Post of Responsibility

Galwaygirl45

We have just been given notice in our school that we are due an A post this year. We are an ASTI school and previously no one has gone against the person most Senior so the highest B post holder just applied and automatically got the post. What are people's opinions on applying for the post. It is for Year Head. I have no post but have been in the school a long time and do a lot of extra work in the school. Would it just create a bad atmosphere on staff and just not be worth it?

05eaftqbrs9jlh

It depends on if you really want it or not. You could just be upfront and ask the most senior person how they feel about the post - they might not even want it. Am I right in saying you don't even get paid any extra for them? Could be a bad move if you were to whip the rug out from under someone (unless you have some ulterior motive; are you looking to become VP or DVP?).

Galwaygirl45

No you do get paid for it. Over €8,000. There has been no post in the school since the seniority rules have changed so this is the first post that's meant to be open competition. Have no aspirations to be VP or P.

evolving_doors

Seniority only counts for part of it.

All's fair in love and war. I think it'd be nuts for folk to 'allow' someone get the job (or maybe it's an honourable thing to do!). I know someone who didn't apply as they thought the person was a shoe-in and nobody else was applying, turns out someone unexpected did apply and got the post. So don't assume others aren't applying.
Putting your name forward shows ambition (for further posts!) and it also gives you valuable experience for the next post interview. If another A post comes up you can be sure it'll be pretty much the same format (unless the principal changes or something!).

Just keep it under your hat in the staffroom if you are applying, unless you want to talk to another A post holder about the interview format, but ask them to keep it to themsleves. Depends on the staffroom though, I'd imagine there are staffrooms where half the staff apply for the post, wish each other well and have a laugh about it amongst themselves.

05eaftqbrs9jlh

Ah, in Primary "Allowances are not payable to new beneficiaries i.e. those who become eligible for receipt of the allowance in question on or after 1 February 2012". Apologies for my oversight.

If you feel that you would be equipped to do it, and you'd be in with a chance due to previous diligence, I'd say definitely go for it. Eight grand is fantastic money. Just because somebody has been there longer, doesn't mean they're more entitled to it.

Godspeed!

2011abc

Gebgbegb wrote: »

Seniority only counts for part of it.

All's fair in love and war. I think it'd be nuts for folk to 'allow' someone get the job (or maybe it's an honourable thing to do!). I know someone who didn't apply as they thought the person was a shoe-in and nobody else was applying, turns out someone unexpected did apply and got the post. So don't assume others aren't applying.
Putting your name forward shows ambition (for further posts!) and it also gives you valuable experience for the next post interview. If another A post comes up you can be sure it'll be pretty much the same format (unless the principal changes or something!).

Just keep it under your hat in the staffroom if you are applying, unless you want to talk to another A post holder about the interview format, but ask them to keep it to themsleves. Depends on the staffroom though, I'd imagine there are staffrooms where half the staff apply for the post, wish each other well and have a laugh about it amongst themselves.

So much imagery so early in the morning ! The 'Ambition' displayed by some staff to leapfrog others would put the Julie Birchall trash novel to shame and as for 'keeping it under your hat 'well I can only assume you've got a sweet patootie and / or sugar daddy there !!!

km79

The new format was brought in to stop exactly the situation described I.e. Next in line gets it based purely on seniority
It's is now quite rightly the best person for the job .
Go for it and apologize to nobody !

2011abc

Alicia Obedient Spyglass wrote: »

I'd say definitely go for it. Eight grand is fantastic money. Just because somebody has been there longer, doesn't mean they're more entitled to it.

Godspeed!

Changes in education in last decade are not Gods work .Manna from heaven for bullying principals though .Id be of opinion that people wait their turn .That way as you approach retirement you get the 8k reckonable for pension .Of course the obvious counter is "Wont somebody think of the children ,that way they won't get the best year head , sports coordinator etc .Well there's no guarantee youthful vim and vigour trumps experience .And in my opinion teachers are part of the school community and promotion opportunities should not be turned into something akin to gladiatorial combat .

Honour isn't such a bad thing ...

2011abc

km79 wrote: »

The new format was brought in to stop exactly the situation described I.e. Next in line gets it based purely on seniority
It's is now quite rightly the best person for the job .
Go for it and apologize to nobody !

