Are posts of responsibility reviewed in your school?

carolzoo

Just wondering if this happens in your school. I imagine it's something that should happen at the end of the school year or at the very beginning of the first term.

Do inspectors check these duties? or check if they're still relevant etc. They or the principal could survey existing teachers anonymously for suggestions.

I appreciate no new posts are being created and need to be but at the same time there are many A and B posts especially B posts that need to be reviewed.

For example most schools have their policies in order, school plans in place. School planning was a new development a few years ago in addition to creating policies. Is there need for an A or a B post for this activity now? Wouldn't an "active" year head role be a better addition to a school to replace an A post year head post holder who has retired.

Other B posts in our school are crazy - outdated duties that do not involve time or just involve a little time. The time would be better spent on something more relevant, current and useful to the school. Perhaps something that would save the school secretary or another overworked teacher time for example. I do not know but work can be distributed unevenly in schools

Posts need to be reviewed and updated to reflect the current climate. The duties of post holders also need to become more tranparent.

I realise I might get a lot of back lash from existing post holders now. Fair enough of course some post holders duties are current and relevant - Perhaps your school reviews the duties to reflect the current climate. But this doesn't happen in all schools.

Post Holders in VEC schools get 4 hours per week for duties in addition to a substantial allowance. This is inequitable to other voluntary schools because they do not get 4 hours off their timetable to do the duties. However I am not sure if vec schools have to give the 4 hours off the timetable to the post holder - I think there is a clause where they don't have to. I am not sure. But it is inequitable to voluntary secondary schools

spurious

Yes, we review ours every year. (VEC)

We are in the middle of it at the moment.
The staff are surveyed as to what duties they think are a priority for the school and then the Principal and DP tell the post holders what duties to do, keeping in mind people's personal strengths.

We lost a number of post-holders through retirement, so the list of jobs to do is longer than those to do it, but we get the hours allowance, so most of us have multiple (or moving) responsibilities.

It's hard to see young staff who you know would be good in a particular post, not get the chance due to the embargo. I know of schools where staff are doing post work without an allowance, partly as they feel it has to be done and partly to help possible promotion prospects in the (distant) future.

seavill

I worked in a school about 4 or 5 years ago that reviewed the posts for the first time in a long long time, and it has not been done since to the best of my knowledge. An external "facilitator" was brought in to do it. Seemed like something that could have been done internally in my opinion but thats how it was done.

Some teachers are taking on jobs from retired posts, some are taking it hoping it puts them in good favour for future opportunities. Others are doing it because how can you say no to anything when not permanent.

Some older post holders are taking on extra tasks to make up for the retired people.

One thing about posts that really really really annoys me is the entitlement to a post that people feel. Recently someone in my school said "I'm next in line for a post if one comes up and god help X if they try and apply for my post"
Shocking attitude, and also someone who would actually do very little only count the pennies rather than actually work for the money when they do get it.

rainbowtrout

carolzoo wrote: »

Just wondering if this happens in your school. I imagine it's something that should happen at the end of the school year or at the very beginning of the first term.

Do inspectors check these duties? or check if they're still relevant etc. They or the principal could survey existing teachers anonymously for suggestions.

I have to submit a written report at the end of every year detailing the duties I carried out and how much time I spent on each one over the course of the year. I assume this report is forwarded to my VEC head office.

Why would there be a need for anonymity. We have it on the agenda at staff meetings every now and again, to see if there is a need to change the existing duties or if something needs to be addressed in the school through post holder duties, perhaps in preference to a current duty. Why would it need to be all cloak and dagger?

carolzoo wrote: »

I appreciate no new posts are being created and need to be but at the same time there are many A and B posts especially B posts that need to be reviewed.

Is this just a gripe about your own school or the system in general?

carolzoo wrote: »

For example most schools have their policies in order, school plans in place. School planning was a new development a few years ago in addition to creating policies. Is there need for an A or a B post for this activity now? Wouldn't an "active" year head role be a better addition to a school to replace an A post year head post holder who has retired.

Maybe extra year heads are necessary in some schools and not in others. Surely school planning and policy development is a continuous process?

carolzoo wrote: »

Other B posts in our school are crazy - outdated duties that do not involve time or just involve a little time. The time would be better spent on something more relevant, current and useful to the school. Perhaps something that would save the school secretary or another overworked teacher time for example. I do not know but work can be distributed unevenly in schools

Posts need to be reviewed and updated to reflect the current climate. The duties of post holders also need to become more tranparent.

Surely that's something you should address at a staff meeting instead of making sweeping generalisations about the system?

Maybe the duties of post holders in your school are not transparent, in my school there is a list of post holders on the staff room notice board and beside each of our names what we are responsible for. If anyone dared tell me that I wasn't doing anything for my post they would get a right tongue lashing. Also for some postholders their post may require a lot of paperwork. My post as PLC coordinator does, there is a mountain of paperwork that I do that nobody sees. Doesn't mean I'm not doing my job, because it's not as visible as the year head who is seen reprimanding students or handing out report cards.

carolzoo wrote: »

Post Holders in VEC schools get 4 hours per week for duties in addition to a substantial allowance. This is inequitable to other voluntary schools because they do not get 4 hours off their timetable to do the duties. However I am not sure if vec schools have to give the 4 hours off the timetable to the post holder - I think there is a clause where they don't have to. I am not sure. But it is inequitable to voluntary secondary schools

I can't comment on voluntary sector, I've never worked in it, but your comment which I have highlighted above is inflammatory, it implies that those in the voluntary sector are not getting this 'substantial allowance' or not getting paid as much.

