Posts of responsibility

peewee085

Hi guys, bit of advice if ya could.

I'm teaching 5 years in a Dublin secondary school. Got my CID last yr. A load of people that had our B posts have left or retired. We now have nobody to organise exams, check lates and absences, organise detentions, etc.

We reckon tnat we will get some posts next year. Should I ask the Principal to take a post for no pay? Would this help me when the posts do come up?

Finally, would my union crack up?

Thanks

Fizzical

How do you mean you 'reckon that you'll get some posts next year'? Easing of the recession leading to easing of cutbacks on schools? I don't see that happening yet. There's a new squeeze on A posts this year - lose two to get one, and no new B posts allowed at all. In our school, the non-secure teachers are being leaned on to do the work from the missing posts. What you're proposing is similar. Once that settles in I don't know why they would pay someone again.

byhookorbycrook

No new posts for the foreseeable future,I'd say. If you do the work for nothing now, even if posts do come back, you may not get one.I rekcon the Croke Park hour will be used for post work from now on.

2011abc

Never mind the union , your colleagues would be rightly angry.Probably THE biggest cause of staffroom strife is this sort of thing.It was so much fairer (not perfect but FAIRER)when it was done on seniority and not on the basis of who the principal's 'licks' were .I have seen entire staffs torn apart having to 'take sides' when a clearly less suitable candidate gets the job ahead of another .You cant imagine how horrible it is .You wouldnt even consider it if you did .

rainbowtrout

2011abc wrote: »

Never mind the union , your colleagues would be rightly angry.Probably THE biggest cause of staffroom strife is this sort of thing.It was so much fairer (not perfect but FAIRER)when it was done on seniority and not on the basis of who the principal's 'licks' were .I have seen entire staffs torn apart having to 'take sides' when a clearly less suitable candidate gets the job ahead of another .You cant imagine how horrible it is .You wouldnt even consider it if you did .

Seriously? You think that just because someone is in the school 20 years that they should have a post simply for being there longer than another person.

You don't have to be a 'lick' to get a post. Someone people work hard because they see the work needs to be done and they work efficiently inside and outside the classroom, not because they are trying to curry favour with management. Some people who have been there a long time are often the worst choice for a post because they think they deserve it out of some sense of entitlement for simply showing up to work everyday.

Your staffroom sounds quite childish if you are describing adult work colleagues as licks and if people think they have to take sides. It's an interview for a job promotion essentially and only concerns the people who apply for it. It's nobody else's business. If a post comes up anytime soon in my school and I hear of a number of people going for it, I will probably have an opinion as to who I think would be best at the job, but I won't feel the need to openly declare this in the staffroom and set up camp in one corner or the other.


As for the OP, well B posts aren't going to return anytime soon, can't imagine why you think your school will get a whole load of posts next year. Currently schools are entitled to one A post holder per 100 students. It's only when you go below that threshold that you can replace one. There is no leeway for B posts.

solerina

OP
I wouldnt hold your breat waiting for B posts, Id say we are not likely to get them back anytime soon....we used to have 6, now we have 2 and no sign of any likely hood of getting anymore...People are doing the jobs which used to be posts for free so why will they ever pay for them again !!

doc_17

B posts are not returning.

seavill

I would agree I would say that B posts have no hope of returning when there are CP hours, things will be divided up, people will be asked to do extra tasks particularly the ones who can't say no. The staff as a whole generally just chip in and get on with it which is probably half the problem and why they are getting away with it as we all know if some of the work isn't done the school will come to a stand still.

As for the comment about seniority this is the one thing in teaching that I have a particular gripe with to be honest. No way in hell should anyone get any job because of seniority. If they are the best person for the job and happen to be the next in line due to seniority then fair enough but this should not be the reason they get the job.
This year I did hear one teacher comment how they were next in line and it really annoyed me. This particular person would be the least deserving of a post in my, and others opinion but they feel they are entitled to it (if it ever comes up that is)

