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

threatened suspension

Discussion in 'Governors' started by udd, Jan 17, 2017.

  1. udd

    udd New commenter

    What to do if a governor is threatened with suspension, refuses, and no regulations have been followed, the chair refuses to communicate, how long can this go on? where do we go from here?
     
  2. Rott Weiler

    Rott Weiler Lead commenter Forum guide

    .
    You need to tell us a bit more @udd , I don't understand from your post what is happening. Are you asking "where do we go from here?" from the point of view of the governor threatened with suspension or the GB?

    Is this a Local Authority maintained school?

    If so the procedures are set out in paragraph 17 of the School Governance (Roles, Procedures and Allowances) (England) Regulations 2013 here

    If the governing body follows the correct procedure the suspended governor can't "refuse" to be suspended.
    .
    .
     
  3. udd

    udd New commenter

    the governor was told they had breached confidentiality and that they could take 6mth voluntary suspension or the official route would be taken. the decision allegedly was made by chair and vice chair. The governor refused to take voluntary suspension and asked for detail with regards to confidentiality breach. no information was provided. contact was made with governor services, who informed Chair not to communicate.
    The school is a Lea maintained school, the governor has informed the chair with regards to reg 15
    It is over a month and nothing has happened.
    The governor only asked for information regarding the accusations made against them, unsure how to proceed.
     
  4. Rott Weiler

    Rott Weiler Lead commenter Forum guide

    .
    Chair doesn't know what they are talking about, there's no such thing as 'voluntary suspension'. Sounds like LA have told Chair that. A governor who 'voluntarily suspended' themself could end up disqualified and removed from the GB for non-attendance at GB meetings.

    There's a reason for specific procedure mandated in regulation 17. It forces transparency (well, of a sort) because proposer has to state reasons for proposing suspension, and governor concerned has right of reply. It also ensures all governors have the chance to consider what's said. Trying to bypass this by informal suspension is wrong, and hopefully LA have made that clear to chair.

    I suggest that you (if you are the governor concerned) do nothing. The chair has apparently abandoned their 'voluntary suspension' suggestion. The ball is in the chair's court. Either the chair proceeds formally in compliance with regulation 17 (in which case the reason will have to be stated) or the chair decides to do nothing and you'll hear no more about it.
    .
    .
     
  5. udd

    udd New commenter

    Thank you, the situation is ridiculous! I have not done anything apart from reminding the chair of the regulations. I am of a minority and have always felt an outsider. I would like to be able to ensure or at least attempt to ensure that this does not happen to anyone else. The chair has been in post for over 20yrs. why have legislation if individuals are allowed to by pass them? would it not be appropriate to write a letter to DFE highlighting my concerns?
    I really appreciate your help in this matter.
     
  6. Rott Weiler

    Rott Weiler Lead commenter Forum guide

    .
    In your position I'd feel aggrieved too, but looking at this from the outside, and based only on what you've posted, I still advise you to do nothing @udd unless and until the chair the raises it again.

    The chair has done nothing seriously wrong. It was entirely appropriate for the chair to talk to you informally if the chair believed you had breached confidentiality. That informal discussion is what chairs are recommended to do, only moving on to formal regulation 17 procedures if the breach of confidentiality continues. Yes the chair was wrong to suggest 'voluntary suspension', you (and the LA?) have told him that and he appears to have dropped the suggestion. Raising voluntary suspension in an informal discussion wasn't correct but is not misconduct by the chair. Complaining to the DFE is pointless. The chair has not breached or by passed any regulations, has not taken any formal action, and is not guilty of misconduct in public office. The DFE will not get involved.

    The bigger question I see here is what is this breach of confidentiality? Surely the chair gave some explanation of what he considered was a breach of confidentiality? Do you mean that you don't know what he is talking about? Or that you do know but don't agree it was a breach of confidentiality?

    To ensure what doesn't happen? The chair raising breach of confidentiality? Or the Chair raising voluntary suspension? If the former I don't agree the chair should be stopped from doing that. It's the right thing to do. If the latter it seems a fairly minor issue, the chair has now had the regulations explained to him and there's no reason to think he'll make the suggestion again.
    .
    .
     
    Last edited: Jan 18, 2017
  7. udd

    udd New commenter

    Thank you, for your advice. the chair approached the governor when they had their children with them, the meeting in which the voluntary suspension was mentioned was not a prearranged meeting, the chair stated that a member of staff had heard the governor, say , then quoted a statement on the playground and that it was a breach of confidentiality, that he had, had a meeting with the vice chair and decision made at that meeting.
    This is all i know, i have no other information with regards to what preceded this meeting.
    I understand and will follow the advice given. once again thank you.
     
  8. udd

    udd New commenter

    May i just clarify, the member of staff is not a member of the teaching staff and is not a member of the Governing body.
    My concern was Natural Justice, why wasn't the governor informed of the grievance or complaint made against them?
    Should not the governor had a chance to hear the allegations?
    Should not the internal policies be followed.
    This has had an impact on the governor, they have to consider the impact on their reputation not only as a governor but as a professional with over 25yrs unblemished service.
     
  9. udd

    udd New commenter

    Dear Rott weiler would you be able to pm me please!
     

Share This Page