To be honest, it just comes across as bitterness more than anything else.

The post holders system is not perfect, particularly the methods by which people are appointed to posts. Some duties are not very well distributed, but that is a school issue and cannot be said of every school.

carolzoo, it sounds like you are disgruntled with the system in place in your school and are having a rant about it here when you could bring it up at a staff meeting, rather than basically saying the whole system is crap.

carolzoo

rainbowtrout I would imagine a post as a plc co ordinator is definitely justified.

But there are posts in my school and in friends schools that cannot be justified. I realise there can be paper work behind the scenes etc but some posts take up a lot more time than other posts.

Anonymous - because then staff could feel free to make valid suggestions (it should be where staff can type a response in case their handwriting is recognised and submit it into a box in the school office) yes cloak and dagger because otherwise staff will not give their views for fear of upsetting a colleague.

I have friends in other schools and they feel the same about this.

Policies were all the buzz word a few years ago. Schools had no policies. Now schools have most of them and know how to go about creating policies for policies they do not have. Yes school planning is continuous but surely it is not as time consuming now as it was in the formative years? - therefore would allow time for the post holder now to add another activity to the post for example. Other teachers here have commented on how some teachers are carrying out the duties of retired postholders for free (for future promotion purposes perhaps or because they are not permanent) Is this not a way of exploiting non permanent staff?

Perhaps these duties can be incorportated into existing post holders duties duties by means of an annual review - i.e. add the necessary current activities and take away the duties that do not justify having a post. They are getting paid for it (plus this pay is also pensionable) after all in addition to time off (time off for A post holders in vec schools - though perhaps not all vec schools, i do not know if the 4 hours off the timetable is mandatory or not - just to put in that clause there in case!)

(By the way I do not have a huge gripe with school planning posts as yes it is continuous but I feel it doesn't shoulcn't take up as much time as before as plans should be well under way etc etc - perhaps time for updating them etc etc, but there are other posts which are completely unjustified. I cannot and will not give examples in case my school is identified. I also have friends in other schools and they have said something similar in relation to what is happening in their own schools.

Your school has a good policy of submitting a written report of duties carried out. Do staff also see this?
Your school also has a good policy of giving names and details of what you are responsible for. Our school does not provide this.

I did not mean to suggest that A postholders in voluntary schools do not get an allowance. It was the way it was worded and was ment to be interpreted that they get the allowance but do not get the 4 hours off their timetable.

It was not ment to be bitterness either. Just opening up a discussion. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

spurious

Our school staff handbook also has a list of postholders and their duties for that school year.

rainbowtrout

carolzoo wrote: »

rainbowtrout I would imagine a post as a plc co ordinator is definitely justified.

But there are posts in my school and in friends schools that cannot be justified. I realise there can be paper work behind the scenes etc but some posts take up a lot more time than other posts.

Anonymous - because then staff could feel free to make valid suggestions (it should be where staff can type a response in case their handwriting is recognised and submit it into a box in the school office) yes cloak and dagger because otherwise staff will not give their views for fear of upsetting a colleague.

I have friends in other schools and they feel the same about this.

I really don't see how suggesting more important post duties could put out a post holder. Particularly if you were to say at a staff meeting that another year head would be preferable as a post instead of someone being put in charge of lockers. You are not undermining the person, just suggesting that there are more urgent needs in the school. Ultimately it will be the principal who will assign post duties so if staff feel that some things are more important that others then they can be prioritized. That's not insulting anyone.

carolzoo wrote: »

Policies were all the buzz word a few years ago. Schools had no policies. Now schools have most of them and know how to go about creating policies for policies they do not have. Yes school planning is continuous but surely it is not as time consuming now as it was in the formative years? - therefore would allow time for the post holder now to add another activity to the post for example. Other teachers here have commented on how some teachers are carrying out the duties of retired postholders for free (for future promotion purposes perhaps or because they are not permanent) Is this not a way of exploiting non permanent staff?

I can't speak for anyone else as I've always held a permanent job, but nobody is obliged to take on post duties. Perhaps the way post holders duties are scheduled in your school needs to be looked at, but in my school we have more than enough work on as it is without taking on more. Again, people involved in the policy end of things do stuff in the background that others don't see all of the time.

carolzoo wrote: »

Perhaps these duties can be incorportated into existing post holders duties duties by means of an annual review - i.e. add the necessary current activities and take away the duties that do not justify having a post. They are getting paid for it (plus this pay is also pensionable) after all in addition to time off (time off for A post holders in vec schools - though perhaps not all vec schools, i do not know if the 4 hours off the timetable is mandatory or not - just to put in that clause there in case!)

(By the way I do not have a huge gripe with school planning posts as yes it is continuous but I feel it doesn't shoulcn't take up as much time as before as plans should be well under way etc etc - perhaps time for updating them etc etc, but there are other posts which are completely unjustified. I cannot and will not give examples in case my school is identified. I also have friends in other schools and they have said something similar in relation to what is happening in their own schools.

Why is there a need to mention that pay for posts is pensionable? All PS allowances are pensionable, it's the type of comment I expect to see in After Hours. I thought we were done with those type of comments in this forum???

I doubt your school would be identified from describing a post. Most schools have similar posts and there are about 700 second level schools in ireland. If you want an example of being identified, I walked into a school today to examine students and met a teacher in the staff room afterwards, who said 'I read your posts on boards about ag science'

carolzoo wrote: »

Your school has a good policy of submitting a written report of duties carried out. Do staff also see this?
Your school also has a good policy of giving names and details of what you are responsible for. Our school does not provide this.