In reality loads of people in all schools are doing and will do extra things that used to be part of a post for free already. This will continue to happen and schools will cope just about so the department will just argue that look ye never needed the post really. In a lot of schools where year heads have retired the vice principals have taken over that task, for a short period in one school the principal stepped in for a number of months, now in all reality we all know the VP and P have more things to be doing rather then being year head also. Personally I feel the kids are losing out here also as they won't get the attention they would from a dedicated year head, however schools are coping and getting on with things

km79

Has the seniority thing really gone in schools for posts ? I know it's supposed to have gone but I don't think it really has and will not for the foreseeable future. Seniority and the sense of entitlement that's goes with it still prevails

seavill

km79 wrote: »

Has the seniority thing really gone in schools for posts ? I know it's supposed to have gone but I don't think it really has and will not for the foreseeable future. Seniority and the sense of entitlement that's goes with it still prevails

It depends on the staff and the principal.

I have been in schools where both has been the case. One where a new principal came in and wasn't bothered who they upset, they appointed the best person for the job regardless of seniority.

I have been in another school where it was made into a bit of a union issue within the staff and one person was advised it would be best if they withdrew their interest in the post as someone else has seniority over the post.

bdoo

seavill wrote: »

km79 wrote: »

Has the seniority thing really gone in schools for posts ? I know it's supposed to have gone but I don't think it really has and will not for the foreseeable future. Seniority and the sense of entitlement that's goes with it still prevails

It depends on the staff and the principal.

I have been in schools where both has been the case. One where a new principal came in and wasn't bothered who they upset, they appointed the best person for the job regardless of seniority.

I have been in another school where it was made into a bit of a union issue within the staff and one person was advised it would be best if they withdrew their interest in the post as someone else has seniority over the post.

The area is governed by circular letter. That someone was advised to withdraw is more of a union issue than the erosion of seniority in my view.

seavill

bdoo wrote: »

The area is governed by circular letter. That someone was advised to withdraw is more of a union issue than the erosion of seniority in my view.

I didn't say it was due to an erosion of seniority, I just said within the staff the other teacher was advised on behalf of the union that it would be best for inter staff relations that she withdraw from the post as the other person should be getting it due to their seniority within the school.

bdoo

seavill wrote: »

bdoo wrote: »

The area is governed by circular letter. That someone was advised to withdraw is more of a union issue than the erosion of seniority in my view.

I didn't say it was due to an erosion of seniority, I just said within the staff the other teacher was advised on behalf of the union that it would be best for inter staff relations that she withdraw from the post as the other person should be getting it due to their seniority within the school.

The implication is that a challenge to a more senior colleague was put down by a union.

My point is that everyone with three years service is entitled to apply for an assistant principal post, how any union could countenance what you have described is beyond me.

Every staff member whether in the union or not has rights, these rights should not be undermined by anyone. In addition seniority should not entitle anyone to a job.

seavill

bdoo wrote: »

The implication is that a challenge to a more senior colleague was put down by a union.

My point is that everyone with three years service is entitled to apply for an assistant principal post, how any union could countenance what you have described is beyond me.

Every staff member whether in the union or not has rights, these rights should not be undermined by anyone. In addition seniority should not entitle anyone to a job.

As I described it was put to the person by the union rep in the school that the other person had seniority etc. as explained.

I didn't say this was the right way to do it or anything I just said this is how it was dealt with in house within one school.

I am not claiming head office said to do it that way, this is how it was dealt with within the school

Chris68

There are union directives in place. You can do the work only if you are paid for it.

2011abc

Lots of union directives are being flouted ,the unions have never been weaker.Dark days ahead(HERE!).As for my 'staff(room)' being 'immature' ,well when the principal fosters an atmosphere of fear, bullying and disrespect these things happen (screaming matches in staffroom , ugly scenes and people walking out of staff meetings , deep rooted hatreds that last decades ...) but hey , let the Young Guns go for it !Everybody got their 'turn' the 'old-fashioned' way ...I could tell stories about things my principal has done and said to their staff that would make you physically sick .Needless to say they have gotten their 'puppets' into promotion posts they were ridiculously underqualified for ...Im happy for you if you feel your school isnt ran that way but many are .
Its the way of the future you see...Walk all over people ,slash and burn ,nice guys come last .

