School ordered to payout due to "religious bias"

Cabaal

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/gaelscoil-board-must-pay-750-to-pupil-over-religious-bias-30018075.html

THE board of a Gaelscoil has been ordered to pay a Protestant schoolboy €750 after a principal referred to the boy's parents as part of the "rebel crowd" and punished him for not attending First Communion and Confirmation ceremonies.

The tribunal heard that the boy was ordered by the principal to stand against a classroom wall as punishment for not attending a First Communion ceremony with his schoolmates at a local Roman Catholic church, despite being a member of the Church of Ireland.

He was also excluded from a "homework holiday" in which the other children who had made their First Communion at the church were rewarded.

The children were given a special note from the principal excusing them from doing homework for two days while the boy in question was not, which he found very upsetting, the tribunal heard. The parents, who are not named, said the principal had told them the school was "interdenominational" when they initially enrolled their son in school.

Not enough of a payout in my view, schools need to know its not ok to mistreat children for the belief or non-belief of the parents.

Penn

Well, at the same time too much of a payout could be bad for the overall school and students, so it can be a hard thing to balance. Besides, all it'd take is an extra collection at a few Masses or a raffle and they'd make most of the money back again from the parishioners.

Still though, glad some form of punishment was handed down, and another piece of evidence as to why schools should be secular by default.

Cabaal

Penn wrote: »

Well, at the same time too much of a payout could be bad for the overall school and students,

true,
though in fairness I'm not taking about 50-60k here, I'm talking about 1-2k with a max of maybe 5k.

if it was me as the parents I'd donate the money to charity whatever it is,

wp_rathead

What a Cnut of a principal

Knob Longman

Scandalous carry on, The Catholics still think they can do what they want here.

Akrasia

Why didn't they name the school?

wp_rathead

Akrasia wrote: »

Why didn't they name the school?

To protect the child

Bellatori

wprathead wrote: »

To protect the child

From whom though? All it does is protect the hierarchy who can slope back into anonymity after a few weeks. I doubt the schoolboy would mind the notoriety, not with 700+ euros to show for his labours

Cabaal

wprathead wrote: »

To protect the child

But at what cost to other parents and children?

Nodin

Cabaal wrote: »

But at what cost to other parents and children?

Indeed. And perhaps the school. This seems to have been confined to the principal, so it would put pressure on them to remove the problematic element.

The Dagda

Knob Longman wrote: »

Scandalous carry on, The Catholics still think they can do what they want here.

Huh? The Catholics? How? Wha?

I just don't even...

Greenmachine

Cabaal wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/gaelscoil-board-must-pay-750-to-pupil-over-religious-bias-30018075.html







Not enough of a payout in my view, schools need to know its not ok to mistreat children for the belief or non-belief of the parents.

In general I don't agree with the developing compo culture, however in this case I am shocked at the miserable level of payout. The principal comes across as a bully. To further isolate the child is wholly unnecessary. His class mates were probably already confused why one of their classmates was not taking part in the ceremony. The principals actions no doubt left an impression in the boys classmates minds that he was inherently bad for nothing making his communion.

xLisaBx

The principal was clearly a bully in this particular case. Yes, the boy was treated unfairly and was probably distressed. However if a classmate bullied this boy and was a cause of distress, he would recieve no cash payment. The most he would get is a half hearted apology and possible blame in school. So why should one scenario be treated differently to a second?

TheQuietFella

Cabaal wrote: »

But at what cost to other parents and children?

Would you ever get a life!

flutered

Cabaal wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/gaelscoil-board-must-pay-750-to-pupil-over-religious-bias-30018075.html







Not enough of a payout in my view, schools need to know its not ok to mistreat children for the belief or non-belief of the parents.

to me it is the principal who should be fined, i find it hard to believe that any parents association would sanction such action, now i live far in the boonies, thus i honastly saay such action by a principal would not be tolerated.

freyners

xLisaBx wrote: »

The principal was clearly a bully in this particular case. Yes, the boy was treated unfairly and was probably distressed. However if a classmate bullied this boy and was a cause of distress, he would recieve no cash payment. The most he would get is a half hearted apology and possible blame in school. So why should one scenario be treated differently to a second?