No, the other staff don't see this and I don't see why they need to. I have nothing to hide but I don't see why I need to provide a report to all the staff on what work I have done throughout the year. I provide it to my principal as I answer to him and the VEC. I don't need to justify my job to other teachers on staff, I don't ask them to provide me with a list of all the work they've done throughout the year to justify their wage.

No more than I would ask the exam secretary for a written report on all the work she has done throughout the year. None of my business as far as I'm concerned. She doesn't report to me. That's the concern of the principal.

carolzoo wrote: »

It was not ment to be bitterness either. Just opening up a discussion. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

Perhaps, but if you're going to post generalised comments which imply that the system is a shambles you're going to get back comments like mine. It would appear from what you have written that post duties are not transparent in your school, nobody knows what anyone else is doing and there appears to be posts which do not justify the position. That doesn't reflect all schools and it is something you should bring up at a staff meeting if you want it to change.

2011abc

seavill wrote: »

One thing about posts that really really really annoys me is the entitlement to a post that people feel. Recently someone in my school said "I'm next in line for a post if one comes up and god help X if they try and apply for my post"
Shocking attitude.

Far better idea to give all the posts to principals' 'pets' as is now becoming the case .To hell with long sevice and loyalty to a school.

rainbowtrout

2011abc wrote: »

Far better idea to give all the posts to principals' 'pets' as is now becoming the case .To hell with long sevice and loyalty to a school.

Or do you mean that posts are now going to people who actually get off their arse and do some work rather spend 20 years doing the bare minimum and expect a promotion despite not showing any initiative in that time?

I got my post after 6 years teaching ahead of people who were there a lot longer and I don't feel a bit guilty about it. I work hard and I'm as far from the principal's pet as you can get.

Miss Lockhart

I agree carolzoo that there should definitely be a more standardised system in place for ensuring posts are reviewed and are more transparent.

Of course it will be the case that in some schools this is already in place, while in others it is not - so a more standardised review/reporting process would hopefully ensure all schools kept their posts up to date. It need not be an overly formal or bureaucratic process - just a standardised protocol/timeframe for reviewing posts within a school.

Rainbowtrout, I'm not sure why you are taking this suggestion so personally. You are suggesting that carolzoo should take up the problem in her own staffroom since the problem is only in her own school - but that seems to be based purely on your own experiences of a good system in your school. Perhaps it is your experiences that are unusual and not carolzoo's. Either way what's the harm in opening up a discussion on the issue, as well as bringing it up at staff meeting? Carolzoo did qualify her statement by saying:

"Perhaps your school reviews the duties to reflect the current climate. But this doesn't happen in all schools."

In my own school there is a very obvious unequal distribution in work between post holders. And this is definitely not down to behind-the-scenes paperwork. I have two good friends who openly admit their posts are not time consuming at all. Our post duties range from somebody organising the debs (involves booking the same hotel every year and lodging money in debs account) to the very busy and overworked PLC co-ordinator/JCSP co-ordinator/year head. Clearly there is a need for some re-distribution!

We don't have a review system that involves staff - there may be a review at management level.

I agree with rainbowtrout, however, that transparancy should not necessarily involve staff having access to post-holder reports. Post holders answer to the principal, board of management and patron of the school - not fellow teachers. As rainbowtrout said, you wouldn't expect other teachers to demand to see your scheme of work or lesson plans!

seavill

2011abc wrote: »

Far better idea to give all the posts to principals' 'pets' as is now becoming the case .To hell with long sevice and loyalty to a school.

What the hell has being a good year head for example got to do with being in the school 15 years or being loyal to the school.
I really don't understand what you mean by being loyal to a school. If you are given a permanent job and you chose not to move this is to protect your permanent job not out of loyalty to any school.

As I said long service stands for nothing. It has no relevance to your suitability to any position.

I have found in schools I have worked in the times where a principal was appointed to "see out the last few years" has had a detrimental impact on the school. At times this person can be trying to see out the years with the least hassle possible and has no interest in developing the school long term. What benefit to the school does the long service of this person have in this case?

In any job, in any walk of life, the best person should always get the job. As has been discussed numerous times on different threads here about new jobs in schools. I think everyone would agree that if there is an english job going in your school tomorrow surely you and all your colleagues would want the best possible person for the job to be taken on.

Why would that change when it comes to a promotion within the school????

Surely and even more importantly someone like a year head is an essential person in a school and not everyone is cut out for it.

Rainbowtrout, I do not know how to quote you here so I will just respond to your first two paragraphs.

I do not necessarily agree with what carolzoo is saying but I do agree with some things they are saying.

I know in all the schools I have worked in the whole topic of posts can be a very touchy subject, maybe not in yours as it seems to be the culture in your school to have it that way, but certainly in many schools that is the case.
If you even dared to even discuss someone's post you could find yourself eating lunch with the kids for a few months, never mind actually suggesting a change in personnel or tasks, you could be shot for those crimes.

In relation to your second point.
I am not trying to sound like I am having a go here so take it in a nice way but it is very easy to say that you do not have to do anything extra when you have always had a permanent job.
Most new teachers walking into a job (non permanent) will be given a class tutor. Who in gods name is going to say no to that your first day.
If the principal walked in tomorrow and asked me to do the timetable for the summer exams, the first thing I would say "of course".
I must do my best to ensure that the principal does not get a bad impression of me. i must look after my job. Are they taking advantage, most definitely, but am I ever going to say no to the principal, never in a million years.

