Calculating Seniority

Icsics

Can someone clarity, do AP1 & AP2 come ahead of non postholders with more service? Thanks

2011abc

Icsics wrote: »

Can someone clarity, do AP1 & AP2 come ahead of non postholders with more service? Thanks

Yes according to the lists in our school .I was about to break into top ten and am dropping like a stone with all the young guns being appointed to posts .Id imagine the situation is being replicated nationwide .

rainbowtrout

It depends on the context of seniority.

If you are looking at marks awarded for seniority for AP1/AP2 posts in interviews, that is determined by your years of service.

If you are talking about seniority within the staff, then AP1 > AP2 > Non post holders will be the ranking and within each group you would be looking at years served.

Not sure how else you could do it really. If P and DP are away for the day, it should be the most senior post holder in charge. So that would be an AP1.

AP1/AP2 are middle management so they rank above non post holders. No different to a manager > supervisor > regular employee structure in private industry.

Icsics

That's what I thought, am looking at in the context of redeployment

rainbowtrout

I don't have any evidence for this, but I would say that post holders are not going to be under consideration for redeployment, simply because they are part of the middle management structure of the school and because posts are tied to schools so it would in effect be a demotion. It would be a brave principal/ETB who would be willing to take on that court case.

2xj3hplqgsbkym

rainbowtrout wrote: »

I don't have any evidence for this, but I would say that post holders are not going to be under consideration for redeployment, simply because they are part of the middle management structure of the school and because posts are tied to schools so it would in effect be a demotion. It would be a brave principal/ETB who would be willing to take on that court case.

I disagree,(also not evidence based), but would think that time served would be main consideration for redeployment, regardless of posts.

Icsics

Dexter Enough Goose wrote: »

I disagree,(also not evidence based), but would think that time served would be main consideration for redeployment, regardless of posts.

That's what you would think, but redeployment goes on seniority & post holders come before those with more service.

linguist

Well surely we have to base ourselves on evidence and the rules which are contained in these documents:

https://www.education.ie/en/Schools-Colleges/Services/Teacher-Allocations/Teacher-Allocation/Post-Primary-FAQs-Post-Primary-Redeployment-Scheme.pdf

https://www.education.ie/en/Circulars-and-Forms/Active-Circulars/Implementation-of-the-Recommendations-of-the-Expert-Group-on-Fixed-Term-and-Part-Time-Employment-in-Primary-and-Second-Level-Education-in-Ireland-Post-Primary-.pdf

Nowhere in them is any reference made to middle management post-holders being more senior to teachers who do not hold such posts. The only posts which convey more seniority are principal and deputy principal who are always 1 and 2 on the list. We really do need to know our rights and not, with respect, fall into the trap of what we 'feel' or 'suspect' - there's enough of that going around in our world these days. Anyone who is told that they were selected for redeployment solely because the person below them held an APII post should immediately get on to the union based on these documents.

Now, we all know that principals will try to make a case for holding on to certain teachers ('needs of the school') but luckily there are colleagues who are not prepared to roll over if they feel wrongly selected and indeed there are two challenges before the High Court at the moment. It's the letter of the law - circulars, collective agreements, legislation - that matters and we should never be afraid to have recourse to them with union backing.

rainbowtrout

I take your point linguist, but historically posts largely went with seniority, so teachers that held posts were generally the most senior in the school anyway in terms of years served, with a few discrepancies.


It's going to take years for that situation to change drastically, as points for seniority will be gone completely next year, but those that have been in the school longer will have had more of a chance to build up a CV if applying for posts. While a greater proportion of posts might start going to teachers with less experience in the coming years, I can't honestly see a drastic reversal overnight, and given that post holders (AP1/AP2) are a minority on each staff, it is far more likely that there are teachers who have less years served who could lose their jobs/ be redeployed first.

When needs of the school are quoted for redeployment, certainly the metalwork , art, German teachers are safer than the English or geography teachers, because they are the only one usually. But if a teacher who was chosen for redeployment took a case saying that a post holder was less senior to them in the same subject area, I suspect that post holder would then take a case that they are meeting a specific need of the school for which they were appointed ahead of all other competition, and their redeployment would be in effect a demotion, not a like for like transfer, and that the terms of their contract were being changed (18 hours plus admin duties for 22 hours teaching).

I know that document doesn't specifically reference post holders, but everyday experience suggests to me that they are not going to be touched in a redeployment scenario.