Bullying Statistics

www.StandUpToBullying.net 802-362-5448 Info@StandUpToBullying.net Bullying Statistics General Statistics Nearly 1 in 3 students (27.8%) report being bullied during the school year (National Center for Educational Statistics, 2013). 64 percent of children who were bullied did not report it; only 36 percent reported the bullying(Petrosina, Guckenburg, DeVoe, and Hanson, 2010).  More than half of bullying situations (57 percent) stop when a peer intervenes on behalf of the student being bullied (Hawkins, Pepler, and Craig, 2001).  School-based bullying prevention programs decrease bullying by up to 25% (McCallion and Feder, 2013).  The reasons for being bullied reported most often by students were looks (55%), body shape (37%), and race (16%) (Davis and Nixon, 2010). Effects of Bullying Students who experience bullying are at increased risk for depression, anxiety, sleep difficulties, and poor school adjustment (Center for Disease Control, 2012). Students who bully others are at increased risk for substance use, academic problems, and violence later in adolescence and adulthood (Center for Disease Control, 2012). Compared to students who only bully, or who are only victims, students who do both suffer the most serious consequences and are at greater risk for both mental health and behavior problems (Center for Disease Control, 2012). Students who experience bullying are twice as likely as non-bullied peers to experience negative health effects such as headaches and stomachaches (Gini and Pozzoli, 2013) Statistics about bullying of students with disabilities Only 10 U.S. studies have been conducted on the connection between bullying and developmental disabilities, but all of these studies found that children with disabilities were two to three times more likely to be bullied than their nondisabled peers. (Marshall, Kendall, Banks & Gover (Eds.), 2009). Researchers discovered that students with disabilities were more worried about school safety and being injured or harassed by other peers compared to students without a disability (Saylor & Leach, 2009). The National Autistic Society reports that 40 percent of children with autism and 60 percent of children with Asperger’s syndrome have experienced bullying. When reporting bullying youth in special education were told not to tattle almost twice as often as youth not in special education (Davis and Nixon, 2010). Statistics about bullying of students of color More than one third of adolescents reporting bullying report bias-based school bullying (Russell, Sinclair, Poteat, and Koenig, 2012).  Bias-based bullying is more strongly associated with compromised health than general bullying (Russell, Sinclair, Poteat, and Koenig, 2012).  Race-related bullying is significantly associated with negative emotional and physical health effects (Rosenthal et al, 2013) Statistics about bullying of students who identify or are perceived as LGBTQ 81.9% of students who identify as LGBTQ were bullied in the last year based on their sexual orientation (National School Climate Survey, 2011). Peer victimization of all youth was less likely to occur in schools with bullying policies that are inclusive of LGBTQ students (Hatzenbuehler and Keyes, 2012). 63.5% of students feel unsafe because of their sexual orientation, and 43.9% because of their gender expression (National School Climate Survey, 2011). 31.8% of LGBTQ students missed at least one entire day of school in the past month because they felt unsafe or uncomfortable (National School Climate Survey, 2011). Weight-Based Bullying 64% of students enrolled in weight-loss programs reported experiencing weight-based victimization (Puhl, Peterson, and Luedicke, 2012). One third of girls and one fourth of boys report weight-based teasing from peers, but prevalence rates increase to approximately 60% among the heaviest students (Puhl, Luedicke, and Heuer, 2011). 84% of students observed students perceived as overweight being called names or getting teased during physical activities (Puhl, Luedicke, and Heuer, 2011). Bullying and Suicide There is a strong association between bullying and suicide-related behaviors, but this relationships is often mediated by other factors, including depression and delinquency (Hertz, Donato, and Wright, 2013). Youth victimized by their peers were 2.4 times more likely to report suicidal ideation and 3.3 times more likely to report a suicide attempt than youth who reported not being bullied (Espelage and Holt, 2013). Students who are both bullied and engage in bullying behavior are the highest risk group for adverse outcomes (Espelage and Holt, 2013). Interventions Bullied youth were most likely to report that actions that accessed support from others made a positive difference (Davis and Nixon, 2010). Actions aimed at changing the behavior of the bullying youth (fighting, getting back at them, telling them to stop, etc.) were rated as more likely to make things worse (Davis and Nixon, 2010). Students reported that the most helpful things teachers can do are: listen to the student, check in with them afterwards to see if the bullying stopped, and give the student advice (Davis and Nixon, 2010).  