Also from having worked in both sectors I can definitely say that VEC schools are much more efficient in terms of paperwork like this compared to secondary schools. Stock takes etc. are mandatory in every classroom in the VEC school I worked in. In the 3 voluntary schools I was in I have never been asked to do one. Just my experience.

rainbowtrout

Miss Lockhart wrote: »

Rainbowtrout, I'm not sure why you are taking this suggestion so personally. You are suggesting that carolzoo should take up the problem in her own staffroom since the problem is only in her own school - but that seems to be based purely on your own experiences of a good system in your school. Perhaps it is your experiences that are unusual and not carolzoo's. Either way what's the harm in opening up a discussion on the issue, as well as bringing it up at staff meeting?

No, I'm not taking it personally, but from my own experience we have made suggestions as to what would be useful post duties at staff meetings. It's hard to compare posts between any two schools as schools have leeway to award posts in whatever way they see fit, so school planning may not be seen as a necessary post in one school but it may be a priority in another.

I'd agree with you on a post for the debs, that is ridiculous, but while flexibility exists within schools for the types of post duties that are dished out then surely the best place to bring up the issue is at a staff meeting or through the teacher's representatives on the BOM? It can be addressed as prioritizing the needs of the school rather than an attack on a person and their duties.

bdoo

2011abc wrote: »

seavill wrote: »

One thing about posts that really really really annoys me is the entitlement to a post that people feel. Recently someone in my school said "I'm next in line for a post if one comes up and god help X if they try and apply for my post"
Shocking attitude.

Far better idea to give all the posts to principals' 'pets' as is now becoming the case .To hell with long sevice and loyalty to a school.

I got my post this year after 8 years and I'm no pet. I work hard in the clasroom and outside and I have a genuine interest in the school and the kids.

I'M still getting dirty looks and akward silences because I got the job. I don't feel I should apologise for preparing for an interview and getting a job. The people I beat are my colleagues and I have the height of respect for them. service is not what will make a better post holder.

We had a review with all staff recently. We had the list of podta and had to prioritise them as we saw it and some stuff will have to go cos there are no bodies to do them.

I agree with seaville re doing jobs 'voluntarily' how do u say no? Doesn't affect ne now but I can see it as a problem.

carolzoo

teachers with handy posts such as lockers, arranging debs etc will not appreciate other teachers suggesting more important jobs which might warrant being a post beause of the time involved in carrying out the duties no matter how round about a fashion one goes about it. Why would they ask for extra work?? (even though it may be warranted to justify their pay (and extra 4 hours off the timetable - "A" post holders only + in vec schools only)

Many teachers will refrain from openly suggesting other activities to be prioritisd because of this. They may be friends and colleagues of the post holders.

School management should be able to gather staff views anonymously and then to decide on what activities to prioritise after adding their input opinions too. No big deal. Then everyone gets a chance to give their views anonymously - typed answers so handwriting not identified. All teachers might not be comfortable speaking in a staff meeting. Some can be quiet, some are temporary teachers who don't want to upset the boat. Some teachers may be absent the day of the staff meeting. Some teachers take over the discussion, and others end up agreeing as they are not as strong personalities or others end up saying nothing and not voicing their opinions for a various reasons

So an anonymous survey would get all opinions

Miss Lockhart

rainbowtrout wrote: »

No, I'm not taking it personally, but from my own experience we have made suggestions as to what would be useful post duties at staff meetings.

And in carolzoo's experience, and mine, that does not happen and in my experience would not be welcomed.

rainbowtrout wrote: »

It's hard to compare posts between any two schools as schools have leeway to award posts in whatever way they see fit, so school planning may not be seen as a necessary post in one school but it may be a priority in another.

I agree completely - I am not saying posts should be standardised across all schools, just a standardised need for review and transparancy. The final decision though should remain with the principal and BOM who know the individual needs of their school best.

rainbowtrout wrote: »

I'd agree with you on a post for the debs, that is ridiculous, but while flexibility exists within schools for the types of post duties that are dished out then surely the best place to bring up the issue is at a staff meeting or through the teacher's representatives on the BOM? It can be addressed as prioritizing the needs of the school rather than an attack on a person and their duties.

That doesn't preclude having a more widespread discussion on the issue across all schools.

And I can say with certainty that one or two of our post holders would definitely take any suggestions that their post be re-jigged or changed as reflection on their work and be highly insulted. Some people seem to take all discussion of their work as an insult. Not all staffrooms are open to suggestions or change.

rainbowtrout

seavill wrote: »

Rainbowtrout, I do not know how to quote you here so I will just respond to your first two paragraphs.



In relation to your second point.
I am not trying to sound like I am having a go here so take it in a nice way but it is very easy to say that you do not have to do anything extra when you have always had a permanent job.
Most new teachers walking into a job (non permanent) will be given a class tutor. Who in gods name is going to say no to that your first day.
If the principal walked in tomorrow and asked me to do the timetable for the summer exams, the first thing I would say "of course".
I must do my best to ensure that the principal does not get a bad impression of me. i must look after my job. Are they taking advantage, most definitely, but am I ever going to say no to the principal, never in a million years.

Also from having worked in both sectors I can definitely say that VEC schools are much more efficient in terms of paperwork like this compared to secondary schools. Stock takes etc. are mandatory in every classroom in the VEC school I worked in. In the 3 voluntary schools I was in I have never been asked to do one. Just my experience.

