what do you think of this??? Who got the job???

ethical

Voluntary catholic secondary school with principal and deputy principal in charge.
Principal goes on leave. Bom ask deputy to deputize for principal and deputy accepts.
Applications (in-house) then invited for post of acting deputy.

A number of staff apply.
1.One was most senior and special duties teacher,
2.another was next most senior with extra qualifications and is also special duties teacher.
3.Next was staff member who is school steward and staff rep on Bom.


Who got the job?


(the interview panel was made up of ,a religious order person,a Bom religious appointee,two retired principals,and another retired teacher and religious order sympathiser)

TheBody

ethical wrote: »

Voluntary catholic secondary school with principal and deputy principal in charge.
Principal goes on leave. Bom ask deputy to deputize for principal and deputy accepts.
Applications (in-house) then invited for post of acting deputy.

A number of staff apply.
1.One was most senior and special duties teacher,
2.another was next most senior with extra qualifications and is also special duties teacher.
3.Next was staff member who is school steward and staff rep on Bom.


Who got the job?


(the interview panel was made up of ,a religious order person,a Bom religious appointee,two retired principals,and another retired teacher and religious order sympathiser)

Prob the third one got it because if the first two got the job, their special duty jobs would have to be filled too.

Do I get a prize if I'm right?

rainbowtrout

ethical wrote: »

Voluntary catholic secondary school with principal and deputy principal in charge.
Principal goes on leave. Bom ask deputy to deputize for principal and deputy accepts.
Applications (in-house) then invited for post of acting deputy.

A number of staff apply.
1.One was most senior and special duties teacher,
2.another was next most senior with extra qualifications and is also special duties teacher.
3.Next was staff member who is school steward and staff rep on Bom.


Who got the job?


(the interview panel was made up of ,a religious order person,a Bom religious appointee,two retired principals,and another retired teacher and religious order sympathiser)

Assuming the third one because if it was either of the first two you wouldn't be posting.

So rather than drag the arse out of the thread:

1. Are you pissed off because No. 3 got the job instead of the other two and are just a member of staff observing what is going on?
2. Are you No. 1 or No. 2 are reckon you should have got the job?
3. Are you asking to see if other people think this is unfair like you do, as otherwise you wouldn't be asking?

I don't see what the interview panel has got to do with it either to be honest?

Seniority does not confer an automatic right to a promotion albeit temporary in this case. Seniority does not mean that person is the best person for the job.

evolving_doors

ethical wrote: »

Voluntary catholic secondary school with principal and deputy principal in charge.
Principal goes on leave. Bom ask deputy to deputize for principal and deputy accepts.
Applications (in-house) then invited for post of acting deputy.

A number of staff apply.
1.One was most senior and special duties teacher,
2.another was next most senior with extra qualifications and is also special duties teacher.
3.Next was staff member who is school steward and staff rep on Bom.


Who got the job?


(the interview panel was made up of ,a religious order person,a Bom religious appointee,two retired principals,and another retired teacher and religious order sympathiser)

You forgot to mention which candidate embodies the ethos of the school best...

Anyhow.. just to drag the arse out of this thread also ... my money is on the OP being No. 2 (bit of bragging going on there!)

Can we do a poll?

rainbowtrout

Armelodie wrote: »

Can we do a poll?

Can we have an Atari Teacher option??? Polls are such a rare thing in T&L...

king size mars bar

was it the butler with the candle stick holder in the drawing room????

seavill

ethical wrote: »

Who got the job?


(the interview panel was made up of ,a religious order person,a Bom religious appointee,two retired principals,and another retired teacher and religious order sympathiser)

Probably the best person for the job and someone that did a good interview.

Obviously not the person you wanted to get the job but how are you to know what happened in the interview, maybe the other two people interviewed very poorly, despite what they may say. Maybe person 3 is doing a management masters on the quiet or has it already done without the rest of the staff knowing.

evolving_doors

don't you just love internal promotions...

evolving_doors

ethical wrote: »

Voluntary catholic secondary school with principal and deputy principal in charge.
...
(the interview panel was made up of ,a religious order person,a Bom religious appointee,two retired principals,and another retired teacher and religious order sympathiser)

Do I get the feeling that Richard Dawkins is surprised they didn't get the job...

RealJohn

Armelodie wrote: »

Do I get the feeling that Richard Dawkins is surprised they didn't get the job...

You do get the strong impression that the OP doesn't like the religion/religious order in question, don't you?

Fizzical

rainbowtrout wrote: »

I don't see what the interview panel has got to do with it either to be honest?

Seniority does not confer an automatic right to a promotion albeit temporary in this case. Seniority does not mean that person is the best person for the job.