It's the principals' favourites who get the job now .A far worse scenario.Staffrooms riven apart over this .Reflection of the way society is going

km79

2011abc wrote: »

It's the principals' favourites who get the job now .A far worse scenario.Staffrooms riven apart over this .Reflection of the way society is going

I can assure you from experience over the past few years this is 100% not the case . In our school anyway . Obviously it may vary from school to school but it has been applied fairly in outs school

implausible

2011abc wrote: »

So much imagery so early in the morning ! The 'Ambition' displayed by some staff to leapfrog others would put the Julie Birchall trash novel to shame and as for 'keeping it under your hat 'well I can only assume you've got a sweet patootie and / or sugar daddy there !!!

What nonsense! Words like 'leapfrog' are emotive and what create bad feeling in a staffroom. No one is or should be 'entitled' to a post. Posts are not rewards for turning up every day. They should be given to the person best able to do the job, not the person who has hung around the longest.

The idea of waiting your turn might have been faulty, but it made some bit of sense when there were plenty of posts flying about. I'm teaching 17 years and in that time, B posts have disappeared and I've only had the opportunity to apply for one A post. That turn would never come for many of us under the old system.

Merit is the fairest way to appoint posts. 'Honour' is just a cover for keeping an outdated system and keeping younger members of staff in their place.

2011abc

If speaking of inappropriate language I wouldn't equate " hung around longest " with 'gave decades of loyal service ' .And if you want to be pedantic I'd consider "What nonsense!" more emotive than "leapfrog" .

Exiled1

Go for it. Secondary schools have been suffering since 1970 because of the priority given to seniority....indeed in some cases 'senility'. For eight grand, somebody should be expected to a) be energetic enough to take on considerable extra work, b) capable of doing significant work, c) have a track record in contribution to the school, d) have the interest of the pupils as priority, e) have a track record of achievement in withe curriculum or extra curricular.
None of the above need point towards ambitions to be P or DP. There are lots of outstanding teachers in most schools who would qualify under the above criteria. They should not be stunted because of ageism/seniority. Similarly because of cutbacks, falling numbers etc., there are lots of senior teachers who have been deprive d of the opportunity to advance to an AP post.
There are also lots of outstanding teachers who have limited interest in applying for posts.
PoRs are the most contentious issues in schools, either secondary or etb. That will never change.
I worked for a very long time in the seniority system and to say it was frustrating is quite an understatement.

seavill

2011abc wrote: »

If speaking of inappropriate language I wouldn't equate " hung around longest " with 'gave decades of loyal service ' .And if you want to be pedantic I'd consider "What nonsense!" more emotive than "leapfrog" .

What if the next person is not suitable for the job. Someone not capable of being the year head should they still get the job?

RealJohn

If you want it, apply for it. It's better for the school that it goes to someone who doesn't already have a post of responsibility anyway - if someone with a B post gets it, the B post won't be replaced so whatever that person's B post duties were will just fall on the staff as a whole with no extra money and no extra hours for the extra work.

We don't have that sort of messing in our place anyway and when the deputy principal position was open, senior members of staff encouraged everyone to go for it if they were interested but a B post holder got it (only one of our A post holders applied) and he's still running around trying to fulfil his B post duties on top of his deputy principal duties.

I know there are other more important issues but the unions really need to start talking about bringing back B posts.

2011abc

seavill wrote: »

What if the next person is not suitable for the job. Someone not capable of being the year head should they still get the job?

One of the main criteria for posts was always that they were inclusive and capable of being done by everybody .If they're capable of being a half decent teacher they should be able to cope with year head duties .

Exiled1

2011abc wrote: »

One of the main criteria for posts was always that they were inclusive and capable of being done by everybody .If they're capable of being a half decent teacher they should be able to cope with year head duties .

The criteria of a post job description that was inclusive and capable of being done by literally anybody was always ludicrous. What if the school needed an IT co-ordinator, First aid or any of a dozen other essential roles that only people with some expertise could discharge?? I understand why the criteria were there to discourage management picking on favourites.
In the ver/etb sector there was always a place for person to pitch for a post outside the 'basket' if s/he could show the need for and benefit to the school of the proposed job des.