Im not saying ALL principals are like this but maybe a quarter of them display varying tendencies in that direction .I remember my first principal , a true gentleman wouldnt LET me do yard duty when I offered as the rest of the staff had refused and he didnt want me to be in an akward position .Contrast that with the enormous number of non permanent staff who will be intimidated into 'taking up the slack' as our government continues to cut resources ...

seavill

2011abc wrote: »

Lots of union directives are being flouted ,the unions have never been weaker.Dark days ahead(HERE!).As for my 'staff(room)' being 'immature' ,well when the principal fosters an atmosphere of fear, bullying and disrespect these things happen (screaming matches in staffroom , ugly scenes and people walking out of staff meetings , deep rooted hatreds that last decades ...) but hey , let the Young Guns go for it !Everybody got their 'turn' the 'old-fashioned' way ...I could tell stories about things my principal has done and said to their staff that would make you physically sick .Needless to say they have gotten their 'puppets' into promotion posts they were ridiculously underqualified for ...Im happy for you if you feel your school isnt ran that way but many are .
Its the way of the future you see...Walk all over people ,slash and burn ,nice guys come last .

So you are saying seniority should be the way to stop under qualified people being put into positions?

bdoo

2011abc wrote: »

Lots of union directives are being flouted ,the unions have never been weaker.Dark days ahead(HERE!).As for my 'staff(room)' being 'immature' ,well when the principal fosters an atmosphere of fear, bullying and disrespect these things happen (screaming matches in staffroom , ugly scenes and people walking out of staff meetings , deep rooted hatreds that last decades ...) but hey , let the Young Guns go for it !Everybody got their 'turn' the 'old-fashioned' way ...I could tell stories about things my principal has done and said to their staff that would make you physically sick .Needless to say they have gotten their 'puppets' into promotion posts they were ridiculously underqualified for ...Im happy for you if you feel your school isnt ran that way but many are .
Its the way of the future you see...Walk all over people ,slash and burn ,nice guys come last .

Im not saying ALL principals are like this but maybe a quarter of them display varying tendencies in that direction .I remember my first principal , a true gentleman wouldnt LET me do yard duty when I offered as the rest of the staff had refused and he didnt want me to be in an akward position .Contrast that with the enormous number of non permanent staff who will be intimidated into 'taking up the slack' as our government continues to cut resources ...

How can you be ridiculously underqualified? All you need is three years experience.

Everyone has a degree at least. Inexperienced maybe, but twenty years teaching doesn't make you a better candidate.

2011abc

I dont think that someone who has only been teaching a few years but has a Masters under their belt is NECESSARILY more deserving than a loyal servant of the school/community who has a quarter century under their belt .Of course many will say that this decent ole skin is just 'turning up for work'...All I can say is that I have seen too many people that should have been a shoo in for posts ,even Deputy Principalships bypassed often in flagrant contravention of the 'rules' of the day .The sort of principal who will quote chapter and verse on department circulars will often expect his staff to work over 22 hours ,take more than 24 in practical rooms etc etc .
I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this one -maybe a balance of the two systems would be fairest but as far as I know thats the system thats SUPPOSED to be in place right now and only recently have seen a colleague royally shafted by principal and their lapdog.
Ironic thing is that these sort of dynamic individuals who walk all over others to 'suceed' wont be a few years in the school till theyre off on secondment doing inservice etc

2011abc

bdoo wrote: »

How can you be ridiculously underqualified? All you need is three years experience.

Everyone has a degree at least. Inexperienced maybe, but twenty years teaching doesn't make you a better candidate.

I didnt mean in relation to applying for the post .I meant in winning it !Lets say one candidate has had many years experience in various middle management positions in school and the other has NEVER HELD a post of any description who do you think would be more likely to get an Assistant Principalship?What about if the former has had disaggreements with the principal and the latter was a bosom buddy of theirs?Still dont see where Im coming from?

seavill

2011abc wrote: »

I dont think that someone who has only been teaching a few years but has a Masters under their belt is NECESSARILY more deserving than a loyal servant of the school/community who has a quarter century under their belt .Of course many will say that this decent ole skin is just 'turning up for work'...All I can say is that I have seen too many people that should have been a shoo in for posts ,even Deputy Principalships bypassed often in flagrant contravention of the 'rules' of the day .The sort of principal who will quote chapter and verse on department circulars will often expect his staff to work over 22 hours ,take more than 24 in practical rooms etc etc .
I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this one -maybe a balance of the two systems would be fairest but as far as I know thats the system thats SUPPOSED to be in place right now and only recently have seen a colleague royally shafted by principal and their lapdog.
Ironic thing is that these sort of dynamic individuals who walk all over others to 'suceed' wont be a few years in the school till theyre off on secondment doing inservice etc

What system do you mean is supposed to be in place at the moment?

