Evening star., 1909-04-28
BARS OLD TEACHERS
School Act Held to Favor
Those From Outside.
OPINION BY CONTROLLER
Only New Employees Entitled to
Longevity Increased Pay.
FAULT Is LAID TO CONGRESS
Length of Service of No Benefit to
Local Teachers Under Operation
Of Law as It Reads.

In interpreting the effect of one SEN
tence in the District act. approved May
26, 1903. affecting the pay of teachers
in the public schools. the controller of
the Treasury has decided that it operates
for the financial benefit of teachers
brought here from outside schools to
teach in local. high or manual training
schools, but provided absolutely no bene-
mt for teachers in the local schools who
have had the same or longer experience
IF this works discrimination against
the old teachers 1t Is a discrimination
or omission by Congress which 1 have
no authority to correct" says Controller
K. j. Tracewell, significantly, in his
formal decision. His holdings have been
reported to the District auditor. Atozno
Tweedale. and the board Of education has
been advised accordingly.
The act of May rs, 1908, which was
considered as discriminatory against the
old teachers in the local schools in favor
OF OUTSIDE teachers, provides "That
teachers hereafter employed in normal
high and manual training schools may
De placed In group A, class six. and re-
ceive their longevity increase according
to their number Of years Of experience
In teaching in accredited normal, high
and manual training schools This re-
fers to teachers in high, normal and
manual training schools.
That decision OF the controller is, in eff
feet, that old teachers in the local schools
cannot receive longevity pay in accord
ance with the length of service in the To-
cal normal, high or manual training
schools. although teachers brought here
from other accredited schools can receive
such pay, and that local teachers. even
though serving on probation when the act
was passed, cannot receive the longevity
pay provided in the act when appointed
permanently after the passage of the act
The Questions Submitted.
The two main questions submitted to
the controller by Auditor Tweedale, at the
request Of the board Of education, were:
''O Whether teachers who were ap-
pointed in the probationary class in Group
A, class six, in accordance with law, pre-
vious to the passage of the District act
approved May %. 1908 and who were SUBJ
sequently appointed and employed as duly
qualified teachers. are entitled to receive
longevity pay according to their number
credited normal, high and manual train
"(2) Whether the words hereafter en-
ployed,' contained In the provision in the
District act approved May 26. 1903, herein
before referred to, relates to teachers
thereafter appointed and employed, who
were not at the time of the passage of
the act connected with the Washington
public school service. or should the words
referred to be given broader meaning. so
as to include the teachers in the normal,
high and manual training schools at the
time of the passage of the act who will
consequently be employed hereafter. as
we'll as the teachers in the GRADED schools
who may from time to time be promoted
into Glass six. Group A, and who have
had experience in teaching accredited nor
NAL, high and manual training schools
The Controllers Decision.
In reply Controller TracewelI says:
"dD The act OF May %, 1908, supra.
was intended as a modification of the act
of June 90. 1906. supra. as to longevity
increase of pay to new teachers appointed
and placed in group A, class 6. after the
date OF its passage. 1t would follow,
therefore. that a teacher who had been
appointed and assigned to group A, class
6. in the probationary class, prior to the
passage Of the act Of May 26, 1908, and
who became permanent emplOye in
group A. class 6. after the passage of said
act under the provisions of the act OF
June 20, 1906. would not be entitled to
receive the longevity increase of pay
provided in the act Of May 26, 1908, un-
less the teacher was entirely separated
from the school service prior to the pas
sage of the act of May %. 1908, and ap-
pointed or re-employed as new teacher
after its passage.
"(2) The first part of this question is
answered above. The second part must
be answered in the negative for the rea-
SON that the act is wholly prospective and
the act Of employment referred to must
be in future, and as these old teachers
have a fixed tenure and are promoted in
course the act of May 26. 1908. does not
apply to them. If this works discrim-
ination against the Old teachers it Is a
discrimination or omission by Congress
which have no authority to correct
third question was:
"Can the board of education appoint
and employ a duly qualified teacher in
group A, class 6. under the provision of
law referred to in the District act approv
ed May 20, 1903, and allow as longevity
increase pay a less amount Of increase
pay than may be shown by the certifi-
Gates of service In accredited normal,
high and manual training schools
The controller says:
This question is answered in the neg
ative, for the reason that when Congress
fixes a salary no one has authority to
pay or contract to pay more or less than
the sum SO fixed. The longevity increase
of pay is fixed and determined by the
number Of years of experience in teach
ing in accredited normal, high or manual
fraininD schOOlS0