Special Duties Teacher

Werty00

I'm working in a 500+second level school. Recently 3 A posts were advertised and filled. Attached to the notice re the A posts was a list of SD posts also to be filled. No info was given re interviews, criteria, etc for the SD posts. My understanding now is that these 4 SD posts have been filled, given the teachers in question concessionary hours on their timetable. Some staff members are flummoxed that principal already has these filled. My question is if the principal must advertise these SD posts separately, not just an add-on to the A post notice. Thus, were interviews to be held to fill these posts, and not just as the rumour has it, you had to go to principal to "express and interest" and thus that was your application? Thanks!

teacherhead

Werty00 wrote: »

I'm working in a 500+second level school. Recently 3 A posts were advertised and filled. Attached to the notice re the A posts was a list of SD posts also to be filled. No info was given re interviews, criteria, etc for the SD posts. My understanding now is that these 4 SD posts have been filled, given the teachers in question concessionary hours on their timetable. Some staff members are flummoxed that principal already has these filled. My question is if the principal must advertise these SD posts separately, not just an add-on to the A post notice. Thus, were interviews to be held to fill these posts, and not just as the rumour has it, you had to go to principal to "express and interest" and thus that was your application? Thanks!

SD posts haven't been advertised or filled since the moratorium came into effect with the exception afaik of a few new schools that were due a posts but applied for two SD posts in lieu as numbers were low etc. In the car I know of this was agreed with staff.

As for your situation I cannot see that these posts would be paid pensionable positions. In that case I wouldn't recommend getting involved. Regardless of how you feel about the above and your union directives on working for free you should still be entitled to fair procedures in appointments.

What to do? Well dont bother ringing asti. The union view, and my own, is that as long as we do **** for free we will never restore the posts.

If you are keen to do the job for personal reasons / to gain experience you should speak to the principal and find out the story, I only have your version of half a story so I dint know what to say.

A reduction in hours will have a knock on effect on your planing and prep time. Ot is not all its cracked up to be. Where are these hours coming from? I'd hate to think that resource hours were being used to allow someone organise the posters on the wall instead of helping children to learn and achieve


Essentially, the posts are voluntary I suppose. Do you need to interview to be a volunteer. If you work for free you will always be busy.

rainbowtrout

Werty00 wrote: »

I'm working in a 500+second level school. Recently 3 A posts were advertised and filled. Attached to the notice re the A posts was a list of SD posts also to be filled. No info was given re interviews, criteria, etc for the SD posts. My understanding now is that these 4 SD posts have been filled, given the teachers in question concessionary hours on their timetable. Some staff members are flummoxed that principal already has these filled. My question is if the principal must advertise these SD posts separately, not just an add-on to the A post notice. Thus, were interviews to be held to fill these posts, and not just as the rumour has it, you had to go to principal to "express and interest" and thus that was your application? Thanks!

Well aside from the fact that there is a moratorium on Special Duties posts being filled for the last few years, any time posts were vacant in my school both A posts and SD posts were advertised together, which appears to be the case in your school. When I filled in the application form I could opt to apply for one or other or both. I had to do two interview in the two days they were on.


I don't see why you think they should be advertised separately, it's more efficient to hold all interviews at the same time. I think the question you should be asking is if they are department approved Special Duties posts and if the people who got them are being paid for it by the department.

Werty00

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Well aside from the fact that there is a moratorium on Special Duties posts being filled for the last few years, any time posts were vacant in my school both A posts and SD posts were advertised together, which appears to be the case in your school. When I filled in the application form I could opt to apply for one or other or both. I had to do two interview in the two days they were on.


I don't see why you think they should be advertised separately, it's more efficient to hold all interviews at the same time. I think the question you should be asking is if they are department approved Special Duties posts and if the people who got them are being paid for it by the department.

These posts are dept approved and the people appointed are given timetable concessions in lieu of money. As explained, both the A posts and SD ones were printed on the same page but teachers with less than the 5 years experience needed for the A posts were instructed not to fill in an application form as they had not the required number of years needed to get the A post. No mention was made of the SD posts.

