LETTER TO THE EDITOR: May y'all never grow old substitute teaching for Lexington School District One

After retiring as an electrical engineer, my ex-neighbor and friend became a full time student at USC obtaining a masters degree in elementary education. For more than a decade, he taught fourth graders and then worked at various schools as an “EAGLE” teacher (the gifted/talented program) throughout the district.

Those years, he spoke mostly of happy, creative times. He was asked by teachers to return as a substitute. He did. He had tried retirement but missed the expressions of joy when his kids grasped new concepts.

Those schools were lucky. S.C. law requires only a GED to act as a substitute. The law does not categorize substitutes as teachers, even those licensed to teach.

Old age and missteps brought pain to his legs. He inadvertently left four over-the-counter pain reliever pills (Advil in a child-proof container) on a teacher's desk overnight inside a locked classroom not known for after school use. Persons unknown complained and reported this to the principal. Any student entering that classroom would, by policy, have had to be escorted by an adult or teacher.

The district has not been able to identify any state or district policy concerning possession of legal non-prescription pain relievers, nor has any work rule violated. With a brief phone conference and subsequent e-mail notice, he was let go – terminated. The pain in my friend's eyes as he recounted the events haunts me.

Both Kelly and the Lexington One District completed an “investigation” of the matter. Kelly was said to have made the determination to terminate his employment due to “a lapse of good judgement and failure to make a constructive effort to protect the student from conditions detrimental to learning, health, or safety.” He very much took exception to the statement about failing to protect students.

The content of investigations is unknown as substitute teacher employees of Kelly Services have no rights; they are simply told to go home and stay home. The district and the youth lost out. Full time teachers relied on my friend’s skills if they must be absent.

South Carolina State Law Title 59-Chapter 63-Section 240 provides minimum standards of student discipline. Disorderly and/or disruptive students have “rights.” Level II violations discipline (some likely felonies) requires three or more occurrences, a mandatory written notification and expulsion hearing before students may be temporarily or permanently expelled.

The process of teacher discipline is enumerated in S.C. law 59-25-430 & 470 and elsewhere. That law does a good job of presenting a mandate for good employee management with required progressive discipline, a term that is the lowest level of non-physical pain necessary to return an employee to compliance with workplace standards. In part, it mandates, "Administrators are required to make reasonable effort to assist teachers in corrective measures providing reasonable time for improvement.”

The South Carolina Education Association contract provides rights of due process with progressive discipline. The goal is the retention of salvageable teachers. It is not rocket science, it is simply common sense and decent management.

Substitutes are not defined as teachers or educators. They are “at will” - without definition of whose will.

I shouldn't need to mention that any internet search will return pages upon pages of stories of school administrators crying about the inability to find and retain substitute teachers. Several news reports detail uneducated substitutes arrested for violating young students.

The Columbia Daily reported the public reason for Kelly Services being hired by Richland and Lexington Counties was "financial.” COVID-19 help had been provided in the guise of the Affordable Care Act dollars with strings. A Columbia Daily quote: "Under the regulations, if an employee works 30 hours or more per week, their company must offer them health benefits.” The quote went on to say that the administrative team was concerned that substitutes working over 30 hours would cause the district to incur severe financial penalties.

My friend laughed when I showed him that claim. He had been scheduled essentially full time teaching gifted/talented classes.

Perhaps the S.C. Legislature could consider granting substitutes employment rights equal to, say disorderly or disruptive children?

Respectfully,

Tim Houghtaling