Table of Contents Table of Contents
Previous Page  18 / 130 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 18 / 130 Next Page
Page Background

Name that Section: Frequently Used Education Code and Title 5 Sections for Community College Districts

©2018 (c) Liebert Cassidy Whitmore

18

Tenure is the rule and temporary employment the exception, such that it is

the employing district’s burden to demonstrate legally and factually that the

employee is temporary.

Service as a substitute on a day-to-day basis by persons employed as a

temporary employee shall not be used for purposes of calculating eligibility

for contract or regular status.

Case Study Regarding Calculating 67%:

Theiler v. Ventura County Community College Dist.

43

The Ventura County Community College District employed Jeff Theiler as a

basketball coach from 2004 to 2008. The District terminated his employment

November 21, 2008 after an investigation revealed that Theiler submitted false

transcripts to obtain eligibility for student athletes, granted favors to non-

resident athletes, and interfered with the investigation. The District claimed that

he was a temporary faculty member, but Theiler argued that he was a contract

employee who was entitled to due process.

Each semester Theiler accepted a written “Offer of Temporary Non–Contract

Academic Employment.” The offer assigned him to teach a basketball course

for two hours a day. No offer exceeded 60% FTE. Under the collective

bargaining agreement, the District compensated its coaches, including Theiler,

for performing ancillary duties with a stipend, paid as a flat amount that did not

depend on the number of hours actually worked.

Theiler argued that although the class was officially scheduled for one hour and

50 minutes, he spent at least two to three hours per session coaching. He also

held one extra basketball practice per week for two to three hours and was

required to supervise students in weight training and “plyometric exercise.” He

also spent at least 1.63 hours a week coaching basketball games. Theiler’s

coaching duties required that he attend meetings with coaching staff, plan

practices, review films, engage in extensive preparation to competently instruct

the class and supervise the men’s basketball program, develop scouting reports

on opponents, recruit high school students to play basketball, supervise work-

study programs, and engage in fundraising for the basketball program. The

District claimed that basketball coaches are paid a stipend to cover the

performance of ancillary duties, which include the additional duties Theiler

described.

The court held that the time Theiler spent in addition to his scheduled class

hours involved ancillary duties. His employment contemplated only two types

of duties: teaching the class during the time scheduled for class and ancillary

duties. Although some of the other duties were similar to teaching, they are not

comparable to classroom instruction. Thus, the hours that Theiler claimed, in