Because a adult should know a lot better

xLisaBx

freyners wrote: »

Because a adult should know a lot better

Yes but even older students and secondary school students should also know better, and they continue to abuse others. Minimal punishment though

Nodin

TheQuietFella wrote: »

Would you ever get a life!

Do please explain.

wp_rathead

Cabaal wrote: »

But at what cost to other parents and children?

To me, the child's privacy is paramount

Sulla Felix

Huh, never saw that first time around. Article is from February, found a politics.ie thread from around the same time. No other reportage, no Times, no RTE...

iguana

xLisaBx wrote: »

The principal was clearly a bully in this particular case. Yes, the boy was treated unfairly and was probably distressed. However if a classmate bullied this boy and was a cause of distress, he would recieve no cash payment. The most he would get is a half hearted apology and possible blame in school. So why should one scenario be treated differently to a second?

Because the other students do not have duty of care over each other, the teachers and principal do. The principal had a legal duty to protect the boy and instead he used his power to bully him. What happened and what you describe are incomparably different.

freyners

xLisaBx wrote: »

Yes but even older students and secondary school students should also know better, and they continue to abuse others. Minimal punishment though

Teacher is in a position of authority, the students arent. Stop trying to make excuses for what clearly is a pathetic excuse for a teacher, principle and human being

xLisaBx

freyners wrote: »

Teacher is in a position of authority, the students arent. Stop trying to make excuses for what clearly is a pathetic excuse for a teacher, principle and human being

Not trying to make excuses, to be honest I think the boy deserved the money and more. Principal sounds like a **** and old fashioned. It's just I also believe that schools should face some form of punishment when they blatantly ignore bullying. End product is the same: upset child.

xLisaBx

freyners wrote: »

Teacher is in a position of authority, the students arent. Stop trying to make excuses for what clearly is a pathetic excuse for a teacher, principle and human being

Not trying to make excuses, to be honest I think the boy deserved the money and more. Principal sounds like a **** and old fashioned. It's just I also believe that schools should face some form of punishment when they blatantly ignore bullying. End product is the same: upset child.

Nodin

xLisaBx wrote: »

Not trying to make excuses, to be honest I think the boy deserved the money and more. Principal sounds like a **** and old fashioned. It's just I also believe that schools should face some form of punishment when they blatantly ignore bullying. End product is the same: upset child.

There's no comparsion whatsoever. This is sectarianism in a school that receives state funds, perpetrated by the senior member of staff.

xLisaBx

Nodin wrote: »

There's no comparsion whatsoever. This is sectarianism in a school that receives state funds, perpetrated by the senior member of staff.

But senior members of staff often cause hurt in other ways and there's no payouts made. Sectarianism shouldn't have a seperate set of rules.

Nodin

xLisaBx wrote: »

But senior members of staff often cause hurt in other ways and there's no payouts made..

.......what are you on about?

xLisaBx wrote: »

Sectarianism shouldn't have a seperate set of rules.

Discrimination by age, race, sex and religion is illegal in a great number of circumstances, including this one.

xLisaBx

Nodin wrote: »

.......what are you on about?


Discrimination by age, race, sex and religion is illegal in a great number of circumstances, including this one.

I just mean that principals and teachers who upset kids in other ways, eg. Ignoring bullying, face no punishment, why is there different rules for different circumstances?

Nodin

xLisaBx wrote: »

I just mean that principals and teachers who upset kids in other ways, eg. Ignoring bullying, face no punishment, why is there different rules for different circumstances?

Ignoring bullying may well be actionable.

There are occasionally specific rules for specific purposes.

obplayer

xLisaBx wrote: »

I just mean that principals and teachers who upset kids in other ways, eg. Ignoring bullying, face no punishment, why is there different rules for different circumstances?