Students reported that the most harmful things teachers can do are: tell the student to solve the problem themselves, tell the student that the bullying wouldn’t happen if they acted differently, ignored what was going on, or tell the student to stop tattling (Davis and Nixon, 2010). As reported by students who have been bullied, the self-actions that had some of the most negative impacts (telling the person to stop/how I feel, walking away, pretending it doesn’t bother me) are often used by youth and often recommended to youth (Davis and Nixon, 2010). Bystanders Bystanders’ beliefs in their social self-efficacy were positively associated with defending behavior and negatively associated with passive behavior from bystanders – i.e. if students believe they can make a difference, they’re more likely to act (Thornberg et al, 2012) Students who experience bullying report that allying and supportive actions from their peers (such as spending time with the student, talking to him/her, helping him/her get away, or giving advice) were the most helpful actions from bystanders (Davis and Nixon, 2010). Students who experience bullying are more likely to find peer actions helpful than educator or self-actions (Davis and Nixon, 2010). References: Bullying: A guide for parents. (National Autistic Society). Retrieved from http://www.autism.org.uk/Living-with-autism/Education-and-transition/Primary-and-secondary-school/Your-child-at-school/Bullying-a-guide-for-parents.aspx Center for Disease Control, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (2012). Understanding bullying. Davis, S., & Nixon, C. (2010). The youth voice research project: Victimization and strategies. Espelage, D. L., & Holt, M. K. (2013). Suicidal ideation and school bullying experiences after controlling for depression and delinquency. Journal of Adolescent Health, 53. Gini, G., & Pozzoli, T. (2013). Bullied children and psychosomatic problems: A meta-analysis. Pediatrics. Hatzenbuehler, M. L., & Keyes, K. M. (2012). Inclusive anti-bullying policies and reduced risk of suicide attempts in lesbian and gay youth. Journal of Adolescent Health, 53, 21-26. Hawkins, D. L., Pepler, D. J., & Craig, W. M. (2001). Naturalistic observations of peer interventions in bullying. Social Development, 10(4), 512-527. Hertz, M. F., Donato, I., & Wright, J. (2013). Bullying and suicide: A public health approach. Journal of Adolescent Health, 53. Kosciw, J. G., Greytak, E. A., Bartkiewicz, M. J., Boesen, M. J., & Palmer, N. A. GLSEN, (2011). The 2011 national school climate survey. Retrieved from website: http://glsen.org/sites/default/files/2011 National School Climate Survey Full Report.pdf. (2009). C. Marshall, E. Kendall, M. Banks & R. Gover (Eds.), Disabilities: Insights from across fields and around the world (Vol. 1-3). Westport, CT: Praeger Perspectives. McCallion, G., & Feder, J. (2013). Student bullying: Overview of research, federal initiatives, and legal issues. Congressional Research Service. Petrosino, A., Guckenburg, S., DeVoe, J., & Hanson, T. Institute of Education Sciences, (2010). What characteristics of bullying, bullying victims, and schools are associated with increased reporting of bullying to school officials?  Washington, D.C.: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance. Puhl, R. M., Luedicke, J., & Heuer, C. (2011). Weight-based victimization toward overweight adolescents: Observations and reactions of peers. Journal of School Health, 81(11), 696-703. Puhl, R. M., Peterson, J. L., & Luedicke, J. (2012). Strategies to address weight-based victimization: Youths' preferred support interventions from classmates, teachers, and parents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42(3), 315-327. Rosenthal, L., Earnshaw, V. A., Carroll-Scott, A., Henderson, K. E., Peters, S. M., McCaslin, C., & Ickovics, J. R. (2013). Weight- and race-based bulling: Health associations among urban adolescents. Journal of Health Psychology. Russell, S. T., Sinclair, K., Poteat, P., & Koenig, B. (2012). Adolescent health and harassment based on discriminatory bias. American Journal of Public Health, 102(3), 493-495. Saylor, C.F. & Leach, J.B. (2009) Perceived bullying and social support students accessing special inclusion programming. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities. 21, 69-80. Thornberg, T., Tenenbaum, L., Varjas, K., Meyers, J., Jungert, T., & Vanegas, G. (2012). Bystander motivation in bullying incidents: To intervene or not to intervene? Western Journal of Emergency Medicine , 8(3), 247-252. U.S. Department of Education , National Center for Educational Statistics (2013). Student reports of bullying and cyber-bullying: Results from the 2011 school crime supplement to the national crime victimization survey. Wright, T., & Smith, N. (2013). Bullying of LGBT youth and school climate for LGBT educators. GEMS (Gender, Education, Music, & Society, 6(1). Show These Statistics to Your Superintendent.802-362-5448 -- Info@StandUpToBullying.net Our evidence-based programs dramatically improve the culture of your school. 802-362-5448   **District Tour Specials** Competitive Rates are available when multiple schools in your area schedule together for our District Packages.  BULLYING PREVENTION BOOKS, DVDS, AND POSTERS   Shipping and handling is included on all orders. Fax purchase orders to: 802-549-5024 DVD   Books   Posters Info@StandUpToBullying.net Can you define bullying?How can teachers stop bullying? What are the different types of bullying? What is the difference between playful teasing verses hurtful taunting? How do I teach students to forgive themselves? What is verbal bullying?What is physical bullying?Who are the bystanders?What are bystander responsibilities?What are the ways to stop bullying?How should students respond to verbal bullying? 802-362-5448 Providing dynamic and practical anti-bullying workshops to students, staff and parents, Mike Dreiblatt teaches realistic bullying prevention strategies and best practices that can be used immediately to STOP bullying. Bullying Prevention PSAs!!! Mike In Action - YouTube Clips!!! Sexual Harassment Prevention Staff Professional DevelopmentWorkplace Bullying and Harassment Student, Staff, Parent Workshops Info@StandUpToBullying.net  ©2014 www.StandUpToBullying.net | Info@StandUpToBullying.net 802-362-5448 -- 136 Clover Lane Manchester Center Vermont 05255

