A $25,000+ misunderstanding

Why Letters of Intent and NSEA Advocacy Matter

Papillion LaVista Education Association (PLEA) member Johnnie Anderson was plainspoken and realistic about his limits when a medical condition made it unsafe for him to continue teaching high school wood shop in early 2025. Rather than push past what his health would allow, he worked with his district to find a path forward.

“The dust and environment just weren’t compatible with my health,” Anderson said. “My doctor made it clear that continuing as a shop teacher wasn’t a risk worth taking.”

Anderson, a former union electrician and second-career educator, is no stranger to career changes. Certified in physical education, Anderson contacted his district to pursue a PE role. He followed up with an email and a formal closing meeting, believing the situation was clear. 

In March, Anderson received the district’s standard letter of intent to return. 

“Within five seconds of getting my intent to return letter, I signed it and sent it back to them electronically. As far as I was concerned, getting an intent to return letter meant the district wanted me, and me signing it meant that I was telling the district that I wanted to be in the district,” Anderson said. 

Near the end of the school year, an elementary PE position opened, and Anderson interviewed after encouragement from district leadership. Despite positive feedback, he did not receive the position.

Critical Cut in Pay
As the 2025–26 school year approached, Anderson was offered a floating substitute position. It was not his ideal role, but it would keep him in the district. He immediately noticed a problem—the position would pay around $25,000 less annually, a drastic cut from his certified salary.

Given his years with the district, the salary placement did not align with his position on the salary schedule. At the same time, the district pressed for a quick response, citing an upcoming school board meeting that would require approval of his rehiring for the role. The situation did not make sense to Anderson.

“That’s when I said, ‘No way. It's time to call my union,’” Anderson said.

Help from PLEA and NSEA
He contacted his Papillion La Vista Education Association representative, who escalated the issue to NSEA Organizational Specialist David Nielsen. Together, Nielsen and Anderson requested a meeting with the district.

“I found minutes from a previous meeting showing the board had accepted Johnnie’s resignation—but Johnnie had never resigned,” said Nielsen.  

During the meeting, district representatives cited an email Anderson had sent thanking his principal as evidence of his intent to resign. Nielsen pushed back, noting the message contained no language ending Anderson’s employment or indicating a resignation.

“I was so thankful for David in that meeting because I was so frustrated I couldn’t think logically,” Anderson said. “There was back and forth, but eventually David explained to them that the reason I didn’t look anywhere else was because I had signed my letter of intent.”

Letter of Intent 
A letter of intent signals a certificated employee’s plan to return to a school district for the following year. Under state law, districts may require those letters on or after March 15, and once signed and submitted, they are binding. Failing to return a letter of intent by a lawful deadline can jeopardize an educator’s employment status.

For educators, letters of intent provide clarity and protection, documenting their commitment to a district and preserving salary placement, benefits and tenure. When questions arise, the record created by a signed letter can be critical.

After Nielsen raised the letter of intent, the room went silent. He and Anderson paused while district representatives searched their system for the digital record.

“She looked right at me and said, ‘You did sign your letter of intent, and we do need to find you a job,’” Anderson said.

A $25,000 Meeting
The district reversed course. Anderson retained his certified pay, benefits, tenure and placement on the salary scale. Instead of a cut in pay with the floating substitute position, he was given a position in one building for the 2025-26 school year and compensated appropriately at the rate of a full-time certified staff member. 

“That one meeting was a $25,000 meeting,” Nielsen said. “Without that letter of intent and without advocacy, Johnnie would have lost compensation and protections he had earned.”

During the 2025–26 school year, Anderson worked as a paraeducator while awaiting placement. This December, he was notified he would begin a full-time elementary PE position for the 2026–27 school year.

For Anderson, the experience reinforced the importance of both documentation and membership.

“There is no doubt in my mind that the letter of intent is the most important document I’ve ever signed,” he said. “And the second most important thing was having someone like David, my local association and NSEA behind me.”