I'm not saying that a principal should surround themselves with yes men or anything of the sorts but at the same time if I am to choose a person for a middle management position I am going to pick someone who can follow the management line and not maybe create arguments about everything or not someone that I feel would go behind my back about something. This would and should be a genuine concern and consideration for a principal in my opinion anyway.

If they have given 20 years and are the best person fine but giving it to them just cause of the 20 years and their loyal service to the school and community is not good enough at all. This should not be a consideration for a second. This is not a reason for a promotion on its own. I have seen too many schools ruined by principals appointed due to their service and their only intention is to hide and see out their last few years and build up a pension why just cause they have been there a long time. What sort of qualification is that for the job ?

rainbowtrout

2011abc wrote: »

I didnt mean in relation to applying for the post .I meant in winning it !Lets say one candidate has had many years experience in various middle management positions in school and the other has NEVER HELD a post of any description who do you think would be more likely to get an Assistant Principalship?What about if the former has had disaggreements with the principal and the latter was a bosom buddy of theirs?Still dont see where Im coming from?

Look clearly whatever goes on in your school feeds into your opinion of how posts should be distributed, but in your original post you basically said that a person should get a post based on seniority. Now you're saying that a person was passed over for a post after several years in middle management positions.

Those are both very different scenarios.

You're also confusing two very different situations. Clearly from your description of your school your principal has favourites who get posts ahead of other teachers for whatever reasons.

This is completely different from a school where there is an level playing field and it's from the teaching staff that pressure is coming on teachers who are not there as long not to apply for jobs.

If you were working in an office in the private sector and a manager/supervisor position came up, you would never turn around to someone else in your department and say 'you're not allowed to apply for the job, I'm here longer, I'm entitled to it'.

Being a decent old skin has nothing to do with it, most teachers I've worked with are decent. Doesn't stop some of them being unsuitable for posts of responsibility and them only wanting one because they feel a sense of entitlement to have one.

Awesome-O

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Seriously? You think that just because someone is in the school 20 years that they should have a post simply for being there longer than another person.

Not necessarily straight out deserve but have earned it and showed dedication, also would have much more knowledge on how the school is run and more imput (not always but in what I see in my school)

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Someone people work hard because they see the work needs to be done and they work efficiently inside and outside the classroom, not because they are trying to curry favour with management. Some people who have been there a long time are often the worst choice for a post because they think they deserve it out of some sense of entitlement for simply showing up to work everyday.

Quite often the newer staff (myself include, I've been teaching for 5 years) need to put in the extra work, time and effort for themselves more then impressing management, preparation and planning makes daily life much easier. The staff who have been there longer, don't always have to put in the same amount if they have hda the same class/subject/topic for years and have put it into practice to know what works and what doesn't. If it ain't broke.... I also find the longer I'm teaching the less time I have to spend planning - until new guidelines or curriculum come in again!

I'm not saying that staff there longer always deserve the post but often it can't look like they are not putting in the same amount of effort but usually they are.

Anywho b posts seem to be a thing of the past so it doesn't really matter who's more deserving, more who is more of a mug to do the extra work for no extra pay.

rainbowtrout

Awesome-O wrote: »

Not necessarily straight out deserve but have earned it and showed dedication, also would have much more knowledge on how the school is run and more imput (not always but in what I see in my school)
.

There are plenty of teachers working a long time who are dedicated and know the running of the school and are suited to posts when the come up, and are deserving of a post if it comes up, even when they happen to be next in line seniority wise, but there are also plenty who have no interest beyond punching in their 22 hours and whatever requirements go with that, and want a post despite showing no interest, or not being suited to the post.

e.g. a teacher who has discipline problems in their class, but thinks because they are the most senior that they should be the next year head when they are clearly not suited to it.