As far as I am aware ignoring bullying is not against the law, it is contemptible but not illegal. Religious discrimination is illegal.

xLisaBx

Nodin wrote: »

Ignoring bullying may well be actionable.

There are occasionally specific rules for specific purposes.

I don't think it's actionable, staff may get a scolding that's about it. Happens a lot

Sulla Felix

If their duty of care doesn't cover actively responding to the actions of others that are brought to their attention, it should. That said, it's an issue only tangentially related to the OP.

I had heard the usual parish pump gossip about the gaelscoils being used for de facto religious and ethnic segregation but am sad to see that in this case at least it's true.

Hotblack Desiato

Sulla Felix wrote: »

Huh, never saw that first time around. Article is from February, found a politics.ie thread from around the same time. No other reportage, no Times, no RTE...

Was reported in the Irish Times and discussed here.

Nodin

Nodin wrote: »

.......what are you on about?


Discrimination by age, race, sex and religion is illegal in a great number of circumstances, including this one.

When it's illegal to discriminate against non catholic teachers - or at least until there are enough reasonable alternatives for teachers and parents alike in terms of schools - it'll be great

Cabaal

Nodin wrote: »

.
Discrimination by age, race, sex and religion is illegal in a great number of circumstances, including this one.

but as we know discrimination by schools towards teachers on the grounds of sex and religion is very much legal sadly,

- Non catholic, aww you didn't get the job as not inline with ethos
- your gay, aww your contracts not renewed as its not inline with ethos

I guess when you have this mindset towards the people you work with/employee its very easy to think you can treat the students the same way, might very well explain why the principal was such a dick

Cabaal

TheQuietFella wrote: »

Would you ever get a life!

Thanks for your thoughtful, meaningful and well constructed contribution to this thread. Your certificate will be in the post.

:rolleyes:

Dades

I also find the compensation element strange and out of place.

IMO, what should have happened was the principal being removed from his position. It's bullying by an adult in a position of power. The €750 is blood money so the principal can avoid what his behavior deserves.

expectationlost

Cabaal wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/gaelscoil-board-must-pay-750-to-pupil-over-religious-bias-30018075.html







Not enough of a payout in my view, schools need to know its not ok to mistreat children for the belief or non-belief of the parents.

Published 18/02/2014 sure we discussed this before

freyners

xLisaBx wrote: »

Not trying to make excuses, to be honest I think the boy deserved the money and more. Principal sounds like a **** and old fashioned. It's just I also believe that schools should face some form of punishment when they blatantly ignore bullying. End product is the same: upset child.

See where your coming from now, apologies for the tone of the posts

Sulla Felix

ninja900 wrote: »

Was reported in the Irish Times and discussed here.

Granted, I was going by the first page of google results for some possibly too-broad search terms. Passed by my radar though!

ShooterSF

Dades wrote: »

I also find the compensation element strange and out of place.

IMO, what should have happened was the principal being removed from his position. It's bullying by an adult in a position of power. The €750 is blood money so the principal can avoid what his behavior deserves.

Wait I just assumed he had been forced to "resign" after it :eek:

bluewolf

bluewolf wrote: »

When it's illegal to discriminate against non catholic teachers - or at least until there are enough reasonable alternatives for teachers and parents alike in terms of schools - it'll be great

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/law-change-will-protect-position-of-gay-teachers-1.1848231

Well that's a start...

Nodin

Cabaal wrote: »

but as we know discrimination by schools towards teachers on the grounds of sex and religion is very much legal sadly,

- Non catholic, aww you didn't get the job as not inline with ethos
- your gay, aww your contracts not renewed as its not inline with ethos

I guess when you have this mindset towards the people you work with/employee its very easy to think you can treat the students the same way, might very well explain why the principal was such a dick

O I know. Painful it exists in a supposedly developed Western European state.

P_1

bluewolf wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/law-change-will-protect-position-of-gay-teachers-1.1848231

Well that's a start...

About bloody time, didn't the religions gain themselves a loophole though by the fact that they are able to reject teachers who didn't do some religion course though?