1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Can a Headteacher perform and get paid for the One to One tuition programme

Discussion in 'Governors' started by Rich0216, Feb 19, 2011.

  1. Can a headteacher register themself as a tutor and get paid for it on the one to one tuition programme without the permission of the governors or without the signature of the chair for a change of contract? A pay claim has been made for this when the tuition was probably not carried out and if it was it was in regular school hours.
     
  2. Can a headteacher register themself as a tutor and get paid for it on the one to one tuition programme without the permission of the governors or without the signature of the chair for a change of contract? A pay claim has been made for this when the tuition was probably not carried out and if it was it was in regular school hours.
     
  3. harsh-but-fair

    harsh-but-fair Lead commenter

    I can't see why not
    That seems to indicate that the payment request is fraudulent, which is another matter.
    Welcome to TES, Rich.
     
  4. I was under the impression that Headteacher contracts stated that they must be available at all times to ensure the efficient running of the school, no maximum or minimum working hours on this contract. Meaning there should be no financial rewards for extra time.

    I am really concerned about this as the casual labour form has been approved by the same person on two occasions and there seems to be no record of any one to one tuition for any child.
     
  5. Headteachers can undertake and be paid for MGP. I know of several, including myself, who do so. There are, I think, 2 pay rates, one for tuition during the school day and the other for tuition given outside the school day.
     
  6. According to the MGP guidelines a tutor employed full time at the school in question giving tuition during the normal working day would not recieve any additional pay.
    In this case the payment request is for one to one tuition at £29.56 per hour, 40 hours in one month on a casual labour timesheet. This cannot surely be possible during school hours when there are less than 50 on roll with a 0.5 teaching requirement from the Head. This should also have been approved by the governing body i would have thought.
    This all seems very strange to me and after discovering that there seems to have been no tuition given i am at the stage of consulting professional advice.
     
  7. A couple of things to clarify.
    Firstly, I am assuming that this is ring-fenced money under the government scheme. The money has been provided to your school, and your HT must identify who is going to deliver that tuition. In a 50 pupil school, the options are limited. We have found that the quality of external tutors has been very very poor - my apologies to any good ones out there - but our local supply agencies seem to think that it is acceptable to send the supply teachers who can't get work because schools complain about them. It is normal in many schools to do this in-house, and your HT + 1 or two other teachers are the only people who can do this.
    I know of headteachers who have taken on one to one pupils and been paid. I think it would be stretching the definition of headteacher responsibility to expect them to provide it for free so that the school can claim the money. It is (almost) like offering someone a different contract - while your HT is on duty 24/7, clearly you don't expect them to work 24/7. *If* they have carried out the tuition, then they should be paid. You could, of course, decide as a governing body that they should not be eligible for this in the future - this would be going against the 'norm', but *if* they have carried out the tuition in good faith, it would be a very poor employer who backdated rules and regulations about who can undertake the work.
    The level of claim is not strange. Our LA processes the claim for payment only when the tutoring is complete. I am SLT and a tutor, and I had some difficulty claiming for a child who dropped out after 5 sessions as their computer didn't like the idea of paying me after 5 sessions - I was paid eventually. In theory then, the headteacher may have been tutoring 4 children x 1 hour weekly over the last 10 weeks and therefore be requesting payment for all of this now.
    The difficulties with evidence are complex. There are centralised procedures in place through which schools must submit names and levels of children who have been tutored (after the tuition) before payment is processed. Children's individual details, levels and tuition plans should not be presented to the governing body. Is this the sticking point with your HT? In which case, can the LA confirm that the child has been tutored? Or could you propose that the HT presents the details but with names removed?
    I am actually confused why this is in the hands of governors in the first place? Our governors have been informed of one-to-one tuition, but haven't had to approve any pay, that has all been handled by the LA.
    If, of course, there is no external funding for tuition and the HT has decided to spend the budget employing him/herself in that way, that would be a very different scenario.
     
  8. Thank you for that very precise reply, it has helped a lot.
    This came to light because we became aware of a casual labour timesheet for the head and approved by the head for payment, in any other type of employment this would be gross misconduct and subject to investigation.
    I understand your comments about streching the definition of HT responsibility, but in a small school like ours even if the it was funded we would never have approved this. This head has enough responsibility with the .5 teaching requirement and i dont think in any other employment you could be paid for two roles at the same time. If the head should have been performing teaching duties or head duties at that time but carried out 1 to 1 we are paying for someone who is not there.
    This is all without taking into consideration that none of us are aware of any one to one having been done. We have minutes of a meeting where a request was made to increase the p/t teacher hours for a few weeks so the head could take small groups for booster classes but nothing else.
    On the last part how will i find out where the funding has come from for this, is it extended schools?