I think you are arguing the same side of the coin, I was acknowledging that my permanency protects from being abused in that way to a certain extent. I do have job security, doesn't mean I can't been given a crap timetable or have life made difficult in other ways. Because I'm permanent doesn't mean I haven't been asked to do these things and doesn't mean I have refused. When I did refuse (with justification) the repercussions were not fun.

bdoo

Miss Lockhart wrote: »

rainbowtrout wrote: »

No, I'm not taking it personally, but from my own experience we have made suggestions as to what would be useful post duties at staff meetings.

And in carolzoo's experience, and mine, that does not happen and in my experience would not be welcomed.

rainbowtrout wrote: »

It's hard to compare posts between any two schools as schools have leeway to award posts in whatever way they see fit, so school planning may not be seen as a necessary post in one school but it may be a priority in another.

I agree completely - I am not saying posts should be standardised across all schools, just a standardised need for review and transparancy. The final decision though should remain with the principal and BOM who know the individual needs of their school best.

rainbowtrout wrote: »

I'd agree with you on a post for the debs, that is ridiculous, but while flexibility exists within schools for the types of post duties that are dished out then surely the best place to bring up the issue is at a staff meeting or through the teacher's representatives on the BOM? It can be addressed as prioritizing the needs of the school rather than an attack on a person and their duties.

That doesn't preclude having a more widespread discussion on the issue across all schools.

And I can say with certainty that one or two of our post holders would definitely take any suggestions that their post be re-jigged or changed as reflection on their work and be highly insulted. Some people seem to take all discussion of their work as an insult. Not all staffrooms are open to suggestions or change.

The danger with the review of posts is that you don't know what work is involved unless you have donr it. I know that in my school looking after nearly 600 lockers id far from handy and is very time consuming and must be done in school - you can't take lockers hone to repair them. I think the key to successful posts iscto match the person to the duties wherever possible.

carolzoo

I would imagine the caretaker helps out with a lot of the locker issues?

bdoo

carolzoo wrote: »

I would imagine the caretaker helps out with a lot of the locker issues?

That's the nub of the problem a lot of people imagine a lot of things.

You don't know a post until you have done it.

carolzoo

Perhaps make it more transparent so!

I see the caretaker sorting out keys/locker issues frequently in my school. lost keys - replacing them, fixing lockers that are jammed etc

I realise students pay a deposit for a locker key and this money has to be taken recorded etc. Also to ensure students clear out their lockers at the end of term etc. Perhaps this is what the post holder does? I would imagine a lot of this takes place at the beginning of the year or students leave the money for the lockers into the school secretary in some cases they would organise the lockers.

Yes i am a novice on the lockers front I admit but interested in hearing more!

bdoo

carolzoo wrote: »

Perhaps make it more transparent so!

I see the caretaker sorting out keys/locker issues frequently in my school. lost keys - replacing them, fixing lockers that are jammed etc

I realise students pay a deposit for a locker key and this money has to be taken recorded etc. Also to ensure students clear out their lockers at the end of term etc. Perhaps this is what the post holder does? I would imagine a lot of this takes place at the beginning of the year or students leave the money for the lockers into the school secretary in some cases they would organise the lockers.

Yes i am a novice on the lockers front I admit but interested in hearing more!

You are missing the point. Its an example of how little people know about posts unless you have done it.

I think carolzoo that you are just complaining for the sake of it. Do you have a post?

carolzoo

No, I don't have a post and I am not complaining for the sake of it.

I am opening up the discussion on the review of posts in schools.

I see it as being current and relevant given that some relevant posts such as year heads/ discipline issues/ pastoral care needs are being left unaddressed in schools due to retirements and the embargo on posts.

The above and other new work which warrants being a post for example could be added or swopped into existing post holders duties.


i.e. review post holders activities, what activities now also warrant being a post, what activities are null and void now or are just once off activities and do not warrant being paid as a post. etc etc.

seavill

rainbowtrout wrote: »

I think you are arguing the same side of the coin, I was acknowledging that my permanency protects from being abused in that way to a certain extent. I do have job security, doesn't mean I can't been given a crap timetable or have life made difficult in other ways. Because I'm permanent doesn't mean I haven't been asked to do these things and doesn't mean I have refused. When I did refuse (with justification) the repercussions were not fun.

I was responding to this quote
"but nobody is obliged to take on post duties"
I took it from what you were saying was that people should say no if they didn't want to do something.

If you meant something different I apologise but that is how I read the post and how I responded.

seavill

carolzoo wrote: »

The above and other new work which warrants being a post for example could be added or swopped into existing post holders duties.
.

As far as I know the union stance on the above would be that nothing can be added to a post.

Their line is that you can change post as long as it does not require any extra work other than what you are already doing.

Its not often that I agree with the union but I do on this as otherwise the poor post holders that are left could find themselves with huge work loads if they are expected to take on 2 or 3 jobs to fix the prob of teachers retiring

carolzoo

Fair enough seaville, but some posts may have taken time to do a few years ago but now can be done much quicker due to systems being set up in in relation to them or perhaps the post for example e.g. organising the book rental scheme is no longer warranted.

Surely posts have to be reviewed and the current needs of the school addressed. Some posts may be out dated.

I see the union stance but at the same time all post holders should have a certain amount of relevant, current, school duties to complete.

