Firing a Teacher

The Talmud rules that a teacher who is negligent in his duties may be fired without warning.[1] Indeed, in almost any profession, one who makes a mistake whose consequences are exceptionally severe can often be fired without warning. There is some discussion, however, as to what type of negligence the Talmud is referring to when it rules that a teacher may be fired without warning.

According to Rashi, the Talmud is referring to a teacher who teaches school children false information.[2] Teaching children false information is deemed to be an “irreversible loss” as it is assumed that children are so impressionable that once false information enters their mind, it will remain there forever.

Tosfot[3] challenges Rashi’s interpretation of a teacher’s negligence based on a different Talmudic passage which states[4] that false information that a child is taught is indeed eventually forgotten. According to this approach, teaching a child incorrect information cannot be deemed an "irreversible” or “permanent” loss as the child will naturally forget what he learned! As such, Tosfot interprets “irreversible loss" as the time that was wasted learning the incorrect information when it could have been used for learning true and accurate material.Since such time can never be replaced, it is deemed to be the “irreversible loss” for which teachers can be immediately dismissed.

The Ran, on the other hand, attempts to draw a distinction between the different types of false and mistaken information that a child might be exposed to.[5] He says that when the Talmud teaches that incorrect information is eventually forgotten, it refers to information that a child picked up on his own. Mistakes that are ingrained by an influential figure, however, such as a teacher, are permanently set in a child’s mind.

It seems from Tosfot that firing a teacher for merely wasting time is justifiable, as well. Indeed, the Rema writes in the name of earlier authorities that a teacher can be dismissed without prior warning if he wastes "a day or two."[6] It is explained that "a day or two" refers to a teacher wasting a full twenty-four hour period of learning.[7] According to this approach, anything less than this amount of time is inadmissible grounds for firing. The source for defining "a day or two" as a twenty-four hour period is found in the Midrash.[8] When a master injures his Gentile slave, there are a number of different possible penalties that the master could be subject to. It all depends on the extent of the injuries and whether the slave survives the ordeal "for a day or two." The Midrash says that when the Torah writes "a day or two," it means a twenty-four hour period.

It is interesting to note that although halacha makes allowances for employees to strike, Torah teachers are an exception to this rule and are generally not allowed to strike. This is because teaching Torah is not considered just another profession but, rather, a religious duty. Indeed, although Torah teachers are paid for their work like all others nowadays, this money is considered payment in exchange for not seeking alternative employment. For a teacher to strike would cause mass “bittul zman,” waste of time, as students would be left without a learning structure. As the Talmud says, “every moment a child is not learning causes irreparable damage,” and as we learned, it is forbidden for teachers, or anyone for that matter, to intentionally cause “irreparable damage.” Nevertheless, Rabbi Moshe Feinstein allows teachers to strike if they are being abused or taken advantage of by their employer.[9]

[1] Bava Metzia 109a. This chapter is adapted from the "Daf Yomi Digest" to Bava Metzia 109.

[2] Rashi, Bava Metzia 109a s.v. mikri.

[3] Tosfot, Bava Metzia 109a s.v. V'sefer.

[4] Bava Batra 21a.

[5] Ran s.v. Mikri.

[6] Rema, CM 306:8.

[7] Sma, CM 306:21.

[8] Mechilta D'rashbi, Shemot 21:21.

[9] Igrot Moshe, CM 1:59, 2:59.