Can Substitute Teachers Collect Unemployment Between Assignments?

The federal rule behind the denial

Under 26 U.S.C. § 3304(a)(6)(A), states are required to deny unemployment benefits to employees of educational institutions for the period between academic years or terms — including summer and holiday recess — if the employee has a contract or 'reasonable assurance' of returning to work in a similar capacity for the next term. This rule applies to both professional staff (teachers) and non-professional staff (support roles, and, contested as discussed below, substitutes), at both public and nonprofit schools.

The policy rationale is straightforward: unemployment insurance is meant to support people between jobs, not to subsidize a planned, recurring seasonal gap that the worker already knows is coming and already has a next assignment lined up for. The problem for substitutes is that the second half of that sentence — 'already has a next assignment lined up' — is often not actually true in the way it is for a contracted teacher.

What 'reasonable assurance' actually requires

Federal guidance (DOL Unemployment Insurance Program Letter No. 5-17) is specific about what reasonable assurance means: it requires a bona fide offer of employment for the next term, not merely an expectation, a past pattern of rehiring, or being on an active roster. The offer cannot be contingent on enrollment numbers, funding levels, or program changes that haven't yet been decided, and it must come from someone with actual authority to extend it.

Being on a district's substitute-availability list does not automatically satisfy this standard, because a list is not an offer — it is eligibility to be called, which is a meaningfully lower level of assurance than a contract or a specific commitment to provide work.

Why courts and state agencies have split on substitutes specifically

Because sub work is sporadic by nature, several state-level decisions have wrestled with whether districts can treat 'being on the sub list' as reasonable assurance the way they treat a teacher's signed contract. A California appellate decision (Board of Education v. Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board, 1984) held that a substitute did not have reasonable assurance and was entitled to benefits for the summer, reasoning that roster placement is not an offer of work. Washington state's Abulhosn v. Department of Employment Security dealt with a similar question about whether roster status meets the standard.

More recently, Massachusetts Board of Review decisions from 2024-2025 held that an employer's mere assumption a substitute would return — based on the pattern of having rehired that person in past years — is not sufficient by itself to meet the employer's burden of proving reasonable assurance existed. The throughline across these decisions is that the assurance has to be a specific, actual commitment, not an inference drawn from past behavior.

What this means practically if you sub and are considering filing

If you're a substitute facing a gap — summer, an extended school closure, or simply a slow stretch with few calls — whether you qualify for unemployment during that gap depends on the specific facts of your situation and your specific state's interpretation of reasonable assurance, not on a single universal rule. Being told generically 'subs can't get unemployment' is often an oversimplification of a genuinely contested legal question.

The practical approach is to file and let the state make the determination rather than assuming denial is automatic, since several of the decisions above show state agencies and courts siding with subs when the district could not point to an actual, specific offer of returning work.

Before you file for unemployment as a substitute

Check whether your district ever gave you anything more specific than 'we'll call you next year' — an actual offer, a specific date, or a signed agreement changes the analysis.
Gather your work history for the year: how many days you actually worked, and any communication (email, text, portal message) about next-term availability.
File your claim with your state unemployment office directly — don't assume ineligibility based on general advice, since your state's specific application of the reasonable-assurance standard to subs may differ.
If denied, ask specifically what evidence the state used to determine reasonable assurance existed, and consider appealing if that evidence amounts only to an assumption based on past rehiring patterns.
Keep this determination separate from any conversation with your district about future work — filing for unemployment during an off-term gap is a legal process, not a statement about wanting to return.

Sources used for this guide

Rules can change. Use these sources as a starting point and confirm any state, district, student-plan, employment, licensing, or retirement requirement with the agency or team that governs your situation.

Questions school staff ask about this situation

Can substitute teachers get unemployment benefits during summer break?

It depends on whether the district gave you 'reasonable assurance' of returning work next term under 26 U.S.C. § 3304(a)(6)(A) — a specific, bona fide offer, not just being on a substitute roster. Several state decisions have found roster placement alone insufficient.

Does being on a district's substitute call list count as reasonable assurance?

Not automatically. Multiple state-level decisions (California, Washington, Massachusetts) have held that mere roster placement or an assumption based on past rehiring patterns does not meet the reasonable-assurance standard by itself.

Should I bother filing for unemployment if I'm not sure I qualify?

Yes — file and let the state make the actual determination, since this is a genuinely contested area where subs have won benefits in multiple states when the district couldn't show a specific offer of return work.

Does this rule apply to full-time teachers the same way?

The same statute applies, but a signed teaching contract for the next school year is a much clearer form of reasonable assurance than a substitute's informal roster status, so the outcome is more predictable for contracted staff.