     
  9. It has been a national project for the last two years. Schools have been allocated a ring-fenced amount through the standards fund and required to provide tuition for x number of pupils, based on a % of underachieving pupils identified through results.
    There is a lot of info here, including HR (based on one local authority's guidance)
    http://www.learningwithsouthglos.org/onetoone/index.htm
    Your HT, therefore, has been required to engage tutors for these pupils. In reality, although LAs have set up pools, because the work is sporadic and not in one place, this hasn't always been successful. Most schools are covering it from their own staff, and, even then, many schools (including us) are finding it difficult to find people to deliver. As a larger school in a deprived area, we have approximately 20% of the school's population funded for tuition, but have no idea how we will get it all done before the summer.
    At the end of the tuition period, there is a centralised system https://www.onetoonetuitiondata.education.gov.uk/
    for collating the results.
    I think your HT is reasonable to claim for payment (as I said, I know others who have). I do understand your concerns that (a) the HT is, effectively, appointing him/herself to deliver the tuition, which is not right, and that (b) the governors have not been made aware of the whole tuition project, which has an impact on budget-setting etc (since some of the standards fund is ring-fenced to pay staff to deliver this).
    These are the key points that need addressing, and I would be looking into the method of recruitment far more than the legitimacy of the payment or the two roles running concurrently. Has the HT offered this work to other staff, and were they interested would be my first question.
    Incidentally, as far as I know, while the coalition government expects schools to continue to deliver tuition from 2011-2012, this is no longer ring-fenced and should be seen to be part of the current funding settlements and particularly a suitable use for the pupil premium. This should give the governing body reason to expect the HT to inform them of the tuition which has taken place and the school's evaluation of it, since next year you will need to decide whether to allocate a similar amount through your own budget.
     
  10. This may be the definitive answer -
    STPCD, Section 2, paragraph 49.1
    49.1 Subject to sub-paragraph (2), the relevant body may make such payments as they see fit to a teacher, including a head teacher, in respect of-
    (c) participation in out-of-school hours learning activity agreed between the teacher and the head teacher or, in the case of the head teacher, between the head teacher and the relevant body;
    1-1 tuition is covered by 49.1. (Google "one to one tuition 49.1").
    However, it also clearly states that the headteacher should agree this with the relevant body where it applies to them. The HT should not have undertaken the tuition without first agreeing it with the governing body; but - were such an agreement in place - would be entitled to receive additional payment for it.
    I have no idea what the way forward is on this! The children have received their entitlement and the money is there to be claimed by the person who delivered it. There is no opportunity to spend this money elsewhere (ie if the HT doesn't claim it in salary, the money is lost to the school). The sticking point is that the HT delivering it did so without proper authorisation. You might want to approach this as a misunderstanding/oversight on their part rather than as an attempt to defraud the school. It certainly needs writing into your pay policy and clear guidance issued to the HT for future recruitment of tutors.
     
  11. anon2799

    anon2799 New commenter

    Am I the only person concerned by the OPs expectation that the headteacher's contract is 24/7?
     
  12. Some really good information here. Thank you very much.

    But everyone is assuming that the tuition has been carried out, I have been notified that it may not have been.

    That is my conundrum.
     

  13. Why? I know a fair few heads who think that a teacher should put in whatever hours are needed.

    Heads don't even have the 1265 hours 195 days restrictions.
     
  14. You have been "notified" that the tuition may not have been carried out.
    This is very thin ice on which to base an allegation or accusation against a member of staff.
    "I know a fair few heads who think that a teacher should put in whatever hours are needed" Too right, and that is exactly what they get paid for!!
     
  15. anon2799

    anon2799 New commenter

    I'm aware of that. The OP seems to think s/he " owns"the .
    Everyone is entitled to a work life balance. I'm fact the governors have a duty of care to ensure that the head maintains one. You may know of some heads who expect 24/7, I can assure that not all
    Heads do. Maybe you need to change jobs?
     
  16. "Everyone is entitled to a work/life balance." That would be the argument for the head not being expected to work 24/7. I'm not sure it stands up in the context of doing extra work for extra pay, in the free time ensured to meet the duty of care for a head's work-life balance.

    If a head is claiming when no tuition has been given, that would be fraudulent. But as education professionals, we all know of parents 'in the know' who listen to and pass on gossip, so that it becomes 'fact'. This head should, it appears, have got permission of the GB to undertake the 1-1 tuition. But that is likely to be a technical oversight of a busy head. Members of the GB should be aware of the laws of defammation which unions may use to protect h/ts who are defamed on the basis of hearsay.
     
  17. Last update on this. There was an admission that the O2O had not been done and some documentation had to be submitted to secure the payments. This head has since been allowed to move on to a bigger school as they were already working notice. My own child was among those who had supposedly had this tuition but never did, we did not know anything about until this came out. An absolute disgrace to the teaching profession and should not have been allowed to continue in education.
     
  18. This head has "been allowed" to move schools? The HT had clearly secured another post as you state they were working through the notice period.
    You clearly have your own opinion.
    If the HT has taken money for work not done then a criminal act has been performed and the police should be informed. Over to you then.
     

Share This Page