It has now emerged that the principal was accepting expressions of interest for the SD posts as recent as last week with the general consensus being that they had not been filled. Now however, people have been appointed who have not interviewed for them. Ultimately, the principal told us not to apply on the original form that they were posted on, because it was solely for the A posts. Nobody did, expecting a second form and round of interviews later on to fill the SD posts. Now word amongst the staff is that the principal has already made out timetables for next year and has included the concessionary hours in some staff timetables. Is this acceptable, bearing in mind that no and I mean no, info was given to staff re these SD posts, therefore making it impossible for open competition. It seems to all involved that the principal has chosen who he wants and is going with that. All advice welcome!

rainbowtrout

Werty00 wrote: »

These posts are dept approved and the people appointed are given timetable concessions in lieu of money. As explained, both the A posts and SD ones were printed on the same page but teachers with less than the 5 years experience needed for the A posts were instructed not to fill in an application form as they had not the required number of years needed to get the A post. No mention was made of the SD posts.

It has now emerged that the principal was accepting expressions of interest for the SD posts as recent as last week with the general consensus being that they had not been filled. Now however, people have been appointed who have not interviewed for them. Ultimately, the principal told us not to apply on the original form that they were posted on, because it was solely for the A posts. Nobody did, expecting a second form and round of interviews later on to fill the SD posts. Now word amongst the staff is that the principal has already made out timetables for next year and has included the concessionary hours in some staff timetables. Is this acceptable, bearing in mind that no and I mean no, info was given to staff re these SD posts, therefore making it impossible for open competition. It seems to all involved that the principal has chosen who he wants and is going with that. All advice welcome!

This all sounds very strange. There is a moratorium on Special Duties posts so I don't honestly see how they could be sanctioned and how they could be remunerated with time off in lieu of payment. That in itself is fishy.

However if there are posts to be filled, there has to be an application process and an interview process. Again, teachers can't just be appointed to positions without a record of application and interview as appointments are made based on interviews in which points are awarded in a number of different categories. Teachers who are unsuccessful after interview are entitled to appeal the decision (lots of experience of this in my school) and interviews can be carried out again etc.

you would be better off talking to your union and explaining the situation. An expresssion of interest is not enough to apply for a post. There has to be a paper trail. If you just decalre your intention verbally who's to say who applied and who didn't and where are the results of all the interviews?

By the way, how do you know the posts are department approved given the moratorium on special duties posts?

teacherhead

You do not, and never did, need 5 years for an a post. It's 3 for an AP post and 1 for an SD post.

If time in lieu is being given one could argue tat you are being pensionably renumerated for the post. I'm in a school of almost 600 and theres no sign of any SD posts. We have lost two this year due to retirement and a further 2 due to promotion to AP.

The whole thing stinks if you ask me. And I'm one of the dreaded 'management' people mwah ha ha.

ethical

Is it not rather unfortunate that getting on in teaching is so linked to an appalling system of cronyism and corruption,it is now way past time to bring on the whistleblowers and get the profession sorted!

Qwerty?

Werty00 wrote: »

These posts are dept approved and the people appointed are given timetable concessions in lieu of money. As explained, both the A posts and SD ones were printed on the same page but teachers with less than the 5 years experience needed for the A posts were instructed not to fill in an application form as they had not the required number of years needed to get the A post. No mention was made of the SD posts.

It has now emerged that the principal was accepting expressions of interest for the SD posts as recent as last week with the general consensus being that they had not been filled. Now however, people have been appointed who have not interviewed for them. Ultimately, the principal told us not to apply on the original form that they were posted on, because it was solely for the A posts. Nobody did, expecting a second form and round of interviews later on to fill the SD posts. Now word amongst the staff is that the principal has already made out timetables for next year and has included the concessionary hours in some staff timetables. Is this acceptable, bearing in mind that no and I mean no, info was given to staff re these SD posts, therefore making it impossible for open competition. It seems to all involved that the principal has chosen who he wants and is going with that. All advice welcome!

Of course Principals are going to be looking for teachers willing to do SD posts for free. But I don't see the Dept approving this, and certainly not approving of Timetable Concessions in lieu.

Also I doubt the timetable is completed for next year, sure its been worked on, but completed is quite unlikely. Final allocation/redeployments have only been finalised in the past week.

teacherhead

ethical wrote: »

Is it not rather unfortunate that getting on in teaching is so linked to an appalling system of cronyism and corruption,it is now way past time to bring on the whistleblowers and get the profession sorted!

Whistleblowers? If you have information about wrongdoing you should report it. You will achieve little posting about it here.

For every teacher who doesn't achieve promotion there is a conspiracy. It is so unprofessional and unkind to successful applications to suggest that they only got it because of pull.

ethical

Documentation sent to Ruairí's office,expect lots of 'noise' in September!!