---

www.StandUpToBullying.net 802-362-5448 Info@StandUpToBullying.net

Understanding the Roles of  Mental Health Professionals  in Community-Wide  Bullying Prevention Efforts  What is known about bullying and its consequences?  Bullying may seriously affect the mental health, physical health, and academic well-being of children and youth who are bullied. Research confirms that: • Children and youth who are bullied are more likely than those not bullied to have symptoms of depression, harm themselves, high levels of suicidal thoughts, and lower academic achievement; they also are more likely to be lonely and want to avoid school (Cook, Williams, Guerra, Kim, & Sadek, 2010; Klomek, Marrocco, Kleinman, Schoenfeld, & Gould, 2008; Reijntjes, Kamphuis, Prinzie, & Telch, 2010) . • Children and youth who bully others are more likely to exhibit delinquent behaviors, dislike school, drop out of school, bring weapons to school, think of suicide and attempt suicide, drink alcohol and smoke, and hold beliefs that support violence (Cook et al., 2010; Klomek et al., 2008; Nansel, Overpeck, Pilla, Ruan, Simons-Morton, & Scheidt, 2001). • Children and youth who are involved in bullying (are bullied, bully others, or both) are more likely than others to report health problems such as headaches, backaches, stomach pain, sleep problems, poor appetites, and bed-wetting (Gini & Pozzoli, 2009). Mental Heath Professional's Unique Roles in Addressing Bullying How can mental health professionals help to prevent bullying?  Whether community- or school-based, mental health professionals know the effects that bullying can have on those directly involved as well as those who witness it, and they play important roles in preventing and responding to bullying. Psychologists, counselors, and social workers who are based in schools bring critical expertise to the task of planning and implementing school- and community-wide approaches to bullying prevention. This includes:  • Collecting and using data to inform prevention efforts (Bauman, 2008). They can lead efforts to conduct needs assessments within schools, identify evidence-based practices to address bullying, establish systems to monitor progress in reducing bullying, evaluate and interpret data, and use data to inform future bullying prevention and intervention efforts (Rossen & Cowan, 2012).  • Training and advising educators, families, and students. Practitioners can inform others about the nature and prevalence of bullying, its effects, and effective prevention and intervention strategies (Bauman, 2008; Jacobsen & Bauman, 2007). • Collaborating with educators. They can work with educators and others to develop policies about bullying and implement evidence-based efforts to reduce bullying and improve school climate and safety (American Counseling Association [ACA], 2008; Jacobsen & Bauman, 2007). These rules and policies should provide students, families, and staff clear guidance about appropriate student behavior. Harsh, inflexible discipline strategies, such as zero tolerance policies, should be avoided. Such policies have been found to harm student-adult relationships, dampen school climate, and contribute to poor student achievement (APA Zero Tolerance Task Force, 2008). Instead, graduated sanctions should be used for rule violations, which are appropriate for the developmental level of the child and the nature and severity of the bullying. Removal from the school-setting should be a measure of last resort.  • Teaching, counseling, and consulting. Practitioners can help teach students social skills (ACA, 2008), counsel students how to manage aggressive tendencies, offer support and coping strategies for those who are bullied, counsel family members of affected students, and consult with educators to encourage appropriate behavior of students (Bauman, 2008).  Mental health professionals who work in settings outside of schools also play critical roles in the prevention of bullying by providing counseling to clients who are involved in bullying or have been affected by it; providing training and consultation in bullying and bullying prevention within schools and/or at community gatherings; and evaluating the effectiveness of school-based or community-based prevention efforts. Whether they are based in schools or in other settings within the community, mental health professionals can work together and with educators, health professionals, and community stakeholders, to support effective bullying prevention and response efforts.  