I have seen many excellent teachers who are very poor year heads (but never a poor teacher who was a good yh). YH needs a different skill set than teaching skills. A good job as YH is a good indicator of a potentially good Deputy Principal.

ethical

Go for it,as some commentators say, do not assume that a current B POST holder has any interest,they may or may not.There are a few naive comments also in the comments section so far.
Do not assume the best person gets the job!
I ve seen both the non post holder with no experience other than being a leech to the Principal get the job while the person who went beyond the call of duty was side lined because some fcukin nun told lies!
I have seen the steady worker who minds their own business get the job also.Yes,be careful,as it can split the staffroom.Most reasonable staff will understand if the best candidate, in their opinion get the post while on the other hand if its some lacky who contributed damn all that gets the job,open,transparent and fair staff will cold shoulder this person.Of course ,the good of the school children should be paramount in selecting the most appropriate person but in good old Ireland this does not always happen.
If you get an interview and it is common knowledge that the outcome was not fair there is an appeals process.This process is very interesting as you can then,in front of a panel,discuss why you, in your and others opinion was the best person for the job.You can actually let your feelings be known and the outcome may be overturned.Be aware ,though.that the employer will have a heavy hitter of the legal variety there on the day to try and make you squirm.Do not worry about this person though as they are only there to collect a few euro.On the other hand you will have a Rep from your Union there to give you back up should you require it.This should have no consequences in your further career and may even be a positive further down the road!

2011abc

It won't be a positive if you appeal and stay in same school !!!

Galwaygirl45

Thanks for all your advice. It makes interesting reading. I'm not a new teacher on the staff. Have been there nearly 20 years. When I joined staff there was quite a lot of middle aged post holders. It's only in the last few years that they have been retiring. If the moratorium on posts hadn't come in I probably would have had a B post by now. I suppose I'll see what the feeling on staff is about it. If there are a few others going for it I might through my hat in the ring.

evolving_doors

Galwaygirl45 wrote: »

Thanks for all your advice. It makes interesting reading. I'm not a new teacher on the staff. Have been there nearly 20 years. When I joined staff there was quite a lot of middle aged post holders. It's only in the last few years that they have been retiring. If the moratorium on posts hadn't come in I probably would have had a B post by now. I suppose I'll see what the feeling on staff is about it. If there are a few others going for it I might through my hat in the ring.

Just go for it if you want it and feel you have something to bring to the table, don't mind anyone else, it's the type of thing where you don't wait around for others to tell you you should go for it. You're there long enough to see how the school operates.

mirrorwall14

Its a very interesting discussion to read. There is going to be a post coming up in our school too. I went anyways for the last one because I had no hope of getting it under the old criteria because of seniority. I asked for feedback on the interview and they said the only thing they could advise was to stick around until seniority kicked in as my interview was excellent. This time around I may not go for it as I'm a pretty young member of staff and I don't want to spend the next 10 years being resented when these posts come up so rarely it could be then before someone else gets another shot

man_no_plan

mirrorwall14 wrote: »

Its a very interesting discussion to read. There is going to be a post coming up in our school too. I went anyways for the last one because I had no hope of getting it under the old criteria because of seniority. I asked for feedback on the interview and they said the only thing they could advise was to stick around until seniority kicked in as my interview was excellent. This time around I may not go for it as I'm a pretty young member of staff and I don't want to spend the next 10 years being resented when these posts come up so rarely it could be then before someone else gets another shot

Go for the bloody thing if you want it. If you're good enough you're there long enough.

If people want to resent you that's their problem, its worse that seniority, at least that was an open and closed stitch up, this hostility is far more sinister.

Years ago I missed a b post to a colleague who was a good friend, I really lost the head and was bitter about it for ages. Then I realised I was just being a dickhead because I thought I'd get the post because I had a maternity one before hand and she hadn't. I did a **** interview and didn't deserve the job.

What it did do was make me think a lot harder about why I wanted a post and I got my act together a bit. Then we had the moratorium and so on.

Things have changed a lot. I had my first b post after a year, it was acting, and I picked up several over the course of a few years . now its an a post or bust. That's not a great situation, for the people who wouldn't want to be a year head for example there's nothing, and they could be great at other stuff. Its really unfair.

Someone said about good teachers being hood year heads and they're right. Unfortunately good teachers get promoted out of teaching. There should be posts to do with teaching and learning rather than just admin and discipline.