You don't see what the interview panel has got to do with who was appointed to the job? You may be right.

As for seniority not meaning that that person is the best person for the job, being appointed equally does not mean that that person is the best person for the job.

rainbowtrout

Fizzical wrote: »

You don't see what the interview panel has got to do with who was appointed to the job? You may be right.

As for seniority not meaning that that person is the best person for the job, being appointed equally does not mean that that person is the best person for the job.

No I don't see. The OP has gone out of their way to highlight that there were a number of people on the panel from the religious orders, and that there was a 'religious order sympathiser' on the panel so it would seem that the OP has an issue with this, and possibly that they feel that this had a bearing on the outcome of the interview.

Well generally in an interview situation the person appointed is deemed to be the best person for the job as a result of the interview they gave. If person 3 got it and the OP has a problem with it, as is implied, then it would suggest that it's 'jobs for the boys'.

Still waiting for the OP to clarify if that is indeed their gripe or are they just annoyed that they/the person they favoured didn't get it.

Being a post holder doesn't confer automatic entitlement to a promotion to senior management, nor do extra qualifications. The extra qualifications may not be relevant and neither might the post.

im invisible

it's a trick question, isn't it?

I'm going for person 1

Sensor

Im saying op IS number 2 and number 3 got the job. Well done boardsies for taking this apart and analysing it so well!

Some of you must be detectives!

Fizzical

rainbowtrout wrote: »

No I don't see. The OP has gone out of their way to highlight that there were a number of people on the panel from the religious orders, and that there was a 'religious order sympathiser' on the panel so it would seem that the OP has an issue with this, and possibly that they feel that this had a bearing on the outcome of the interview.

Of course the interview panel had something to do with the choosing of the person - they chose him (or they just backed up the Principal's choice in which case they had nothing to do with the appointment). If the OP feels that the religious leanings of the panel had a bearing on the outcome of the appointment he could well be right. As Armelodie mentioned, the question may have been 'who embodied the ethos of the school the best'.

Well generally in an interview situation the person appointed is deemed to be the best person for the job as a result of the interview they gave.

A person will be chosen as most suitable in the situation. This is not the same as being the best person for the job, but for the situation involved. Who exactly considers the appointed person as being the best person for the job? The interview panel who chose them for whatever reason? The Principal who would have made their opinion clear (at the very least through their reference)? The teaching staff who know the candidates?

Being a post holder doesn't confer automatic entitlement to a promotion to senior management, nor do extra qualifications. The extra qualifications may not be relevant and neither might the post.

Agreed. But you must admit that some appointments to management positions are not based on ability or record but on more 'woolly' attributes such as day-to-day support for the Principal's methodology and public support for the religious ethos. I suppose it depends on what you consider most important for the school - educational aims or religious aims, smooth agreement or impetus towards change.

rainbowtrout

Fizzical wrote: »

Agreed. But you must admit that some appointments to management positions are not based on ability or record but on more 'woolly' attributes such as day-to-day support for the Principal's methodology and public support for the religious ethos. I suppose it depends on what you consider most important for the school - educational aims or religious aims, smooth agreement or impetus towards change.

Yes, I agree and there have been many threads on here about teachers getting posts and the merits of seniority v. ability to do job etc.

But, the OP hasn't clarified what their problem is. They've just implied it in a rather passive aggressive way that the person who got the job shouldn't have got the job/wasn't as deserving as one of the other candidates/the OP themselves was the person and lost out to someone else and they haven't clarified what their point was in highlighting the make up of the interview panel.


If all the replies to this thread had been 'No. 1 or No. 2 should have got it and if you you were No. 1 or 2 and lost out to No. 3 you should feel hard done by and definitely appeal it', they would have definitely been back to agree. But they haven't. They came looking for an opinion without stating their own, and found that they didn't get the answers they were expecting.

We also weren't given very much background on No. 1 or No. 2. The post holders might be year heads or co-ordinators of courses or have some sort of administrative duty which would be useful experience for the DP post, on the other had they might have a post which involves giving out lockers (this was a B post in my school in the not too distant past) which in my opinion does not convey a huge range of management skills, or the extra qualifications could have been a Masters in Chinese, the favoured language of the moment :rolleyes:, but has fcuk all to do with being able to run a school on a day to day basis.

rainbowtrout

Fizzical wrote: »

Who exactly considers the appointed person as being the best person for the job? The interview panel who chose them for whatever reason? The Principal who would have made their opinion clear (at the very least through their reference)? The teaching staff who know the candidates?