Challenges & Opportunities for Mental Health Professionals  Mental health professionals experience a number of challenges and opportunities in efforts to prevent bullying in schools and communities:  • Ongoing professional development and continued education related to school bullying. School-based psychologists, counselors, and social workers are often on the front lines in prevention and response efforts and have expressed an interest in ongoing professional development and training opportunities. In a national survey, a majority (87%) had obtained some training through professional conferences and school in-service workshops, yet indicated a need for more extensive and formal education. Fewer than half reported receiving relevant training during graduate school (Lund, Blake, Ewing, & Banks, 2012).  • Multiple demands. School counselors, school psychologists, and other school-based mental health professionals have many roles and, like educators, experience multiple demands on their time. Therefore, it is critical to work with others to prioritize ongoing, sustainable and school-wide bullying prevention efforts.  • Communication between school-based and community mental health professionals. Some students and their families may use the services of both school- based and community mental health professionals. To most effectively meet the needs of these individuals, mental health professionals in both settings must communicate effectively with each other. Doing so requires a commitment to collaborate and careful planning to ensure that necessary consents are obtained.  • Opportunities for partnership and collaboration. With the passage of anti-bullying laws in nearly every state, most school districts are required to develop policies to address bullying at school. Mental health professionals can bring: unique expertise, a collaborative approach, and leadership to the development and refinement of these policies; the selection and implementation of evidence-based prevention and intervention approaches that avoid common misdirections such as zero tolerance policies; and the evaluation of these efforts over time.  • Leaders in translation of social science research. They also play important roles in translating social science research on issues such as the effects of bullying on students and effective (and ineffective) interventions. For example, recent media publicity around suicides by youth who were bullied by their peers has led many to incorrectly assume that bullying often leads directly to suicide. Mental health professionals can lend their expertise in explaining and reinforcing that suicide is a complex issue and that there are many factors that may contribute to a youth’s risk of suicide.  • Reimbursement for bullying-related services. Mental health professionals in the community are likely to be reimbursed for services to children and families that are related to bullying, which may help to promote effective prevention and treatment services. How Can Mental Health Professionals Engage and Include Others in Community Bullying Prevention Strategies  Because of their training, collaborative approach, and focus on the social and emotional well-being of children, youth, and families, mental health professionals can assist in leading school- and community-based bullying prevention and response efforts. Since bullying does not stop at the doors of the school, community-wide attention to bullying is important. Given their daily experiences and their role as leaders in translating the latest in social science research, school- and community-based mental health professionals can work with children and youth, families, school personnel, and other stakeholders to promote community-wide efforts to address bullying.  