0010 7230 82 (Sept. 16, 2014) – The claimant’s re-appointment letter was not reasonable assurance of reemployment as a long-term substitute teacher for the following academic term, because the letter did not offer a specific position and the claimant had to affirmatively apply for posted positions. The offer was a mere possibility of reemployment and nothing more.
0002 1339 03 (May 12, 2014) – An adjunct professor offered only two courses in the fall semester, after teaching five courses during the prior academic period, had reasonable assurance of teaching based upon a pattern of courses not being cancelled due to inadequate enrollment, but the offer was not under substantially similar economic terms and conditions. Board distinguishes adjunct professors from substitute teachers.
BR-121907-A (July 31, 2012) - Under G.L. c. 151A, § 28A, an on-call substitute teacher who worked during the spring academic term was not entitled to benefits over the summer, because she had reasonable assurance of reemployment as an on-call substitute teacher under the same economic terms and conditions for the fall. It makes no difference that she had worked very few days during the spring term.
BR-117509-A (Mar. 27, 2012) - If an on-call substitute teacher receives reasonable assurance to work as a substitute teacher for any school employer in the fall, he is precluded under G.L. c. 151A, § 28A from collecting benefits during the summer based upon any of the wages that he earned from substitute teaching.
BR-109037-OP (Aug. 4, 2009) -- Claimant laid off from a full-time teacher position during the base period subsequently worked as an on-call substitute with reasonable assurance of returning to work as a substitute after summer vacation. Because the entire base period employment is considered; not just the last job before summer break, she was eligible for benefits based upon the full-time teacher wages.