Should post holders with minimum work to do as other posters have mentioned here continue as they are? and other teachers carry the burden? is this fair?

seavill

carolzoo wrote: »

Fair enough seaville, but some posts may have taken time to do a few years ago but now can be done much quicker due to systems being set up in in relation to them or perhaps the post e.g. school rental scheme is no longer warranted.

Surely posts have to be reviewed and the current needs of the school addressed. Some posts may be out dated.

Yea I havn't disagreed with you on that one yet as far as I know.

Just stating something to clarify something you said.

carolzoo

Ok fair enough, no problem!

rainbowtrout

carolzoo wrote: »

Perhaps make it more transparent so!

I see the caretaker sorting out keys/locker issues frequently in my school. lost keys - replacing them, fixing lockers that are jammed etc

I realise students pay a deposit for a locker key and this money has to be taken recorded etc. Also to ensure students clear out their lockers at the end of term etc. Perhaps this is what the post holder does? I would imagine a lot of this takes place at the beginning of the year or students leave the money for the lockers into the school secretary in some cases they would organise the lockers.

Yes i am a novice on the lockers front I admit but interested in hearing more!

Lockers is a B post in my school. Or rather it was, the person who held that post retired this year, so I dunno what the story is with it at the moment. It would appear that some people have nothing to do for long periods during the year but again, find out what they are doing before deciding that their post doesn't warrant being a full post.

Given that 4 hours a week are allocated to A post holders, I think it would be reasonable to consider that B post holders would be giving 2 hours a week to their duties. If you want to get mathematical on it, that would roughly work out at 2 x 34 = 68 hours over the school year for a B post.

A person dealing with lockers will have a lot of that time used up in the first few weeks of the year and the last few weeks but might spend a lot of time in doing so in those weeks making up for weeks where they appear to be slack.

I can't comment on how that person's time was spent, but I know that their duties included collecting money from lockers, usually done by year group, and allocating lockers and keys to those students. I assume all of the money and records of who got what locker was recorded in some sort of ledger.

Much the same type of work went on at the end of the year but in reverse.

During the year the post holder made themselves available for certain periods during the week ( don't know when ) that students could come to them if they needed to order replacement keys and pay for those keys. But I do know that they made themselves available during that time every week for the year.

Did they deal with students outside of this time period? I don't know, but I did have students on occasion come to class saying 'I can't find my locker key, so I have no books, can I go to 'Ms. B-post holder' and order another locker key, so maybe they dealt with students at other times as well.

Again ordering keys, not a huge task but I don't know if the order was placed with a local key cutting business or a company where orders were placed for numbered keys. Get an order number from the office, fill in the order, record the receipt of order from key company, give in invoice to office. Lots of small fiddly stuff, but someone has to do it. So maybe in a relatively big school it warrants a B post.

seavill

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Lockers is a B post in my school. Or rather it was, the person who held that post retired this year, so I dunno what the story is with it at the moment. It would appear that some people have nothing to do for long periods during the year but again, find out what they are doing before deciding that their post doesn't warrant being a full post.

Given that 4 hours a week are allocated to A post holders, I think it would be reasonable to consider that B post holders would be giving 2 hours a week to their duties. If you want to get mathematical on it, that would roughly work out at 2 x 34 = 68 hours over the school year for a B post.

A person dealing with lockers will have a lot of that time used up in the first few weeks of the year and the last few weeks but might spend a lot of time in doing so in those weeks making up for weeks where they appear to be slack.

I can't comment on how that person's time was spent, but I know that their duties included collecting money from lockers, usually done by year group, and allocating lockers and keys to those students. I assume all of the money and records of who got what locker was recorded in some sort of ledger.

Much the same type of work went on at the end of the year but in reverse.

During the year the post holder made themselves available for certain periods during the week ( don't know when ) that students could come to them if they needed to order replacement keys and pay for those keys. But I do know that they made themselves available during that time every week for the year.

Did they deal with students outside of this time period? I don't know, but I did have students on occasion come to class saying 'I can't find my locker key, so I have no books, can I go to 'Ms. B-post holder' and order another locker key, so maybe they dealt with students at other times as well.

Again ordering keys, not a huge task but I don't know if the order was placed with a local key cutting business or a company where orders were placed for numbered keys. Get an order number from the office, fill in the order, record the receipt of order from key company, give in invoice to office. Lots of small fiddly stuff, but someone has to do it. So maybe in a relatively big school it warrants a B post.

Fair point I must say. You would never thing of all those things really unless you did it yourself.

Espcially the part I have highlighted. When you think over the first 2 or 3 weeks you could have 20 or 30 hours used up easily on these tasks in school I have been in. And as you said reversed at the end of the year. Never mind all the little fiddly bits in between.

Very good post. You can't really judge without knowing the ins and outs.

rainbowtrout

seavill wrote: »

Fair point I must say. You would never thing of all those things really unless you did it yourself.

Espcially the part I have highlighted. When you think over the first 2 or 3 weeks you could have 20 or 30 hours used up easily on these tasks in school I have been in. And as you said reversed at the end of the year. Never mind all the little fiddly bits in between.

Very good post. You can't really judge without knowing the ins and outs.

Yep, so while it might appear that that person does nothing from October-April, they might be doing work in the background... and just because their 68 hours is mainly squashed into 2 months of the year doesn't mean they should be obliged to take on more duties in the middle of the year.

I do agree that some posts in some schools do not warrant the time they have been allocated, but certainly people should consider what is required of a job before they decide people aren't doing the hours.

bdoo

rainbowtrout wrote: »

seavill wrote: »

Fair point I must say. You would never thing of all those things really unless you did it yourself.

