Educator challenges the abolition of positions and the assignment of her former teaching duties to other teachers
Subsequently the Board assigned certain courses previously taught by Farber-Peck to three other teachers, Michelle Ploss, Kristin Smith and Glen Manning.
The District also asserted that certain necessary parties were not joined in the action and thus Farber-Peck's appeal must be dismissed.
Here, however, the Commissioner said that with respect to such "other parties" there is “no evidence that Ploss, Smith or Manning would be adversely affected should [Farber-Peck] prevail herein because such a result would impact only one course in their overall workload.” Further, said the Commissioner, Farber-Peck does not seek dismissal or reassignment of those teachers and there is no evidence that the employment status of those individuals would be adversely affected. Accordingly, ruled the Commissioner, the three were not necessary parties and need not be joined as respondents and the appeal would not be dismissed on that procedural basis.
Noting that Farber-Peck “does not claim otherwise in her petition," the Commissioner said that, on the record before her, Farber-Peck has not met her burden of established that Board acted in bad faith or was motivated to abolish positions for other than economic reasons and thus “there is no basis on which to conclude that [the Board] abolition of [Farber-Peck] position was improper."