CheshireVal said:
But the morality clause only applies when you're actually employed as a teacher. If she wasn't employed at the time of her indiscretion, and if she has no arrest record or anything, what she did in the past shouldn't matter.
I don't know where I stand on that. Whether she did it a decade a go or last week, it obviously IS an issue for kids and parents; otherwise, this wouldn't be in the news. I doubt the principal (or the school board) discovered this situation -- it was probably kids who "uncovered evidence" about her past.
Still, it doesn't matter.
The bottom line is that she's a second year teacher, and she can be dismissed for no reason whatsoever -- no, let me rephrase that: the school can choose not to renew her contract next fall for no reason whatsoever. In their first few years of work, teachers are sort of like temps, contract workers, or people hired to complete a certain project (the project being to teach for one school year); they are
only promised a job from this August to next June. When their contract's up, it's up. That contract may or may not be extended for the next year. The school doesn't have to give her a reason of any type. She can be dismissed because the principal's niece graduated from college and needs a teaching job. She can be dismissed because the principal found someone who's able to coach football. She can be dismissed for any reason whatsoever, and the school's not going to keep a controversial teacher around if they're not forced to do so.
She's not being fired, so there's nothing stopping her from going to another county or state and applying for a job (well, nothing but this publicity). She's not eligible for any type of unemployment because she's been employed for her full contract.
Most people don't realize that this is how teachers' employment works. Teachers have NO job stability for the first few years. Once they are tenured, then they can only be fired FOR CAUSE.