Wife on Maternity Leave Unfairly Dismissed?

paddedjohn

gizmo111 wrote: »

Got any examples of this? If you have then report it to OFSTED asap.

Thanks

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2013/mar/31/schools-hiring-unqualified-teachers-money


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/9798578/Unqualified-teachers-are-majority-of-staff-in-some-schools.html

Just two examples and I think OFSTED already know.;)

flashnazia

sovilla wrote: »

How long as she been working there? If its less than 2 years I dont think she has any rights.

cannyscot wrote: »

Invincible-you did not say if it was a years contract and the dates it ran for ie academic year. Sounds like 1 yr contract july to h
july? How long has she had these contracts for ie how many years and have they run consecutively?

If she was dismissed because of her maternity she does not need 2 years' service to claim unfair dismissal.

paddedjohn

It doesnt sound like she is actually being dismissed though, rather that when her 1 year contract ends it wont be renewed.

RichardD1970

paddedjohn wrote: »

Regardless of the rights and wrongs of sacking someone on maternity I personnaly feel that our children are being cheated out of a good education by being taught by unqualified staff.

Sorry but having a teaching qualification does not necessarily make you a good teacher.

My wife, mother in law, sister in law all work in school as support staff and my other sister in law is a teacher with managerial responsibilities.

They would all agree that some of the staff who get the most from the kids are sometimes the "unqualified" ones, the ones who have a real passion for the job and do it for next to no money. Some of the fully qualified teachers are useless but it is very hard to get rid of bad teachers!

Not saying that is true across the board, there are good and bad on both sides but your statement is too sweeping and generalised.

flashnazia

paddedjohn wrote: »

It doesnt sound like she is actually being dismissed though, rather that when her 1 year contract ends it wont be renewed.

---

The non-renewal of a fixed-term contract is in law a dismissal. This is set out in s.95(1)(b) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, which provides that an employee is dismissed by the employer if "he [or she] is employed under a limited-term contract and that contract terminates by virtue of the limiting event without being renewed under the same contract".

If an employee's fixed-term contract comes to an end while she is on maternity leave, there is no express obligation on the employer to re-employ her at the end of maternity leave. If it does not, the key question will be why the contract was not renewed. If the reason for the non-renewal of the fixed-term contract is related to the employee's pregnancy or the fact that she is on maternity leave, the dismissal will be automatically unfair under s.99 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. Under this section there is no need for the employee to meet the requirement of having one year's qualifying service (or two years' service for employees whose employment begins on or after 6 April 2012) in order to present her claim for unfair dismissal. It is also likely that an employee in such a situation would include a claim for sex discrimination. The employer should ensure that there are other justifiable reasons for not renewing the contract and that these are unconnected with pregnancy or maternity leave.

ViolaLass

flashnazia wrote: »

If she was dismissed because of her maternity she does not need 2 years' service to claim unfair dismissal.

But there's no indication so far that her contract is not being renewed because of her maternity leave.

Valli

paddedjohn wrote: »

Regardless of the rights and wrongs of sacking someone on maternity I personnaly feel that our children are being cheated out of a good education by being taught by unqualified staff.

I assume you noticed that the OP's wife is a teacher in an independent school, which, like academies, are NOT obliged to employ trained and qualified teachers.

Valli

gizmo111 wrote: »

Got any examples of this? If you have then report it to OFSTED asap.

Thanks

See my post, above.
Unqualified staff are *usually* paid less too. The fact that this is an independent school probably means that they can continually re-employ the same person on yearly contracts; in state schools there is a time limit on contract renewal, of, I believe (though this is not checked and I'm going from memory here) two years.

So independent schools can respond very quickly to changes (falls) in numbers by not renewing contracts.

Valli

ViolaLass wrote: »

I agree with the advice to contact her union.

Also, I wouldn't get hung up on the head's qualifications - as far as I'm aware, there are no qualifications for them to have.

Heads in State Schools can obtain the NPQH qualification; candidate for headships are usually expected to have the NPQH already or to be in the process of qualifying.

paddedjohn

Valli wrote: »

I assume you noticed that the OP's wife is a teacher in an independent school, which, like academies, are NOT obliged to employ trained and qualified teachers.

And I assume that you ignored my earlier post regarding the above (post10)