Alamance-Burlington Schools terminated 66 employees; 57 substitutes inactive for missing six assignments

Alamance-Burlington School System dismissed 66 employees during calendar year 2025, records show, with substitute teachers accounting for the overwhelming majority of terminations. Fifty-seven of the 66 terminated employees were substitutes, and records indicate most were removed from the active substitute list for not meeting the district’s minimum assignment threshold.

The reporting materials include the specific phrasing that substitutes were “removed from the active substitute list largely because they did not complete the six assignments required to remain active.” One of the terminated individuals held dual roles as a substitute teacher and a substitute daycare worker.

Taken together, the 66 terminations represent about 1.7 percent of the district’s roughly 3,873 employees in 2025. The same set of materials shows another 380 ABSS employees resigned or retired during the year, while the district reported no employee demotions in 2025. ABSS officials “have since furnished the newspaper with records of all employees who had been terminated, demoted, suspended, and/or resigned in 2025,” the records state.

Not all terminations were administrative. Three non-substitute dismissals cited in the materials involved allegations of assault. Two employees were fired following alleged assaults on students; the records note that “a misdemeanor charge against one now-former employee has since been expunged; another former ABSS employee received a conditional discharge when her case went to court, meaning the conviction won’t appear on her record, providing she successfully completes 12 months of unsupervised probation.” A third employee was fired after an assault tied to a domestic dispute, and Alamance County court records show “no criminal charge was filed against her.”

The scale and composition of the terminations have practical implications for classroom operations and local families. Removing 57 substitute teachers from the active roster — many under a policy tied to completing six assignments — could strain schools that rely on substitute coverage for teacher absences, field trips, and extracurricular supervision. School administrators and principals will face logistical pressure to fill gaps or reassign staff if substitute availability remains constrained.

The materials also note that ABSS suspended a number of employees with and without pay in 2025; details on suspensions were deferred for a later installment. That outstanding coverage, together with the district’s personnel materials, leaves several questions for district leaders and the public: how the six-assignment rule is administered, how substitutes are notified and tracked, and whether the district’s disciplinary practices favor termination over alternatives such as demotion or progressive corrective measures.

For Alamance County parents, educators, and taxpayers, the immediate takeaway is operational: staffing churn and a large number of retirements and resignations could affect classroom continuity. The district’s records provide a baseline of counts and outcomes, but further public records and interviews with ABSS officials will be needed to clarify policy details, timelines, and any steps the district plans to take to stabilize substitute staffing and address disciplinary cases.