A California state appeals court has reversed a lower court, finding that a community college district acted appropriately when it “summarily terminated the employment” of a basketball coach.
The central dispute was whether plaintiff Jeff Theiler, a basketball coach in the Ventura County Community College District, should be classified as a temporary employee or contract employee, which would have entitled him to relief under his due process claim.
The court noted that each semester Theiler accepted a written “Offer of Temporary Non-Contract Academic Employment.” The offer specified he was to teach a course in basketball for two hours a day, Monday through Friday. A two-hour scheduled class actually lasts 110 minutes. The offer also specified the percentage of hours that was equivalent to a full-time teaching assignment. None of the offers provided for greater than 0.6 of full-time equivalent (FTE). During Theiler’s employment with the District, he was a member of the Ventura County Federation of Teachers. The Union and the District had a collective bargaining agreement.
The collective bargaining agreement recognized that a basketball coach has ancillary duties that will be performed outside the course hours specified in the contract. Pursuant to the agreement, the district compensated its coaches, including Theiler, for the performance of their ancillary duties with a stipend. The stipend was paid as a flat amount that did not depend on the number of hours actually worked.
In November 2008, the district terminated Theiler’s employment. An investigation revealed that Theiler submitted false transcripts to obtain eligibility for student athletes, granted favors to nonresident athletes, and interfered with the investigation of his wrongdoing.
The district classified Theiler as a temporary employee, and a temporary employee is not entitled to due process in the termination of his employment. However, Theiler claimed that he was employed to teach classes for more than 60 percent of the hours per week. Thus, he argued he was a contract employee pursuant to section 87482.5, subdivision (a), because contract employees are entitled to due process.
He ultimately sued, and the trial court granted his motion for summary judgment and the district appealed.
The appeals court reviewed the trial court’s determination that the time the plaintiff “spent coaching basketball games, practices and conditioning sessions—all performed in the presence of and in supervision of student athletes—is more akin to ‘teaching’ than ‘ancillary activities.’” Therefore achieving the necessary 60 percent FTE, qualifying Theiler as a contract employee entitled to due process.
The panel further noted that “the overriding policy consideration is to give the district maximum flexibility in classifying teachers, while preventing the exploitation of temporary instructors who carry the equivalent of a full-time teaching load. McGuire v. Governing Board, 161 Cal.App.3d 871, 875 (1984).”
The appeals court continued, noting that “no one could reasonably deny that some of the duties of a basketball coach involve a type of teaching. But the duties of a basketball coach are not comparable to that of the typical classroom instructor. The collective bargaining agreement recognizes this difference by providing for a stipend for basketball coaches. Full-time faculty, who teach traditional classroom courses, receive no such stipend.”
Jeff Theiler v. Ventura County Community College District et al.,; Ct. App. Calif., 2d App. Dist., Div. 6; No. B222321, 2011 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 5493; 7/25/11
Attorneys of Record: (for defendants) Atkinson, Andelson, Loya, Rudd & Romo, Warren S. Kinsler; Law Offices of Walsh & Associates, Dennis J. Walsh; Lascher & Lascher, Wendy C. Lascher; Ferguson Case Orr Paterson, LLP, Wendy C. Lascher; The Feldhake Law Firm, APC, Robert J. Feldhake, Christine E. Howson; Farmer Smith & Lane, LLP, Craig E. Farmer, Emmanuel R. Salazar. (for plaintiff) Wasserman, Comden, Casselman & Esensten, L.L.P., Mark S. Gottlieb, Gregory J. Ramirez, James E. Perero.
