Reply #99: Wouldn't a fairer solution have been to

[jp11]

better allocate funding to poorer schools, if issues of equipment/supplies were part of why tenured teachers leave those schools, limit the percentage of teachers who could be tenured in a given school, ie you can't transfer if there are too many tenured teachers at your 'wanted' school because of the impact on students/your old school? How about you use a multiplier for 'troubled schools' where a year there is equal to 1.5yrs at 'better schools' as defined by highest turnover. Maybe have some teachers occasionally 'rotate' to the 'troubled schools' every few years provided they aren't 'unreasonably' far away or the like?

Or if you want to transfer to a 'better' school you lose your seniority and 'start over' at your new school. Those seem more like the fairer way of 'protecting' the civil liberties of students who unfairly lose more teachers because they have more new teachers at their schools.

I don't know the 'right' solution but forcing any employee to lose their job because they didn't perform as well as some other employee when the basis for performance isn't in their hands seems more unfair to me than letting go of purely recently hired workers. It isn't different than a mechanic losing their job because the car they worked on for a race didn't win/place, when nothing went/was wrong with their work on the car it was just the driver didn't win or place in the race.