Earlier this month, the Guilford County Board of Education voted unanimously to file a lawsuit against the state regarding a new tenure law passed, according to Darlene Garrett, a member of the Guilford County Board of Education. 

The law in question offers the top 25 percent best performing teachers an increase in pay for four years if they give up their tenure.

Jon Hardister, a North Carolina General Assembly representative for Guilford County, said the law was enacted to hold teachers accountable for job performance. 

“This contract system will still provide teachers with a reasonable measure of job security, while making it easier to promote accountability amongst educators,” Hardister said. 

Members of the Guilford County School Board passed a resolution that requested changes be made to the law before its implementation, according to Garrett. He said the board would not take steps to comply with the law until then. 

Hardister said the Guilford County School Board reserves the right to challenge the state law, but it’s also the citizens’ duty to respect and abide by the law.

“If we disagree with a law, then we seek to change it legislatively, or we can challenge it in the courts, which the school board is doing,” Hardister said. “But it is wrong to deliberately disregard a law simply because you don’t agree with it. This applies to all citizens and also to governmental bodies, such as the school board.”

Because the law requires tenured teachers to defer their career status, the board feels it is unfair to take this vested right away, according to Garrett.

“It’s unprecedented. Other states have ended tenure, but no other state has done it retroactively,” Garrett said. “That’s a major part of it. In our opinion, it’s taking away someone’s constitutional right.” 

Hardister said he agreed that teachers already tenured should be able to maintain that status. 

In addition to the legal issues the board has with the law, Garrett said there are general discrepancies, like the vagueness of how teachers are to qualify for the raise and who is considered a classroom teacher. 

According to Garrett, in the eyes of the public, counselors, social workers, academic coaches and curriculum facilitators are generally considered teachers. Depending on how the law classifies who is or is not a teacher, there may not be enough money in the budget to cover the first year of raises. 

“We are supposed to offer these contracts, yet the legislation is only funded for one year,” Garrett said. “That makes us legally responsible for the rest of the money if the general assembly doesn’t fully fund it.”

The new legislation would prevent teachers from working with one another, becoming more concerned with competition rather than collaboration, according to Garrett. He said the process of choosing the top 25 percent is hard because some teachers don’t have evaluations. 

“It’s putting the board of education in a very precarious situation because we have to offer these contracts and determine these teachers,” Garrett said. “It puts us in a position to be sued by our teachers.”

Hardister said there has been talk about raising the percentage of selected teachers from 25 percent to 40 percent and that it’s a topic he plans to discuss with his colleagues when they convene in the short session this year.

There is no set date for when the board will hear back about whether or not they will be granted an injunction, but the board is hoping the resolution is in before the June 30 deadline, according to Garrett. 

Garrett said Senator Phil Berger has expressed his disappointment with the board and has sent them several letters expressing his concern with the board defying the law.According to an article in the News & Record, Berger called the board’s action an “attempt to manufacture legal arguments to derail policy directives,” which he called “even more underhanded than openly refusing to follow the law.” 

Berger said the law was enacted to recognize and reward excellent teachers and that he is troubled by the board’s actions, according to the News & Record.

“Like the rest of us, local officials cannot pick and choose which laws to follow,” Berger said in the News & Record. “Such action would give them an unconstitutional veto over the laws enacted by elected representatives in the General Assembly.”

Because the board’s actions do not rise to the corruption level, Garrett said their attorney does not anticipate their being thrown out of office as it is unlikely to happen.