Espcially the part I have highlighted. When you think over the first 2 or 3 weeks you could have 20 or 30 hours used up easily on these tasks in school I have been in. And as you said reversed at the end of the year. Never mind all the little fiddly bits in between.

Very good post. You can't really judge without knowing the ins and outs.

Yep, so while it might appear that that person does nothing from October-April, they might be doing work in the background... and just because their 68 hours is mainly squashed into 2 months of the year doesn't mean they should be obliged to take on more duties in the middle of the year.

I do agree that some posts in some schools do not warrant the time they have been allocated, but certainly people should consider what is required of a job before they decide people aren't doing the hours.

That's the point I have been making also rainbowtrout but hadn't the energy to give such a long and detailed response.

I think also what might be seen as unnecessary in school a is an essential in school b.

Imagine a deis school with no book rental scheme - no books in class, no homework being done etc etc. But I suppose year heads could come in and give out to the kids to sort that out!

seavill

bdoo wrote: »

That's the point I have been making also rainbowtrout but hadn't the energy to give such a long and detailed response.

I think also what might be seen as unnecessary in school a is an essential in school b.

Imagine a deis school with no book rental scheme - no books in class, no homework being done etc etc. But I suppose year heads could come in and give out to the kids to sort that out!

In a large number of schools from my experience year heads may not always be post holders. Out of the 5 closest schools to me the year heads in 2 are A post holders, in 2 they have no post at all just are year heads for no extra money (I am unsure about classes off in one school of the 2 they get 3 periods a week). in the 5th school I am unsure of the arrangement.

To me an essential job in any school with a massive workload deserving of an A post where ever it is

solerina

In my school we have a meeting at the start of September to review the posts...we have very few now anyway so its easy enough to do. We have an A post for 3rd/5th/6th yr Year Head and a B post for Junior year head. These havnt changed. We have an A post for Special Needs coordination. The other posts have all changed recently as people have retired...again some people have posts that are busy throughout the year while other posts have periods when they are very busy and periods with less t do...but we do review them annually.

hotpotato

Know this is serious dredging up of the past but on the topic of Posts of Responsibilty I figured there still might be a few of you around who could help me . Could anyone show me where it is written down WHEN Special Duties Posts must be done. I.e must special duties posts be done outside of the 5 hr 40 mins working day?
I would say prayers for anyone who could show me where this is/isn't written down!!!!

Pwpane

I've never heard of times being mentioned - either in the sense of 'do it now' or in the sense of 'you must do 5 hours'. And I'm inclined to read these things.

The job takes as long as it takes (or as long as you're willing to put into it), and you do it when it makes sense. For example if it involves working with students then you do it when the students are there. If it doesn't, you do it when you can. Could be a combination of both.

What's the problem?

hotpotato

Pwpane-thanks for your response. Really appreciate feedback.

No, it's just one of the other teachers on the staff has a post but also has a job directly after school which stops him from staying late.

Really annoying me, prob touch of the green eyed monster! I just thought that a post shouldn't cut on on your normal working hours. Love to see it in writing somewhere but it prob goes without saying.

Incidentally, this also means that they can't do CP hours in afternoon so they do them in morning on their own-just annoying.

solerina

Hi
I have never heard of anything which says when posts should/should not be done, they are essentially extra work for extra pay...so I usually use up free classes, lunch hours, before school and often at home time to work on my post. I think that's the norm, it certainly is in my school (Secondary so no reduction in hours).

Pwpane

I suppose you feel he's not really doing the work that should be done.

What kind of post does he have, generally speaking? Do you know that he's not getting the work done?

rainbowtrout

hotpotato wrote: »

Pwpane-thanks for your response. Really appreciate feedback.

No, it's just one of the other teachers on the staff has a post but also has a job directly after school which stops him from staying late.

Really annoying me, prob touch of the green eyed monster! I just thought that a post shouldn't cut on on your normal working hours. Love to see it in writing somewhere but it prob goes without saying.

Incidentally, this also means that they can't do CP hours in afternoon so they do them in morning on their own-just annoying.

I think it's two separate issues. The fact that this other teacher has another job affects how they do CP hours. Not fair on the other teachers who are expected to stay behind and do them. If I'm not mistaken it's normally written into teaching contracts that teachers do not take on work outside of their teaching hours that impinges on their work within the school. You may have a sympathetic principal but how does it work for other teachers who need/want an afternoon off for something?


The other issue is largely down to the nature of the post I would imagine. I can do a lot of my paperwork at home in the evening and choose to do so some evenings as it's administration. Some of it I need to get done in school hours if it involves meeting other staff, students, making phone calls etc. Is this post one that is clearly not being done or could they be doing it in their own time? e.g if the person is a year head and you have brought a disciplinary issue to their attention and they are not dealing with it, then that's an issue. If it's a paperwork post they could be doing it all along without anyone knowing what they do in the evening.

seavill

hotpotato wrote: »

Pwpane-thanks for your response. Really appreciate feedback.

No, it's just one of the other teachers on the staff has a post but also has a job directly after school which stops him from staying late.

Really annoying me, prob touch of the green eyed monster! I just thought that a post shouldn't cut on on your normal working hours. Love to see it in writing somewhere but it prob goes without saying.

Incidentally, this also means that they can't do CP hours in afternoon so they do them in morning on their own-just annoying.