Ideas for Next Steps  • Learn more about bullying prevention through StopBullying.gov or the resources listed below. Review the research presented in the modules and how it is best communicated to motivated audiences. • Review any existing data within your school or community regarding bullying. Consult the Community Action Toolkit, which provides helpful tools to perform a landscape assessment that will help you identify relevant data, as well as the broader needs and opportunities within the community. • Plan a bullying prevention event that will inform a broader network of school- and community-based mental health practitioners, as well as parents, youth and other members of the community to help dispel common myths and misdirections. This will also shed light on the importance of a holistic, community-based effort with a public-health approach. • Develop professional networks to support bullying prevention efforts and advocate for high-quality training opportunities (within graduate training programs and in continuing education) to increase mental health professionals’ knowledge about bullying and effective prevention and response. Resources and References Resources  American Psychological Association’s “Resolution on Bullying Among Children and Youth” – This statement “encourages the implementation and dissemination of bullying prevention programs and interventions that have demonstrated effectiveness in schools and communities.” For more information, visit www.apa.org.  Centers for Disease Control and Prevention provides an in-depth “compendium of assessment tools” for measuring “bullying victimization, perpetration and bystander experiences.” For more information, visit www.cdc.gov. Federal Partners in Bullying Prevention’s Webinar on Bullying and Suicide – This webinar provides current research and science on the relationship between bullying and suicide and outlines some of the shared risk and protective factors. For more information,  visit www.sprc.org.  Mental Health America, Bullying: What to do about it – This resource provides information on how to address bullying and includes tip sheets on bullying and LGBT youth. For more information, visit www.mentalhealthamerica.net.  National Association of School Psychologists’ Bullying Prevention Resources – This website provides a variety of resources on bullying and bullying prevention, including “A framework for school-wide bullying prevention and safety” which guides education agencies and school administrators in implementing effective, sustainable, school-wide bullying prevention and safety efforts. For more information, visit www.nasponline.org.  References American Counseling Association (2008). Effectiveness of school counseling. Retrieved fromhttp://www. ctschoolcounselor.org/news/effectiveness-school-counseling APA Zero Tolerance Task Force (2008). Are zero tolerance policies effective in the schools? An evidentiary review and recommendations. American Psychologist, 63, 852-862. Bauman, S. (2008). The role of elementary school counselors in reducing school bullying. The Elementary School Journal, 108, 362-375. Cook, C. R., Williams, K. R., Guerra, N. G., Kim, T. E., & Sadek, S. (2010). Predictors of bullying and victimization in childhood and adolescence: A meta-analytic investigation. School Psychology Quarterly, 25, 65-83. Gini, G., & Pozzoli, T. (2009). Association between bullying and psychosomatic problems: A meta-analysis. Pediatrics, 123, 1059-1065. Jacobsen, K. E., & Bauman, S. (2007). Bullying in schools: School counselors’ responses to three types of bullying incidents. Professional School Counseling, 11, 1-9. Klomek, A. B., Marrocco, F., Kleinman, M., Schonfeld, I. S., & Gould, M. S. (2008). Peer victimization, depression, and suicidiality in adolescents. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, 28, 166-180. Lund, E. M., Blake, J. J., Ewing, H. K., & Banks, C. S. (2012). School counselors’ and school psychologists’ bullying prevention and intervention strategies: A look into real-world practices. Journal of School Violence, 11, 246-265. Nansel, T. R., Overpeck, M. D., Pilla, R. S., Ruan, W. J., Simons-Morton, B., & Scheidt, P.(2001). Bullying behavior among U.S. youth: Prevalence and association with psychosocial adjustment. Journal of the American Medical Association, 285, 2094-2100. Reijntjes, A., Kamphuis, J. H., Prinzie, P., & Telch, M. J. (2010). Peer victimization and internalizing problems in children:  A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Child Abuse & Neglect, 34, 244-252. Robers, S., Kemp, J., Truman, J., & Snyder, T. D. (2013). Indicators of School Crime and Safety: 2012. Retrieved from: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2013/2013036.pdf Rossen, E., & Cowan, K. C. (2012). A framework for schoolwide bullying prevention and safety [Brief]. Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists. Available athttp://www.nasponline.org/resources/bullying/Bullying_Brief_12.pdf