Awesome-O wrote: »

Quite often the newer staff (myself include, I've been teaching for 5 years) need to put in the extra work, time and effort for themselves more then impressing management, preparation and planning makes daily life much easier. The staff who have been there longer, don't always have to put in the same amount if they have hda the same class/subject/topic for years and have put it into practice to know what works and what doesn't. If it ain't broke.... I also find the longer I'm teaching the less time I have to spend planning - until new guidelines or curriculum come in again!

I'm not saying that staff there longer always deserve the post but often it can't look like they are not putting in the same amount of effort but usually they are.

Anywho b posts seem to be a thing of the past so it doesn't really matter who's more deserving, more who is more of a mug to do the extra work for no extra pay.

I got my post with 6 years teaching experience. I wasn't out to impress management, I was just getting on with my job. I'm the PLC Co-ordinator in the school and knew PLC/FETAC like the back of my hand when I got the post. Incidentally there was a teacher who was there a lot longer than me, she got a (different) B post at the same time as me, but wanted my post because basically she thought it would be a cushy number, despite not knowing the first thing about PLC, or ever showing an interest in it and clearly not aware of how much work is involved in it.

Fizzical

As far as I remember, posts of responsibility were introduced to avoid a pay increase - to reward long serving staff who had no hope of promotion since only two people in a school could be P or DP and one of these was generally a religious at the time. If I do recall correctly, that's why seniority was the original rule and why the sense of entitlement exists.

Without seniority, promotion in secondary schools is at the whim of the principal. The new rules include seniority in the interview criteria but the other criteria are so vague as to be useless. Basically it means that promotion is given to those who the principal prefers to work with - not by merit.

In this situation bright, young yes-men are quite likely to win out over older, wiser people who have tangled with the principal in the past - quite often over poor decisions and bad management. In these cases, promotion 'by merit' is bad management of staff and of the school, is unfair and can cause much damage.

seavill

The people arguing against seniority here are not arguing against it as part of the best person for the job.

What we are saying is using it as the only criteria is not acceptable. I think this point is being missed.

Fizzical

seavill wrote: »

The people arguing against seniority here are not arguing against it as part of the best person for the job.

What we are saying is using it as the only criteria is not acceptable. I think this point is being missed.

Why is it so much more important to have the 'best person for the job' to mark attendance, to run a library etc that it is acceptable for someone who has been hard working and dedicated for years to be passed over by someone more principal-friendly?

Most school jobs are doable by most teachers and content of posts must not be exclusive. In any case, the content of posts may be changed at the request of the principal or the post holder.

Being senior and long-serving may make a teacher work in a quieter and less showy fashion. It does not make a teacher unintelligent or incapable of doing a school job that is not rocket science.

bdoo

Fizzical wrote: »

Why is it so much more important to have the 'best person for the job' to mark attendance, to run a library etc that it is acceptable for someone who has been hard working and dedicated for years to be passed over by someone more principal-friendly?

Most school jobs are doable by most teachers and content of posts must not be exclusive. In any case, the content of posts may be changed at the request of the principal or the post holder.

Being senior and long-serving may make a teacher work in a quieter and less showy fashion. It does not make a teacher unintelligent or incapable of doing a school job that is not rocket science.

What kind of cushy jobs are in your school? The only posts being filled at the minute are AP posts, I cant imagine how part of one of these posts wouldn't be a Year Head.

Are you saying that you shouldn't appoint the best person as assessed on a number of criteria including seniority at 30%.

Before you go saying about lapdogs etc, if you are so concerned why do you not get your union involved and use the appeal mechanism, applicants are entitled to their marks and can appeal o. A couple of grounds

seavill

Why is it important to have the best person for the job?????

Seriously???

It should always be the best person for the job. Any job.

In reality these promotions are to the middle management of a school, possible to be used as a stepping stone to the higher positions.

I'm genuinely shocked people ate arguing that people should get a senior post in a school if they are not the best candidate for it

Awesome-O

rainbowtrout wrote: »

I got my post with 6 years teaching experience. I wasn't out to impress management, I was just getting on with my job.