Best of luck.

implausible

mirrorwall14 wrote:

Its a very interesting discussion to read. There is going to be a post coming up in our school too. I went anyways for the last one because I had no hope of getting it under the old criteria because of seniority. I asked for feedback on the interview and they said the only thing they could advise was to stick around until seniority kicked in as my interview was excellent. This time around I may not go for it as I'm a pretty young member of staff and I don't want to spend the next 10 years being resented when these posts come up so rarely it could be then before someone else gets another shot

10 years?! Some of the workplaces I hear about on here sound horrendous! In the ETB sector, we've had longer to get used to it I suppose, but while people might be p*ssed off initially at not getting a post and they might watch the person who does get it like a hawk to see how they're getting on, eventually things move on.

How little would you have going on in your life to hold a long-term grudge against a colleague for getting a promotion?

doc_17

Someone mentioned earlier about the €8000 being a lift for your pension. True if you are pre 2004 but for those of us who started after 2004 the pension is a career average and not based on the final salary.

Because of this I would go for hell for leather for it. Someone teaching 20 years vs my 10 is already on a winner. They have a better pension, many years less of paying the pension levy and will retire with 50% of their final salary.

Upstart, leapfrogging etc are emotive words but ambition shouldn't be looked at as a bad thing.

2011abc

Career average pension since before recession ?! How the **** did the unions let that through ?!

2RockMountain

2011abc wrote: »

It's the principals' favourites who get the job now .A far worse scenario.Staffrooms riven apart over this .Reflection of the way society is going

THree people on the interview panel, right? And post has to be approved by the Board of Management, right?

man_no_plan

2011abc wrote: »

Career average pension since before recession ?! How the **** did the unions let that through ?!

Career average is post 2010/2011 to my knowledge. Post 2004 is work til 65 with no 35/55 rule, the start of the decline...

I stand to be corrected on the above but I'm almost certain without going doing too much digging.

Moody_mona

Yes, fairly sure you're correct on the post 2011 career average. It also comes into effect after a six month unapproved leave.

doc_17

Yeah I think that's correct. Your pension, post 2004, is calculated by adding 1/80 of your salary every year for 40 years and the sum is your annual pension. So if you were casual/part time etc in early years it can have a huge effect on it.

evolving_doors

doc_17 wrote: »

Yeah I think that's correct. Your pension, post 2004, is calculated by adding 1/80 of your salary every year for 40 years and the sum is your annual pension. So if you were casual/part time etc in early years it can have a huge effect on it.

Ya I wonder is anyone post 2004 wasting their time chasing after a pension once they are over a certain age.

Basically go for the 8k now

feardeas

The idea that the next in line should get it was always farcical and is more so now. The idea that every single teacher is competent at their teaching never mind added responsibilities is laughable.

The reinstatement of posts is very necessary. There should be an audit in schools to ensure the workload is fair. I also think that there should be concession in timetable for all posts if they're to be done properly.

rainbowtrout

doc_17 wrote: »

Yeah I think that's correct. Your pension, post 2004, is calculated by adding 1/80 of your salary every year for 40 years and the sum is your annual pension. So if you were casual/part time etc in early years it can have a huge effect on it.

Post 2004 to Pre 2012 is 1/80 of final salary multiplied by number of years of service, but even if the teacher has done their 40 years, they can't go until 65, or rather no pension will be paid out until 65 even if they have completed their 40 years. Also 65 is minimum age to go, a teacher who doesn't have 40 years service at 65 can continue working (the horror!!)

Post 2012 is 1/80 of career average earnings multiplied by years of service. Same rule applies in terms of retirement age.

man_no_plan

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Post 2004 to Pre 2012 is 1/80 of final salary multiplied by number of years of service, but even if the teacher has done their 40 years, they can't go until 65, or rather no pension will be paid out until 65 even if they have completed their 40 years. Also 65 is minimum age to go, a teacher who doesn't have 40 years service at 65 can continue working (the horror!!)

Post 2012 is 1/80 of career average earnings multiplied by years of service. Same rule applies in terms of retirement age.

Fair play for that level of detail on a Friday evening!

doc_17

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Post 2004 to Pre 2012 is 1/80 of final salary multiplied by number of years of service, but even if the teacher has done their 40 years, they can't go until 65, or rather no pension will be paid out until 65 even if they have completed their 40 years. Also 65 is minimum age to go, a teacher who doesn't have 40 years service at 65 can continue working (the horror!!)

Post 2012 is 1/80 of career average earnings multiplied by years of service. Same rule applies in terms of retirement age.