When was the last time your school had bullying prevention, professional development training? 802-362-5448 -- Info@StandUpToBullying.net

802-362-5448 Our evidence-based programs dramatically improve the culture of your school.   BULLYING PREVENTION BOOKS, DVDS, AND POSTERS   Shipping and handling is included on all orders. Fax purchase orders to: 802-549-5024 DVD   Books   Posters Info@StandUpToBullying.net Can you define bullying?How can teachers stop bullying? What are the different types of bullying? What is the difference between playful teasing verses hurtful taunting? How do I teach students to forgive themselves? What is verbal bullying?What is physical bullying?Who are the bystanders?What are bystander responsibilities?What are the ways to stop bullying?How should students respond to verbal bullying? 802-362-5448 Providing dynamic and practical anti-bullying workshops to students, staff and parents, Mike Dreiblatt teaches realistic bullying prevention strategies and best practices that can be used immediately to STOP bullying. Bullying Prevention PSAs!!! Mike In Action - YouTube Clips!!! Sexual Harassment Prevention Staff Professional DevelopmentWorkplace Bullying and Harassment Student, Staff, Parent Workshops Info@StandUpToBullying.net **District Tour Specials** Competitive Rates are available when multiple schools in your area schedule together for our District Packages.

©2014 www.StandUpToBullying.net | Info@StandUpToBullying.net 802-362-5448 -- 136 Clover Lane Manchester Center Vermont 0525

Are You Setting Your School District up for a Lawsuit?: Why Job Titles Matter More than You May Think

June 4, 2014 by Chett Daniel Leave a Comment

(This article was co-authored by Adam Taylor, Senior Consultant and Director of Labor Relations at k12hrsolutions)

How important are job titles in your school district?  Unclear or inaccurate job titles may be a lawsuit waiting to happen in your school district.

I usually do not spend a lot of time here on k12hrsolutions talking about how to prevent lawsuits through HR practices.  That has been the traditional role of HR, defensive in nature.  Most of the topics on k12hrsolutions focus on how HR can be used in an offensive and proactive manner. We devote most of our time on articles discussing how districts can become more effective in reaching their organizational goals through the use of strategic HR tools and practices. A couple of recent events have persuaded me to focus a couple posts on helping districts ensure they are legally compliant and not setting themselves up for costly and embarrassing lawsuits.

Thou Shalt Not Misuse Job Titles

This past week I read a news story about school district job titles in the Cincinnati Catholic Schools.  According to the article, new contracts issued to teachers within the Archdiocese of Cincinnati prohibit educators, regardless of personal or religious beliefs, from sharing living arrangements with partners out of wedlock or having sex outside of marriage.  The new contracts also forbid teachers from using in-vitro fertilization or engaging in, or supporting a homosexual lifestyle.    The article went on to say the new contracts for the 2014-2015 school year added the job title “ministers” to all district teachers.  The addition of this new job title is seen by many as a legal maneuver to protect the archdiocese from being sued by teachers for infringing upon their civil rights.  Ministerial exceptions have been used in past court cases where the church could demonstrate the larger part of that person’s role was ministerial in nature.  (This is where this case is going to get sticky).

Under the Fair Labor and Standards Act (FLSA),   Section 541.2 specifically states “A job title alone is insufficient to establish the exempt status of an employee. The exempt or nonexempt status of any particular employee must be determined on the basis of whether the employee’s salary and duties meet the requirements of the regulations.”   The duties test boil down to what primary duties/ work is the employee actually performing.  In short, the district employees’ actual job tasks must be evaluated, along with how the particular job tasks “fit” into the employer’s overall operations.  Simply changing the job title of an employee to fit an organizational need will likely lose any court challenges.  While the Cincinnati Archdiocese situation does not fall under FLSA rules, it will likely be challenged based on EEOC, First Amendment rights, or other Civil Rights issues.  Judges and attorneys will look closely at the same factors under FLSA such as duties teachers perform, not their job titles to determine if, in fact, educators can be classified as ministers.

In mentioning the recent events in Cincinnati I am not attempting to incite a debate over whether the archdiocese choice is right or wrong.  Rather, I wanted to highlight a very public example of how simply trying to change a job title to fit operational objectives can potentially backfire. Let me discuss another example that does not have as many hot button issues.

