Last week I reported here about efforts by Grossmont Union High School officials to intimidate a teacher who simply told a student that, yes, people in same-sex relationships experience domestic abuse just like heterosexual couples do.

What is significant is that the teacher is a tenured, or permanent, teacher in California. If school officials at Grossmont wanted to remove her from her post, not only would they have to follow formal channels, they would have to show that she is a poor teacher.

But if a teacher is a probationary, or non-permanent, teacher, the district could simply not elect to renew her contract. And that’s what happened to a teacher in a recent case. The teacher objected because school officials would go into her classroom and search the belongings of her students without any suspicion of any wrongdoing by the students. She thought the policy was unconstitutional and involved racial profiling because the district was picking on schools that had mostly black and Hispanic students.

She was right about her concerns. She made headlines with her refusal to let school officials into her classroom. But she lost her job. Oh, she wasn’t fired. She wasn’t dismissed. The district merely elected not to renew her contract.

The California Court of Appeal said she wasn’t fired. She had no expectation of continuing employment because she was merely a probationary employee. The court dismissed her claims for wrongful termination and free speech concerns.

This case involved searching students, but it could have easily been about a district’s failure to protect gay and lesbian students and teachers from harassment.

So what does any of this have to do with Prop. 74, a measure on next week’s California ballot? The measure would extend the probationary period for teachers from two years to five years.

On its face, it doesn’t sound bad. But during that five-year period California teachers can be fired summarily. But it’s not called a firing, it’s called a “non-renewal” or “non-election” to extend the contract another year, and school officials don’t have to give any reason for it.

After the two-year period, upon election to a third year, teachers have permanent status. Thus, in order to remove a teacher, school districts must follow due process. They have to give the teacher notice of his or her deficiencies and the teacher must be given 90 days to improve. And, of course, there is a procedure under which a teacher can appeal adverse decisions by school administrators.

California law also allows teachers to be fired, even with tenure, upon conviction of serious felonies or other reprehensible behavior. Ironically, as you might have guessed, that used to include being gay or lesbian.

The governor has proposed Prop. 74 as part of a school reform program. His contention – as well as that of some school board members – is that it’s very difficult to fire a tenured teacher. And it’s supposed to be, because, as a trade-off for the horrible working conditions, at least teachers can expect some level of job security based on seniority. It’s also supposed to guard against school administrators firing teachers in retaliation for speaking out against unfair district policies.

It is true that some veteran teachers use old teaching methods, some don’t follow the new state standards for state testing, and others just show up and play movies. That’s why there needs to be some second level of review, often called post-tenure review, where permanent teachers are reviewed every five years to determine if they are still outstanding performers in the classroom. Such a review should be done the same way it is done on the college level: by peers.

There’s no perfect system. My guess is that voters will simply approve Prop. 74 because they think that it will somehow magically change public schooling in California.

Let’s be real. Teaching in public schools is a horrible job. That’s why the national statistics show that the majority of teachers leave the profession within five years – Los Angeles reports that one-third of its teachers left within five years.

Why are teachers giving up these “cush” jobs? Overcrowded classrooms, students who can’t read or write, and too many students whose disciplinary problems make them more suitable for the California Youth Authority.

This is how bad it is. L.A. Unified admitted that it must consult with gangs in Los Angeles about transferring teachers and students to different schools. Gee, with a picture like this, do you really think the problem is bad teachers?

If Prop. 74 passes, then the governor should propose that probationary teachers have some recourse when their non-renewal is due to the teacher exercising their freedom of speech.