5 replies to this topic

[Muskrat1234]

Here's the quick synopsis:

Teacher with certification was investigated for gross misconduct and placed on paid leave. After investigation he was given option to resign instead of being terminated. Teacher left the profession and took up an entirely new occupation in an unrelated field.

This was in spring 2005. Now, Dec. 2012, (over 7 1/2 years later) received letter from state that stated this teacher would be investigated to see if the license they possess would be revoked or not.

Is this legal for the state to do with no action for that entire time period?

Is it legal to investigate if the license is inactive or expired?

[Tax_Counsel]

You did not specify in what state this is taking place, and that matters because it is state law that governs the issuance of most professional licenses, including teaching certificates/licenses. That said, however, typically there is no time limit for the licensing body investigate to determine whether to revoke the license. If the state decides to revoke the license, there will be a process available for the former teacher to contest the revocation. However, if the former teacher is in a new occupation, does it really matter now if the license is revoked?

[pg1067]

Is this legal for the state to do with no action for that entire time period?

Rather obviously, in order to assess whether something is legal, one has to know the applicable law, and, since you didn't bother to identify the state where this occurred, we cannot know what the applicable law is. Also, since a significant percentage of public school teachers are unionized, the terms of the applicable collective bargaining agreement may be relevant. That said, I have a hard time believing that any state has a law that prohibits mere investigation.

Is it legal to investigate if the license is inactive or expired?

This appears to be the same question. If it wasn't intended to be the same, I cannot discern a difference.

[Tax_Counsel]

Also, since a significant percentage of public school teachers are unionized, the terms of the applicable collective bargaining agreement may be relevant.

Unionized teachers have contracts with their employer, typically the local school district. The state licensing body is not the employer and would not be bound by these agreements, so it would an unusual case indeed for a collective bargaining agreement to impact this matter.

[pg1067]

Unionized teachers have contracts with their employer, typically the local school district. The state licensing body is not the employer and would not be bound by these agreements, so it would an unusual case indeed for a collective bargaining agreement to impact this matter.

I don't disagree with you. However, the post is written almost entirely in the passive voice, so it's not entirely clear to me who is taking or took all of the actions described in the post.

[FindLaw_AHK]

What state is this matter concerning?