Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.
Don't forget to look at the how to guide.
Discussion in 'Headteachers' started by jago123, Aug 14, 2018.
Ignorantia juris non excusat
It's the same for teachers. But teachers don't have 13 weeks contractual holiday. They have directed time + undirected time, the latter to be done at teacher's discretion at any time in the year.There's no holiday specified in standard national contracts so holiday entitlement is the statutory minimum 5.6 weeks. By August a teacher will have had far more than 5.6 weeks undirected time. It has no practical significance except in relation to accrued holiday pay if the school agrees to non-standard resignation dates.
Seems pretty unlikely a HOD wouldn't have heard of standard resignation and notice dates!
This doesn't make sense. If you have done your hours for the year and attended the statutory 195 days you have fulfilled your obligations. If we only work 195 days, how do you classify the other 170 days?
HR will most likely delve into the financial implications of the 'breach of contract' and any knock on impact on things like holiday pay. The resignation date with 'immediate effect' will be a very important date all round though and for all involved.
Bear in mind too - the exemployee has not taken on a 'Temporary Summer position' (as many teachers do) with the aim of returning to work and to comply with the school contract. Are their actions appropriate in relation to the agreed contract?
Directed time is only part of a teacher's contractual obligations. The other days you are still employed as a teacher but aren't required to go into school and can't be directed by the head. You direct yourself. You aren't employed for only 195 days a year.
So we have no holidays? In other jobs you are still employed if you are on holiday. How do you classify the 170 days? Or bank holidays?
I just answered that! Teacher's contracts don't fit the standard model. My response re accrued holiday pay is what unions have explained. You direct yourself the other 170 days. If you want to "direct" yourself to work all 170 you can. Alternatively you can "direct" yourself to take 170 days of holiday. Entirely up to you.
It's entirely possible that the HoD in question was indeed aware of the conditions but that when an opportunity to leave arose, the chance was too good to turn down. If a member of staff is so keen to leave a place of employment that they are prepared to risk legal action to do so, management needs to ask why. Maybe there are other members of staff at the school who are equally anxious to leave?
In the OP's position, that's what I'd be thinking about, what I'd be discussing with the CoG and most definitely what I'd be looking for solutions to.
In my experience, when a new ht arrives there is sometimes a higher turnover of employees. Indeed, in one school I was at, the ht decided on new contracts and interviews for all. The arrival of a new ht can bring with it many changes. And sometimes people do jump ship rather than working with a new ht and with new systems.
In another, again with a new ht, the staff were surprised as the level of praise and internal promotions on offer following a set of sustained good results. They all thought alot of the new ht.But again, there was a higher turnover than normal. Some just wanted to get out of teaching.
As they have already started working elsewhere, I don 't imagine they'll be too bothered.
Wow, seems like so many people are missing the point here.
The re-structure of SLT that happened in 2017 was before I was appointed as HT.
The governors insisted on making some further cuts this year.
I have met with HR today and it’s a consensus that we won’t be pursuing an NCTL referral, however the colleague will only be paid up to the 5th August 2018, the date they have sent their resignation.
I have also received a reference request via post and will complete this accordingly. It seems that they request references after the employees start their employment and their employment is confirmed on the subject of satisfactory references. The employee had a good track record, delivered excellent results within the department and their own classes alike during their 11 years at the school and there was never an issue with them until now.
I will mention this, but I’ll also mention that they have left their employment here with no notice provided.
Aren't you going to try and find out why such an exemplary employee took such drastic action ?
A great result - glad its all ended well for all involved. The 2ic stepping up temporarily might even love the chance to prove their worth.
Restructurings and cuts can be tricky - even at the best of times. Its a pity the employee didn't mention the references sooner or confirm for you to be the referee.
I imagine the ex-colleague will expect nothing else, given they resigned with immediate effect.
I'd keep them on, if they had already shown an excellent aptitude for the job in their first fortnight there.
I would expect the ex-colleague has given a great explanation of why they wanted to leave suddenly and were available for an immediate start.
They stated they wanted to 'leave the education sector due to increased stress'. The fact that they got a job so fast may also indicate an opportunity came up. Teaching is tough these days - and it is just a job. That clearly looked more attractive than their current job and a school going through cuts.
But I would suggest HR look into this aspect.
And? You have lost a good Hod. Your pupils have lost a good teacher. Is there anything you could have done differently?
That maybe for the ht, slt and the govs to look at in light of the HR feedback. And also to recognise the impact of their restructuring and cuts. The ex hod didn't blame the school or the ht, but referenced the 'education sector'
It is awful that there is currently a teacher recruitment and exodus issue in the uk.
Re - summer holiday pay - it is a definite grey area. When I took up my headship, my predecessor was moving around 300 miles away, and resigned deliberately from 31st July as she didn't want to be "on call" from that distance if the school burnt down or there were a major crisis during the summer. The LA HR were happy with this arrangement from a STPCD point of view but advised the governors that "someone needs to be legally in charge of the school" at all times.
The LA I was moving into asked me to resign on 31st July and bring forward my start date to 1st August; the LA I was leaving would not accept this as they believed that they were required to pay me for August if I worked up to the end of term. Two different LAs interpreted the rules completely differently.
(Sadly the story didn't end up with me being paid by both schools, the LA provided an advisor to be HT during August and agreed to only bill the school on a daily rate if he were needed!).
Maybe somebody else in the school has provided a reference and just kept quiet about it. As the new employer isn’t a school, they probably won’t care who it is from precisely...