Sorry, can I just ask if you meant that it's 1/80 or your total career earnings? So say 50,000 x 40 = 2,000,000 and 1/80 of that would be 25,000?

man_no_plan

doc_17 wrote: »

Sorry, can I just ask if you meant that it's 1/80 or your total career earnings? So say 50,000 x 40 = 2,000,000 and 1/80 of that would be 25,000?

It's 1/80 x final salary x no of years service

DES pension modeller, the final pension excludes the state pension which is also paid to new entrants. There's a detailed thread here on it.

http://www.education.ie/en/Education-Staff/Services/Retirement-Pensions/Pensions-Modeller/Pensions-Modeller.html

rainbowtrout

doc_17 wrote: »

Sorry, can I just ask if you meant that it's 1/80 or your total career earnings? So say 50,000 x 40 = 2,000,000 and 1/80 of that would be 25,000?

For which one?


Pre 2012: If you work 40 years, you get 40/80 of final salary. If you finish on 60k per year as your final salary after 40 years, then you get 30k pension. What you earned in the early years is irrelevant, which is why it was mentioned on this thread about going for the A post to boost the pension. With a finishing salary 8k higher than a finishing salary without an A post, for the teacher who works the full 40 years that will effectively mean an extra 4k on their retirement pension.


Post 2012. You add up your salary each year for all the years you work. Get the average. Multiply that average by (number of years worked/80).

If over 40 years your salary worked out on average to be 32k, then it would be 40/80 * 32 which would be 16k.

The calculation is the exact same only the career average earnings is going to bring down pensions significantly, as so many teachers are struggling to get hours in the first 7 or 8 years, many being on part time hours. Even teachers in the ideal scenario (full hours straight out of college, work 40 years with no career breaks etc on full hours) will not be getting the same wage each year because of the pay scale. The lower end of the pay scale will reduce the average.

I did out a calculation on it last year and posted it here:

and the more depressing one here

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=97054430&postcount=19

gavwaldo

rainbowtrout wrote: »

For which one?


Pre 2012: If you work 40 years, you get 40/80 of final salary. If you finish on 60k per year as your final salary after 40 years, then you get 30k pension. What you earned in the early years is irrelevant, which is why it was mentioned on this thread about going for the A post to boost the pension. With a finishing salary 8k higher than a finishing salary without an A post, for the teacher who works the full 40 years that will effectively mean an extra 4k on their retirement pension.


Post 2012. You add up your salary each year for all the years you work. Get the average. Multiply that average by (number of years worked/80).

Hi,

Do you know which side of the pension fence one would be if started work in Sept 2012........fingers crossed!!!!

rainbowtrout

gavwaldo wrote: »

Hi,

Do you know which side of the pension fence one would be if started work in Sept 2012........fingers crossed!!!!

The career average earnings pension kicked in on Jan 1, 2013, so looks like you made it into the better pension. However, if you are unemployed for 26 consecutive weeks or take a break from teaching that is not an approved break ( such as sick leave, maternity leave or career break), and then you return to teaching you will be put into the new pension scheme...

http://www.into.ie/ROI/InfoforTeachers/Circulars/Circulars2013/cl0007_2013.pdf

*waits for gavwaldo's dance of joy* :pac:

gavwaldo

rainbowtrout wrote: »

The career average earnings pension kicked in on Jan 1, 2013, so looks like you made it into the better pension. However, if you are unemployed for 26 consecutive weeks or take a break from teaching that is not an approved break ( such as sick leave, maternity leave or career break), and then you return to teaching you will be put into the new pension scheme...

http://www.into.ie/ROI/InfoforTeachers/Circulars/Circulars2013/cl0007_2013.pdf

*waits for gavwaldo's dance of joy* :pac:

WOW!!!
dance for joy is an understatment. just started my first RPT contract and now this amazing news......even makes the four crappy years worth it.

thanks rainbowtrout !!!!

jjdonegal

Is there progress being made in relation to the reintroduction of posts in some shape or form? I remember something being mentioned about a review in HRA but can't remember the finer details.

km79

jjdonegal wrote: »

Is there progress being made in relation to the reintroduction of posts in some shape or form? I remember something being mentioned about a review in HRA but can't remember the finer details.

