Simple gestures can keep you survive! 😉
Today what you have is another term “Reasonable Assurance” but this one is still baby incomplete in usage, faulty in components; it needs more work on the part of the legislators in order to be adequately applicable or to be abolished.
Many cases were brought to court to challenge this term “Reasonable Assurance” which is full of holes.
Reasonable Assurance is just a piece of paper that is used by the employers to strip the employees from their basic rights: the right of earning the right amounts for the lifetime they put in such highly draining poor jobs.
This term was diabolically created to cause some noise over the voice of those who wanted to have what they should in the first place. The full-time employees are not affected by this term. Good for them, but how about the part-timers, the on-call ones, the temp, etc.. all victims of this ugly term.
Why shouldn’t they have the same stability in pay like the other full-timers (By the way full-time jobs are recently cut off from educational districts and instead of teachers, instructional assistants/aids are appointed to keep the cost low while the parents think that their kids get good teaching under real teachers) but this is not the point today.
If you check on that term on Google search, you will find a dishonest definition that does not make any sense to any able stable person. But it is still there to help in defeating those who ask for their rights. When the wording of the term uses “likely” similar to saying: there is no guarantee. In other words, there is doubt about giving this employee work. All kinds of games!
Where is the definition of employees? Why is it missing? Education districts, in specific, have a very long list of the labels they give their employees. What kind of employees this “Reasonable Assurance” cover and on what basis?
Where is it called justice to treat the lower-pay employees as if they are worthless or that their time is worthless too?
“Reasonable Assurance” does not guarantee any work at any time for any given employee and districts refuse to write an explanation for this term. How is this possible not to answer when your employee asks you to explain if this is a guaranteed work or not?
Therefore, either adjust this term or kill it and make everyone feels worthy. It is not fair to issue a confusing term only for the sake of misleading new employees; or else you are having a lot of “Reasonable Doubt” in your “Reasonable Assurance”.