Our so-called top-heavy school administration does not allow for enough administrators to observe the teachers whom they are supposed to manage. Teachers need to be observed by their administrators and by outside educators at least three times a year, and three times a quarter would be better. Those formal observations must be written up according to specific rubrics, with criticisms, both positive and negative, as well as recommendations for improvement, enhancement, and professional development. Those comprise teachers' formal job evaluations. Enough negative evaluations can result in termination, which will not be overturned.

People who bring suit in cases like that can be assessed the court costs when they lose.

If the district chooses to settle, which many will rather than put in the time, it sets a bad prescedent.

If the district has inadequate documentation to support firing a teacher, it will lose. See Paragraph 1, above.

The reason the organizations you accuse of creating a litigious atmosphere became interested in defending teachers from termination is because of the very list of wrongs I have provided. Believe it or not, it still happens anyway.

If school districts are afraid to fight lawsuits that they have the wherewithal to win, that's nobody's fault but their own.

If you think that teachers should be treated like WalMart employees, fine. I don't notice anyone backing away from prosecuting the teacher that you have mentioned.