Review of the Case Study "Layoff and Reduction-in-Force" ABSTRACT The following discussion provides a critical reaction and analysis of the case study: Layoff and Reduction-in-Force. In the case study, it becomes evident that the Piscataway School Board made the mistake of laying off Sharon Taxman because of her race. And in the wake of a Supreme Court decision in Taxman’s favor, it also becomes evident that the Piscataway School Board was remiss in having a Reduction-in-Force (RIF) policy in place that properly reflected and supported the laws concerning race and employment. The district also should have had a RIF policy in place that made decisions about hiring a matter of qualification and merit. It is likely that if a RIF had been in...The end:
.....hool Board walked into the layoff and reduction decisions very much ill-prepared from a legal point of view. And even if they did not consult an attorney, the Piscataway School Board should have held an executive session closed to the public so they could talk about layoffs and force reduction decisions in private. So, in sum, the Piscataway School Board and other decision makers had a lot of options in approaching this issue properly. REFERENCES Essex, N.L. (2009). The 200 Most Frequently Asked Legal Questions for Educators. Corwin Press. Imber, M. & Van Geel, T. (2010). A Teacher's Guide to Education Law. Taylor & Francis. Layoff and Reduction-in-Force. (n.d.) Scott, V. (2009). Conflict Resolution at Work for Dummies. For Dummies.