Suspended from school role pending an investigation

sangie595

Going backwards because this is the simple bit, you will not get written statements from students. Nobody will. IF they provide any they will be kept strictly confidential. As minors, they are classed as vulnerable and their statements would be taken by the investigator only, and if made available they will go to the panel only. You won't ever see them.

Now in relation to the meeting your union rep attended with the head teacher - I am afraid that such meetings are commonplace and these often take place. Your union rep is there to represent your widest options, and as such, management often tell us things that are not (or not yet) in the "public domain". We may be told what an investigation has found. We may be told about evidence that suggests or member is not telling us the truth. At the same time, there may be things that we want to say that we would prefer not to say to a disciplinary meeting. Having been in both positions - both as the manager talking to a union official, and as a union official talking to a manager- these meetings are very helpful and more often than not they can result in a solution to a problem. Or, at the very least, a good idea idea of the lay of the land. And any good union rep tells you that they have had these meetings, as yours had done, and what had been said - or, at least, the facts that they can disclose.

Such meetings often include some discussion of "alternatives" - that is, what might be on offer if a resignation were considered. In this case, such a suggestion had been made and your trip is duty bound to tell you what that offer is.

What concerns we is that the fact of the offer narrows this in terms of the disciplinary action. It would appear that there is going to be disciplinary action taken. Now that does not say that toy will be found guilty, nor that the panel have made up their minds or anything else. Just that the investigation would appear to have concluded that there should be a case heard.

The offer could be a bluff - and the disciplinary find you not guilty, or find you guilty and the outcome is less than dismissal. Or even innocent entirely. The offer may be a "can't be bothered with all this fuss let's just hope the problem goes away" offer. Or it may be a "the investigation has found something and the chances are now very high that it will result in dismissal" offer. And there is no way of telling which one. Your union rep may have an inkling of which one. But they may not be able to tell you. But there might be a heavy hint to you!

I will be honest and say that the thing that worries me about this offer is the "good reference, but not valid in schools" bit. Schools, and certain other employers, are obliged to tell each other the truth in references. That is a legal requirement. For obvious reasons. My concern is that if the head says that reference would not be valid in a school, he is suggesting that something he would have to disclose to another school is so serious as to be a bar to working in a school in the future. And that suggests the investigation has found something it considers serious. Again, it may be that that is not at all serious and there is a perfectly good explanation. I can't tell. I am just trying to explain the possibilities.

In your reps shoes I would have done exactly the same thing. The question now is, does the tell know something to your detriment that they can't tell you? Or do they think it's a bluff? Did they say or suggest anything to you that suggests which way the wind is blowing? Of course, the other possibility here is that they actually know nothing, but the offer was made anyway, so they have to pass it on.

Part of the problem that a union rep is, is that pretty much everybody is innocent and didn't do it. Some people are. But the majority aren't. And we can often tell which ones aren't, and I generally tell them flat out that I don't believe them and I can't do my best job for them unless they tell me the whole truth. "My best job" may be getting them a quiet exit. Or a settlement. And not having something on their record. That requires union reps to be ruthlessly honest at times. Not all of them are any good at it, because it doesn't sit comfortably with people to be the bearers of bad stuff. So they hedge around the edges and don't make it clear. I'd have told you straight up whether this might be the best offer you will ever get. Our not. Or whether I didn't know which. But I would also have told you about it because it is your right to make that decision.

Does that make sense?

I think in your shores I would want to speak to my retro again to see if they have any sense of which is happening here. It is ENTIRELY possible that this is just an offer to make it go away quietly. But it also may not be. And they may not know which. But they also may.

sangie595

Ps - sorry about the typos. Predictive keyboard errors! I think it's obvious what I meant but ask if it isn't!

lulu650

sangie595 wrote: »

....you will not get written statements from students. Nobody will. IF they provide any they will be kept strictly confidential. As minors, they are classed as vulnerable and their statements would be taken by the investigator only, and if made available they will go to the panel only. You won't ever see them....

If there is to be a disciplinary then all the paperwork provided to the disciplinary panel will be provided to the OP before the disciplinary in order for the OP to prepare fully. This includes any pupil statements or notes of the meetings with those students.

However, the suspension appears to have come about because a staff member has made allegations against the OP that need to be investigated. Those allegations will need to be discussed in the investigation meeting and a statement would have been taken from that staff member with that statement being provided in the disciplinary pack. It may be that other staff will need to provide statements if involved.

After an investigation meeting the minutes should be supplied but if in disagreement any additions/changes can be appended to the minutes. This would be discussed with the union rep who would have been there to take his/her own notes. If you do not wish to sign the minutes then state why because they will be included in the displinary pack.

There appears to be an offer of a settlement agreement with an agreed reference that will not help with employment in schools. What does that actually mean? Presumably concerns with working with children but then a settlement isn't normally offered if that is the case.

sangie595

lulu650 wrote: »

If there is to be a disciplinary then all the paperwork provided to the disciplinary panel will be provided to the OP before the disciplinary in order for the OP to prepare fully. This includes any pupil statements or notes of the meetings with those students.
.

I am sorry, but you are incorrect on this matter. It is highly unusual for statements from pupils to be provided because they are vulnerable minors and may be coerced or threatened as a result of giving evidence. Normally, student statements inform the investigator, and where used are most often anonymised as part of the investigative report submitted. If the panel wish to examine those statements they would ask to do so - but they would not be disclosed to the other party. Similarly, as in this case, students have been interviewed and no written statements taken, but it would be most unusual for the notes of those interviews to be included in the evidence - it would usually be rolled into the investigators report.

I have been involved in a great many investigations in schools - and ones at the more serious end of the scale where dismissal and impact on future work is involved - and I can count only a very small number where students names have been attached to evidence or statements given directly. The panel must decide what weight to give to such evidence. Just as a court would decide what weight to give to evidence given by a minor.

However, the OP is not at a stage when they have entitlement to any evidence - there has been no panel convened yet. There has been a conversation between the head teacher and the union rep, and the OP needs to ask the union rep what, if any, view they have formed as a result of the offer made. Which does not currently constitute a settlement agreement. Simply making an offer does not mean that a settlement is being offered, and schools are in a difficult position in terms of such agreements because of their obligation to disclose. And not just to any other school, but to anyone working with vulnerable people or in a regulated industry. Which covers a very wide range of employers. I wouldn't want to take such an offer unless I knew for a fact that I was going to be found guilty and that I had no chance of a tribunal win. But that cannot be assessed until the panel is convened and the OP knows what they are being accused of. At this moment in time that has not happened. But the rep may already know - we often do.

dawyldthing

Id have a look to see if any house insurance has legal protection and if so give them a bell

ohreally

dawyldthing wrote: »

Id have a look to see if any house insurance has legal protection and if so give them a bell

Doing so may result in the TU withdrawing their services/ representation (if discovered).

xapprenticex

You sure you said NOTHING, i doubt a member of staff totally 100% made it all up and risked getting into trouble themselves for doing it. Maybe they are exaggerating what you said but there must have been something.

This is #1 reason why I dont comment and scandalous stuff at work, it WILL come back to bite you in the rear.

sangie595

xapprenticex wrote: »

You sure you said NOTHING, i doubt a member of staff totally 100% made it all up and risked getting into trouble themselves for doing it. Maybe they are exaggerating what you said but there must have been something.

This is #1 reason why I dont comment and scandalous stuff at work, it WILL come back to bite you in the rear.

The problem is that the OP didn't say nothing! They did talk to a student. We don't know the content of that discussion, but the OP has a difficulty in that at least some of the allegation has foundation.