Teacher files grievance over probationary contract

A teacher signed a clearly labeled "Second-Year Probationary Contract" but waited over a year to file a grievance claiming entitlement to a term contract. The district dismissed the grievance as not being filed on a timely basis and the teacher appealed to the commissioner of education, who upheld the decision of the district. The teacher then appealed to district court and ultimately, the court of appeals.

The court of appeals reviewed the factual background of the case. On May 21, 2019, the teacher signed a "First-Year Probationary Contract" with the district for the 2019-20 school year. On April 22, 2020, the teacher signed a "Second-Year Probationary Contract" with the district for the 2020-21 school year. The second-year probationary contract was designated as such at the top of the front page in bold type. 

Both contracts stated "Termination of Contract. This Contract will terminate, in accordance with the procedures at Texas Education Code chapter 21, if the Board determines that termination of your contract at the end of the contract period will serve the best interests of the District." 

On April 26, 2021, the district sent notice to the teacher that his probationary contract for the 2020-21 school year would be terminated at the end of the contract term. At that point, the teacher filed a grievance, complaining that the district had incorrectly given him a probationary contract. He argued that based on his prior years of experience, it should have given him a term contract, which would have given him an opportunity to contest the proposed nonrenewal of his contract.

The district dismissed the teacher's grievance as untimely, citing the district's local policy that required complaints to be "filed within 15 days of the date the employee first knew, or with reasonable diligence should have known, of the decision or action giving rise to the complaint or grievance." The district argued that the teacher was not complaining about the termination of his contract; rather, he was complaining that he had been given the wrong contract. In order to make that argument, he should have filed his grievance within 15 days from the date that he signed the incorrect contract.

The court of appeals agreed that the grievance was untimely because: 

1. the probationary contract was clearly titled as such;
2. the teacher signed it acknowledging that he read it and agreed to its terms;
3. the teacher waited over a year to file his grievance; and
4. the grievance complained about the issuance of a probationary contract in 2020, not its termination in 2021. 

The court of appeals upheld the decision of the commissioner of education.