance:
Procedural errors or unreliable evidence can nullify a district’s dismissal decision.
Key Takeaways from FDAB Cases
Procedural compliance is critical – Boards carefully examine whether notice, documentation, and hearings comply with Chapter 586 rules.
Evidence matters – Dismissals based on poor performance must be well-documented and clearly demonstrate statutory grounds.
Appellate review – Courts may reverse FDAB decisions if the Board misapplies legal standards.
Job classification – Actual duties, not just job title, determine FDAB eligibility.
Economic or programmatic reasons – Can justify dismissal if properly documented and compliant with rules.
RELATED Blog
comments