If for example he is doing paper work in class time where he should be teaching, then it is an issue, not really one because you are jealous but becuase it is effecting the kids education.
If it is one that he is doing it in free classes, break times etc. well thats his choice and really not being rude or anything but it is really none of your business, thats between him and the principal as is what you do in your classroom, none of anyone elses business. If he is getting the job done properly without effecting class time I really don't see what it has got to do with you.

The CP hours I would be annoyed with, unless the principal give leway with lots of people for different reasons. If it is a strict rule for everyone except him well then yes I wouldn't be overly happy

RealJohn

With regards Haddington hours (CP is dead people - let's not pretend we've agreed to what's currently being inflicted upon us), my understanding was that they're supposed to be done by all of the staff at the same time or at least, by large blocks of staff at the same time so one person putting in individual hours goes against that and shouldn't be allowed other than on a one off basis. Maybe I'm wrong about that though.

With regards the post of responsibility, it occurs to me that a lot of post holders could take the attitude that they can be pretty lazy about their post since it can't really be taken off them. I imagine the moratorium applies to posts lost for disciplinary reasons as well as for retirements - they don't get replaced unless the school is already well past the point where they used to be replaced. Your post holder might be taking the attitude "they can't take the post off of me because they won't be allowed to give it to someone else so there'll be nobody to do it". I can imagine there are some post holders (hopefully a small minority) who would do that.

hotpotato

Thanks for the feedback. I don't want to give a huge amount away but the post is definitely not being done. Some aspects can indeed be done at home but some have to be after hours. Irritating the life out of me and more so as it's not actually written anywhere.

Same with the CP hours done individually-it's not written down. It only says "Some" can be done individually. This is wide open to interpretation. Complete favouritism by principal if you ask me. Grrrrr.

Pwpane

If the post is not being done, you could complain to the principal, the BOM or the DES.

If the CP hours have been converted to individual class planning, you could ask for the same derogation.

You could ask the union rep to have a quiet word with the principal saying that other staff are upset and wondering what the position is.

It's put up or shut up, really.

Also, sometimes there are things in the background that other people don't know about. And sometimes, it's good that the principal can give some slack even if only temporarily.

rainbowtrout

hotpotato wrote: »

Thanks for the feedback. I don't want to give a huge amount away but the post is definitely not being done. Some aspects can indeed be done at home but some have to be after hours. Irritating the life out of me and more so as it's not actually written anywhere.

Same with the CP hours done individually-it's not written down. It only says "Some" can be done individually. This is wide open to interpretation. Complete favouritism by principal if you ask me. Grrrrr.

I wouldn't be so worried about when the hours are being done. It can be hard enough to get non teaching work done in a school day, but if the post is definitely not being done then it is a problem.

ytareh

hotpotato wrote: »

Know this is serious dredging up of the past but on the topic of Posts of Responsibilty I figured there still might be a few of you around who could help me . Could anyone show me where it is written down WHEN Special Duties Posts must be done. I.e must special duties posts be done outside of the 5 hr 40 mins working day?
I would say prayers for anyone who could show me where this is/isn't written down!!!!

and later hotpotato said

"No, it's just one of the other teachers on the staff has a post but also has a job directly after school which stops him from staying late."


Let me get this straight !?Youre posting her in the hope of finding a link to 'legislation' because youre desperate to make a complaint against a postholder colleague who needs to work after hours to make end meet ?
Once again I will make the point that sometimes our worst enemies are our fellow staffmembers ...

rainbowtrout

ytareh wrote: »

and later hotpotato said

"No, it's just one of the other teachers on the staff has a post but also has a job directly after school which stops him from staying late."


Let me get this straight !?Youre posting her in the hope of finding a link to 'legislation' because youre desperate to make a complaint against a postholder colleague who needs to work after hours to make end meet ?
Once again I will make the point that sometimes our worst enemies are our fellow staffmembers ...

I don't think we have the full story to be fair. The vast majority of postholders in my experience are on full hours, and while there are teachers out there who have expensive childcare and a huge mortgage etc, there are also plenty who are making a fortune on grinds in the evenings, and not exactly short a few bob. It's a huge inference to suggest that the postholder has to work extra hours to make ends meet, they may not need to at all.

Whether they do or not, it appears from what the OP has said that their post is not getting done, and I am guessing this impacts on other staff and/or students. Regardless of the reasons for having a second job, it shouldn't impact on the teaching one.

2011abc

rainbowtrout wrote: »

while there are teachers out there who have expensive childcare and a huge mortgage etc, there are also plenty who are making a fortune on grinds in the evenings, and not exactly short a few bob. It's a huge inference to suggest that the postholder has to work extra hours to make ends meet, they may not need to at all.

No , yours is a huge inference .'Plenty who are making a fortune ,not exactly short a few bob ', what collegiality !Is it any wonder the gutter press trawl these pages with that kind of ammo available.I think the "expensive childcare and a huge mortgage" may be somewhat more representative of a typical 30s/40s teacher .

rainbowtrout

2011abc wrote: »

No , yours is a huge inference .'Plenty who are making a fortune ,not exactly short a few bob ', what collegiality !Is it any wonder the gutter press trawl these pages with that kind of ammo available.I think the "expensive childcare and a huge mortgage" may be somewhat more representative of a typical 30s/40s teacher .

No the point I was making was that this particular teacher may not be scraping by as was assumed by ytareh. The teacher could be just as easily be doing ok financially. Either is possible. But the important point is that doing this work impacts on their teaching job.