Opinion ID: 1947590
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Jeanne Calnan

Text: The circumstances in the case of plaintiff Jeanne Calnan (Calnan) are distinguishable from those of the other plaintiffs because there was limited employment opportunity in the only area of her certification, speech pathology. At the August 10, 1990, hearing, Chevrette testified that as of June 13, 1990, there were two senior teachers certified in speech pathology who would be returning to work in the fall. Calnan testified that she was informed that both speech pathologists would be returning. Chevrette did not tell Calnan that although it was not official, he had a strong suspicion that one of the returning speech pathologists would be resigning to take a position with another school department. Chevrette did not know until late July that the second speech pathologist would be extending her leave. Therefore, according to Chevrette's own testimony: Until [Calnan] was recalled the other evening [July 24, 1990] I had no assurance that I would have a job for her. Calnan could substitute on a day-to-day basis, but, Chevrette noted, the school department only used speech pathologists as substitutes for two-to-three week absences. It is clear from these facts on the record that as of June 13, 1990, Calnan had not been given reasonable assurance of employment. Unlike the other plaintiffs who had the opportunity to fill approximately twenty vacancies, Calnan was limited to the single possible job as a speech pathologist and was told that two teachers were returning to fill this position. Calnan, with her limited certification, is thus distinguishable from the other plaintiffs. The board was clearly erroneous in finding that Calnan was granted reasonable assurance of employment. The substantial, reliable, and probative evidence on the record supports a contrary finding.