Job Titles Are Not a Tool to Manage Payroll

Approximately three months ago a very large school district contacted us through email.  We spoke with them over the phone the next day to see how we could help them.  The district wanted help in updating the job descriptions for nearly 200 different positions in their school district.  As I spoke with them and learned more about their needs and situation they told me the district was in the process of settling a costly lawsuit regarding overtime pay.  The district representative said the previous central office administrative team decided they could save the district money by cutting overtime pay.  The solution was to provide new job titles for many of the districts clerical type jobs.  As many of you are aware, under the FLSA   unless exempt, employees are to be paid at an hourly rate and must be paid at one and one-half of their regular hourly rate for any overtime worked.  The former leadership team at the central office thought if they gave some employees (who were performing clerical type work) exempt-like job titles of “manager” or “director” they could make them “exempt” employees and have them work overtime without the expense of overtime since exempt employees are paid salary and are not entitled to overtime pay.  (Disclaimer: While it is not true in the situation I am discussing here, in situations salaried employees can be classified as non-exempt).

Several of the district’s employees were not impressed by their new classification of an exempt employee with a glorified job title and small raise when they realized their monthly salary was actually less than it had been under their old job titles and FLSA classification when factoring in the overtime they would have normally been paid for performing.  As a result, employees filed a lawsuit under the Fair Labor Standards Act claiming they were still performing predominantly non-exempt tasks at work, therefore they should have been paid overtime for all occasions when they worked more than 40 hours in a week.  The judge found in favor of the employees and the district paid substantial fees in court costs, fines, and past due wages, not to mention the damage to employee trust and community public relations.

School Districts that Misuse Job Titles Are Becoming Targets

Lawsuits filed under FLSA against school districts are on the rise.  An article from the American Bar Association suggests the increase may be due to attempts to shift wage costs (as discussed in the example above) or in many cases, due to aggressive marketing by law offices that are trying to increase their business by educating employees through newspapers and commercials giving them indicators to see if their employers are in violation of FLSA and are possibly owed past wages.  It’s a new era of ambulance chasers, but now they are school bus chasers.

Job Titles Matter When Dealing with Unions

Finally school districts must ensure job titles and the classifications to which they place employees do not interfere with employee rights under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).  Under the NLRA an employer may not:

• interfere with or restrain employees who are exercising their rights to organize, bargain collectively, and engage in other concerted activities for their own protection
• interfere with the formation of any labor organization—or contribute financial or other support to it
• encourage or discourage membership in a labor organization by discriminating in hiring, tenure, or employment conditions
• discharge or discriminate against employees who have filed charges or testified under the NLRA, or
• refuse to bargain collectively with the employees’ majority representative.

So what does any of this have to do with job titles?

Managers are not protected by the NLRA, and cannot join unions or be part of the bargaining unit. These employees are considered to be part of an organization’s management rather than its labor force.  If school district employees are given job titles such as manager or director, but the nature of their work is not managerial or supervisory in nature, school districts may find themselves appearing in court or before the National Labor Relations Board explaining why they are preventing district employees from exercising their right to join a labor union.  Cases likeNLRB vs. Kentucky River Community Care Inc. have also held that some supervisors can be represented by the union.  State and local laws may vary and provide collective bargaining rights to supervisors.

Concluding Thoughts About School District Job Titles

Job titles for school district employees are important for reasons beyond legal ramifications, however school district leaders must ensure they adhere to federally mandated labor laws.  Do not assume you are compliant.  It may be worth your time to review and update your job descriptions and job titles to ensure your school district doesn’t end up with a dunce cap on in court.  If Wal-Mart, the world’s largest retailer and largest employer, has found itself before federal courts numerous times over the past decade due to inaccurate or misrepresented job titles and employee classifications, chances are school districts are in danger of this HR faux pas as well.  Take some time this summer to review your district’s job titles and ensure job titles accurately reflect school district employee duties.

As always, if you need additional help or advice, please contact us and a member of our team will be happy to assist your district in any way we can.  If you found the information here useful, please consider sharing this article through your favorite social media platforms.

(Understand this article will be read by individuals all across the U.S. and in many other countries and we cannot write in generalized legal terms, nor is this article intended to be legal advice.  We bring up these points to ensure school districts are, at the very least, mindful of the considerations that must be made when creating or reassigning job titles).