Exactly, if a person is deserving it's because they are not going out of their way to impress but just doing the work they need to do. This is the type of person who will continue to work hard when given a post of responsibility unlike someone who is putting on an act just to get it.

implausible

Posts are not and should not be a "prize" for staying in a school! Of course service to a school should be taken into account, but as we all know, that service can be accidental i.e. you merely stayed where you got a job.

I'd like to add that posts being at the discretion of management is not the case in all schools; in the VEC sector, you have to be interviewed by a VEC panel, so it is not the principal's sole decision.

Anyway, this discussion is rather pointless. B posts are gone and I can't see them ever returning. Croke Park or whatever succeeds it will ensure that extra duties are taken on by all teachers.

peewee085

OP here again.

I am in a union and I reckon that it will turn a few heads when they see me carrying out a post of responsibilty on a voluntary basis.

However, we have been told that B posts will be coming up again. I will be up against people with 5 years more experience than myself and they will have a huge points lead before they even put on the suit.

I was reading the circular for the distribution of points in these interviews and there are points for posts held or similar duties. Apparently this means that you get points if you are carrying out duties around the school. it's gotta score me some points if I've been doing the work before I've been offered any money??

Anyway, the points for seniority are now reduced. This has to be a green light for young teachers to take posts and do a good job for their schools. I think it's great that if posts come back, the best person getrs the job and not the next 'entitled' person.

Conclusion: starting as green schools coordinator on Monday!!!!!

rainbowtrout

peewee085 wrote: »

OP here again.

I am in a union and I reckon that it will turn a few heads when they see me carrying out a post of responsibilty on a voluntary basis.

However, we have been told that B posts will be coming up again. I will be up against people with 5 years more experience than myself and they will have a huge points lead before they even put on the suit.

I was reading the circular for the distribution of points in these interviews and there are points for posts held or similar duties. Apparently this means that you get points if you are carrying out duties around the school. it's gotta score me some points if I've been doing the work before I've been offered any money??

Anyway, the points for seniority are now reduced. This has to be a green light for young teachers to take posts and do a good job for their schools. I think it's great that if posts come back, the best person getrs the job and not the next 'entitled' person.

Conclusion: starting as green schools coordinator on Monday!!!!!

Who has said this exactly? Because there has been no circular about it and that tends to be the bottom line. Until I see a circular about it or hear it from Ruairi Quinn's mouth I'd be disinclined to believe B posts will be making a comeback any time soon.

peewee085

The circular I read was the one from the VEC that explains the points allocation for B post interviews (when there were interviews).

I actually heard from a Principal that the JMB suggested that the government may lift the block on posts for a time in the budget next month

rainbowtrout

peewee085 wrote: »

The circular I read was the one from the VEC that explains the points allocation for B post interviews (when there were interviews).

I actually heard from a Principal that the JMB suggested that the government may lift the block on posts for a time in the budget next month

I was referring to a circular on lifting a ban on filling posts of responsibility, not the points awarded in interviews for them.

Points are awarded on a pro-rata basis. The person who is most senior going for interview gets full marks for the seniority. Let's say that's 20 marks. Everyone else is marked based on that.

So if that person has done 10 years and gets 20 marks, and you have completed 4 years, as you have 40% of their years, you get 40% of the marks, so 8/20.

km79

Ill be amazed if they come back . Sure their cunning plan is working. People doing the work for free in the hope they come back in.
Why would they begin paying people for the work again....

spurious

I can't see B posts coming back either, especially if people are doing the work for nothing.

trihead

'B posts are dead' - this is what was communicated unofficially from the department via the union in my area. They will never be brought back in the current form. If you have a B post it will 'die with you' as such:mad:. I heard this a few years ago when the ban came in first and kinda thought it would not last but schools are coping on the surface so think it will remain - i know that on the ground its a different story with extra workloads/ things being dropped / students losing out etc but from the dept's viewpoint, they are saving money and that's all that matters right now for them. I really think who ever told you b posts are coming back is wrong. They might have been confused with A posts which are sometimes are put in together.

Think carefully about stepping into a vacant b post. If could really cause issues and tensions. By all means get involved with 'extra' work but do it under s and s or croke park or extra curricular where possible.

ps I would love if you were right:D