employing retired/unqualified teachers

jupiter00

As a parent of primary school children I am confused about reports in the papers about 'primary teachers refusing to work beside unqualified/retired teachers' Why? because who brings/calls for a substitute teacher when a teacher calls in sick, its not us parents! or is it the Board of management who phones teachers to cover for other teachers at our school? Is it not the primary school principal who arranges the cover teacher? Can they not ask for qualifications on the phone or a day afterwards? I 'm talking about longer substitute cover here, say a week or more. We heard there were no others available before but now young teachers are desperate for work. Isn't it primary school principals who are employing the unqualified/retired teachers they now 'refuse to work beside'. Its only our children are losing out!

boogle

You're right that the students will lose out in this argument. I suppose the unions know that if teachers act on this threat only once, the Principal will not try it again. It's sad but the move is designed for maximum disruption, teachers not co-operating in other areas of the job has been tried in the past and wasn't as successful e.g. refusal to do staff meetings in the evenings etc.

E.T.

It seems to depend on the area - I'm in a rural school and a few times lately we haven't been able to get subs, so the classes have been split. As a teacher, I'd prefer to take in extra kids from a colleague's class, rather than see someone untrained paid money to take the class. It's not a great situation, but at least the kids have someone qualified working with them. From a teacher's point of view, it's completely unfair on the kids to have someone untrained in the classroom.

It's also a huge part of why so many people think teaching is so easy. There have been untrained people in loads of schools - in for the day, don't have to do any of the non-teaching work (meeting psychologists, social workers etc; fortnightly plans, long-term schemes, individual work for kids, school plans and policies; planning sports, quizzes, music; meeting parents etc) and then swan off home at 3 to tell everyone that teachers do nothing.

delta_bravo

I read a paper in the article about a principal saying that sometimes there is no alternative but to hire an unqualified sub if nobody else is available.

However from my experience this unqualified person is often a nephew, niece, son or daughter of the principal. Perhaps that is a last resort for the principal but from an independent observer it does look suspect.

TheDriver

I must say employing unqualified people is a last resort but imagine country rural place, 8:30 in morning with a sick call in, try to find someone for 30 mins time.......... Usually it ends up being un qualified unfortunately.
I must say its difficult ringing people last minute, there is only so much answering machines etc you can take when you need a job done.

dambarude

What's the opinion on nearly-qualified teachers subbing? I'm guessing that a lot of those who are classified as unqualified actually belong in this category.

no_bother

TheDriver wrote: »

I must say employing unqualified people is a last resort but imagine country rural place, 8:30 in morning with a sick call in, try to find someone for 30 mins time.......... Usually it ends up being un qualified unfortunately.
I must say its difficult ringing people last minute, there is only so much answering machines etc you can take when you need a job done.

Absolutely - when there is little notice what can a principle do - is it not better that a class be 'supervised' by a non-teacher than combined into another class wheter neither can be acommodated properly. Definitely though a panel system would be best - whereby depending on the region a panel of x number of teachers were to be contacted before an. other is asked to step in - and if that is the case at this stage i would not as a parent be in any way concerned as to whether this individual was known to the principle - niece / nephew etc..