ADVERSE EMPLOYMENT ACTIONS AND PUBLIC SCHOOL ...

ehaviors or acts, but her conduct was considered to be irremediable and clearly a sign of
incompetence in Herrera v. Union No. 39 School District (2009 Vt.).
Table 30 presented the category of failed leadership and revealed issues that lead to this
designation, such as negligence (Table 31), unsatisfactory performance (Table 32), interpersonal
strife (Table 33), insubordination (Table 34), and incompetence (Table 35). Within each of these
threads, the researcher was able to demonstrate that the behaviors in each vein usually exhibited
persistence and a failure on the part of the administrator to correct the behavior. However, there
were also instances of the administrator committing the behavior only once but the egregiousness
of the offense was so great that employment action was unavoidable. Moreover, of the 41 cases
categorized in Table 29 and then recapitulated in Tables 30-34, all adverse employment actions
were present consisting of three cases of demotion (3), suspensions (3), non-renewals (7),
reassignments (8), and terminations (20). In those cases the school system prevailed in litigation
an overwhelming 74% of the time in 32 of the 43 cases. The remaining cases were split decisions
in three instances, judgment for the employee in seven cases, and one remanded for rehearing in
one case. Therefore, the data over a 30-year period make very clear that school systems hold the
upper hand in determining what is and is not adequate leadership, at least in the view of the
court.
Outlandish behaviors. Table 36 reflects 18 cases where significant behaviors on the part
of the administrators spurred the adverse employment action and, ultimately, litigation. These
behaviors were classified as outlandish and included but were not limited to sexual harassment
(5), sexual malfeasance (3), physical altercations with students (3), misuse of funds (3),
349