NO
All the union have done in the last 8 years about it is stop people dong the work for free
Not a peep on it since

jjdonegal

km79 wrote: »

NO
All the union have done in the last 8 years about it is stop people dong the work for free
Not a peep on it since

It still happens in places id imagine. I was dead sure a review was mentioned in the HRA Agreement although I stand to be corrected on that.

joebloggs32

jjdonegal wrote: »

Is there progress being made in relation to the reintroduction of posts in some shape or form? I remember something being mentioned about a review in HRA but can't remember the finer details.

Yes. Expect some restoration for September 2017. Not sure though if it's happening though in ASTI schools
New structure of AP1 and AP2.
AP1 will be the same as current AP and AP2 similar to current SD post. There will be a change in the interview process with seniority being virtually removed.

km79

joebloggs32 wrote: »

Yes. Expect some restoration for September 2017. Not sure though if it's happening though in ASTI schools
New structure of AP1 and AP2.
AP1 will be the same as current AP and AP2 similar to current SD post. There will be a change in the interview process with seniority being virtually removed.

where is this info from ?

joebloggs32

km79 wrote: »

where is this info from ?

It is part of the deal reached on pay for the NQTS last week. The following can be found on the Q&A section on the deal on the TUI website.

What reforms will be sought as a result of the agreement?
The TUI had sought and, in the May 2016 Agreement it secured, a review of the post of
responsibility structure in schools, in the context of restoration of posts. Under the 16th
September document, that review will, inter alia, address the further development of a
distributed leadership model, the accountability of post holders and the redesignation of
the current post of Assistant Principal as Assistant Principal I and of the current post of
Special Duties Teacher as Assistant Principal II.
The grounds for appeal in respect of competitions for appointment to posts of responsibility
will be confined to an alleged breach of the procedure as set out in Department Circulars.
However, the review is tasked with ensuring that those procedures provide for consistency,
fairness and probity.
The existing criteria for selection for posts of responsibility will be revised with a view to
phasing out Seniority/Length of Service as a stand-alone criterion, while still reflecting the
value of a teacher’s experience and how that contributes to their capacity to meet the
requirements of the post.
There will also be an immediate time-bound engagement to resolve issues with the teacher
induction process.
Crucially, these reforms will not add to the workload of TUI members.

km79

joebloggs32 wrote: »

It is part of the deal reached on pay for the NQTS last week. The following can be found on the Q&A section on the deal on the TUI website.

What reforms will be sought as a result of the agreement?
The TUI had sought and, in the May 2016 Agreement it secured, a review of the post of
responsibility structure in schools, in the context of restoration of posts. Under the 16th
September document, that review will, inter alia, address the further development of a
distributed leadership model, the accountability of post holders and the redesignation of
the current post of Assistant Principal as Assistant Principal I and of the current post of
Special Duties Teacher as Assistant Principal II.
The grounds for appeal in respect of competitions for appointment to posts of responsibility
will be confined to an alleged breach of the procedure as set out in Department Circulars.
However, the review is tasked with ensuring that those procedures provide for consistency,
fairness and probity.
The existing criteria for selection for posts of responsibility will be revised with a view to
phasing out Seniority/Length of Service as a stand-alone criterion, while still reflecting the
value of a teacher’s experience and how that contributes to their capacity to meet the
requirements of the post.
There will also be an immediate time-bound engagement to resolve issues with the teacher
induction process.
Crucially, these reforms will not add to the workload of TUI members.

so a "review"
Nothing concrete there
Promises promises promises
reviews reviews reviews

judeboy101

km79 wrote: »

so a "review"
Nothing concrete there
Promises promises promises
reviews reviews reviews

For new appointees it will mean less pay for AP1 and AP2 than for current AP and and SD holders and more work, I guarantee it.

Notorious

Gebgbegb wrote: »

Seniority only counts for part of it.

All's fair in love and war. I think it'd be nuts for folk to 'allow' someone get the job (or maybe it's an honourable thing to do!).

I second this. I think it's absolutely ludicrous to 'let' someone go for the job. I've applied for everything that comes up in my school, even though I'm only in the job a wet day.

We have ended up with staff members who resent others as a result of not being called up for an interview, but at the end of the day a promotion should go to the strongest candidate - not the longest serving.

The position will bolster your cv and wages (along with the pension, so I'm told). As others mentioned, keep it to yourself. The staff will probably find out eventually, but nobody could call you out for trying to better your career.

I think it's so important for there to be competition for important positions in the school - I've heard of a story of a very weak year head being appointed (due to education and length of service) and behaviour amoung their year group becoming disastrous. That would just make the job harder for everyone.