Forum menu
Why is there a letter? If she's in contract then no need for one because it's taken as read. If there's no contract standing then why would she turn up? (Yes, I know easy to say) I think it's not unreasonable to ask the conditions she'd be woyunder.
It amazes me how shit some LAs are at providing employment contracts, it’s such a basic thing.
Honestly I think it is a way of being able to stop teachers knowing thier rights. Stirling have a long history of doing over teachers on thinks like pay level...I don't get why the LNCT doesn't have a 'and all local authorities will include the appropriate web link in all teaching contract letters' such as https://www.snct.org.uk/lnctAgreements.php
Why is there a letter?
Funnily enough mrs_oab has been off with stress for part of the summer term. It's thier way of insisting she returns.
I also suspect it means that after Monday's Safeguarding and usual intro to the year training, the two of them remaining are going to be sent elsewhere....
The letter makes no apology for the delay or confusion, only states that legal due diligence takes time. And no timescale on a resolution.
The most joyful moment of walking out of UK teaching was being told I couldn't because of my contract. And replying I'd never been given a contract to sign.
I’d be chasing up a contract for sure even if it’s only rolling, short term ones.
do you think you are better with the explicit terms of a new contract or the implicit ones a hypothetical tribunal would make up for itself? My gut feel is tribunals won’t have much sympathy for a local authority who can’t do basic admin, and unless the existing contract was terminated will say it’s still in force with any implied changes through custom and practice?
in fairness to the local authority it may be they don’t think there is a need for a new contract - lots of my staff have expected new contracts for small changes (like a promotion) when we just send a letter with new title and salary. That’s in their favour - if we issued a new contract it would be on “today’s” terms which are not quite as nice as our legacy ones.
amazes me how shit some LAs are at providing employment contracts
My experience of the public sector (worked 3-4 years out of my +40 years in the public sector) is that they behave like tiny SME's rather than huge corporates that they really are (subs under a huge Group) - but then as we've seen over the last few years their 'masters' behave like that too very often.
I do have some sympathy for the 'middle managers' as they're basically left without assistance and I can imagine it's just got worse as budgets have shrunk and those supporting depts have disappeared ("too many Managers!" crap we hear about all the time).
do you think you are better with the explicit terms of a new contract or the implicit ones a hypothetical tribunal would make up for itself?
Depends on the circumstances I suppose. There's also the fact that some sort of agreement is implicit in the fact that you're turning up and they're paying you. The benefit of a formal contract is that it's less stressful for the employee if they have something solid which (hopefully!) states terms explicitly.
lots of my staff have expected new contracts for small changes (like a promotion)
In teaching a promotion would not be considered a small change and would definitely require a new contract as it's a very different role with lots of additional responsibilities.
I don’t get why the LNCT doesn’t have a ‘and all local authorities will include the appropriate web link in all teaching contract letters’ such as https://www.snct.org.uk/lnctAgreements.php
/a>
About once a year I circulate that website to the EIS members in the school. It's incredibly useful and contains the answers to many of the questions members approach me with.
In teaching a promotion would not be considered a small change and would definitely require a new contract as it’s a very different role with lots of additional responsibilities.
would be odd in the “real world” for those responsibilities to actually be in the contract rather than a job description that’s provided (and usually signed) separately. I can imagine that public sector have made it really difficult to unilaterally update JD’s though!
i actually thought all teachers contracts in Scotland would be in exactly the same form so that councils were not able to use T&Cs to tempt teachers away from neighbouring areas.
responsibilities to actually be in the contract rather than a job description that’s provided (and usually signed) separately
Actually, you might well be right on some of that although I'm not aware of job descriptions being signed separately from the contract.
i actually thought all teachers contracts in Scotland would be in exactly the same form so that councils were not able to use T&Cs to tempt teachers away from neighbouring areas
The big stuff is set nationally by the SNCT (pay, holiday etc) but some stuff is set locally (the LNCT agreements linked above). I'm not aware of much difference between the LAs, certainly not enough to tempt teachers from one to another.
^ wot spin says.
And for the record, we have a job contract. It is one sentence long 😉
I can imagine that public sector have made it really difficult to unilaterally update JD’s though!
Half the point of the LNCT in Scotland is that the Job Descriptions, Pay Scales, Responsibilities, Rights etc are all 'standard', hence easy to send a link and say 'that is your information'.
What of course is interesting is that the one sentence job description and the employer now saying that they are held up as legal advice is needed, suggests that they need to stick to the LNCT agreement to the letter of the agreement and very carefully. Those who teach in Scotland know that a 'Lead Teacher' payscale exists. Three levels: one in school, one local authority and one national. NOT a principle teacher and NOT leadership in a school setting, but have a specialism, lead CPD etc (see below). Which describes EXACTLY what mrs_oab's work is at a local authority level, and indeed her latest instructions from her boss. So, does this mean we could sue for not paying the right payscale since it was created 3 years ago?
From the
This is exactly what mrs_oab does every month:
Local Authority Lead Teacher
The role of a local authority Lead Teacher would include the duties of a classroom
teacher and the following in a local authority as appropriate:
a) Provide a lead role in the development of an area of specialism.
b) Lead career-long professional learning opportunities on their area of
specialism.
c) Share, demonstrate and model effective practice in their area of specialism.
d) Provide support for the professional needs of colleagues, including school
leaders, on their area of specialism.
e) Lead local networks and collaborate through, and contribute to, regional and
national networks related to their area of specialism.
f) Keep abreast of developments in content and methodology related to their
area of specialism.
Update...
The throw of the dice on all this was a colleague withdrawing from the recruitment-into-your-own-job process as a colleague accepted redeployment on the grounds that they could not work with such difficult managers and wanted out of the early years team. However, this has not been communicated to my wife formally, despite requests for meetings and updates, almost as if they do not want anyone to apply...
This though is now all irrelevant, as retirement on the grounds of ill-health beckons faster and supersedes any other processes. 🙁