Just on this point. Nowhere in the private sector would employees be asked 'who do you want for your manager?' A principal is just that, so I don't think it's appropriate to ask staff that question or for them to decide who should be principal/deputy principal.

ethical

Thanks for all your excellent answers so far! Some of you have got close to the correct result!A little bit of further info.The Poster is looking on and is not 1,2,or 3.

All applicants would be excellent for the school ethos

Candidate 1,the most senior is in its twilight years and would be a great supporter of the school,having ones own children attend at one stage,would have gone for a position in the past but was 'voted' out due to gender equality

candidate 2,the most qualified,had at one stage served on BOM,and had been school steward,during this time the school benefited from some dept money in which candidate was instrumental in sourcing,had also attended for interview in past but was unsuccessful on gender grounds

candidate 3,the youngest,was a shoulder to cry on for the acting principal when the princip went awol, was also a wall for the acting princip stopping staff grievances getting to the union (3 is school steward) and on the Bom as staff rep.

Remember ,this is a Catholic run school where 'they' do their own thing! The interview panel should be ashamed of themselves,taking funds and agreeing on a candidate that was given them by the acting princip before interview.The loosers in this are the candidates that made the interview process look good by actually attending interview.

spurious

What do you mean on gender grounds? They didn't get the job because they were 'the wrong one'?

Is there no appeal system?

I'm in the VEC system where it is fairly straightforward to appeal and find out where you went down in relation to other candidates.

ethical

in voluntary secondary schools the religious order do what they like,dont like their toes stood on even when the school benefits,I saw this personally when a nun,chair of Bom gave out hell to a school steward who had brought the union to the school regarding a health and safety issue,the school benefited as the union pursued funds to have the asbestos removed and the nun never thanked the school steward.
I've also seen a school steward sit on BOM and attend interview panel in which there were other members of BOM and then the 'successful' if somewhat tainted candidate sat in on the BOM to ratify his own position......you wouldn't see the likes of it in Cuba!

evolving_doors

ethical wrote: »

in voluntary secondary schools the religious order do what they like,dont like their toes stood on even when the school benefits,I saw this personally when a nun,chair of Bom gave out hell to a school steward who had brought the union to the school regarding a health and safety issue,the school benefited as the union pursued funds to have the asbestos removed and the nun never thanked the school steward.
I've also seen a school steward sit on BOM and attend interview panel in which there were other members of BOM and then the 'successful' if somewhat tainted candidate sat in on the BOM to ratify his own position......you wouldn't see the likes of it in Cuba!

Knew it,

Op's no. 2 (obvious because he made the assumption that he was the "most qualified")

sorry for your troubles fella, honestly I feel your frustration, but it looks like you were taken for a ride by partaking in the process..

oh well, back to the chalkface ... would someone please think of the childrennnnn....

seavill

I really don't get the point of this thread at all. If you are upset that "your friend" didn't get the job you could have explained that in a much shorter post/thread.

No one ever agrees on who should get promoted in a school. In my experience schools are the worst in this respect.

Just because you don't agree with who was promoted does not mean they weren't the right person for the job. You will have your opinion, the interview panel will have their's. Maybe they were bias, maybe they weren't, you will never know (despite what you have convinced yourself). My previous school someone there 8 years go the DP position over people there 20-30 years, to say it didnt go down well is an absolute understatement. However he has done a fantastic job since.

My advice get over it.

Fizzical

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Just on this point. Nowhere in the private sector would employees be asked 'who do you want for your manager?' A principal is just that, so I don't think it's appropriate to ask staff that question or for them to decide who should be principal/deputy principal.

I didn't mean to imply that. I was in a hurry, trying to reply to your statement that the person appointed is deemed to be the best candidate for the job. It seemed to me to have two meanings: that the interview panel deemed the person best for the job and so appointed them, or that people in general deemed that they were the best for the job because they had been appointed. I was trying to get at the second view. Staff who see who has been chosen from among the candidates are not fooled by 'oh he did the best interview, he deserved to be appointed' when a favourite has been appointed over obviously more experienced and capable people.

Just because appointment by seniority no longer operates it does not mean that appointment by merit now does. It certainly does not operate in voluntary secondary schools with their vague appointment criteria and hand-in-glove panels.

bdoo

I have read lot of rubbish in my time but this is Nonsense of the highest order.

Deputy was asked to deputise? Wtf? The deputy is already the deputy and automatically acts up in the principal position in the absence of the principal.

As for the rest of it, shenanigans on the bom, more qualified, less qualified more male, less female.

I'm pissed that I / my buddy didn't get the job full stop.

rainbowtrout

ethical wrote: »

Remember ,this is a Catholic run school where 'they' do their own thing! The interview panel should be ashamed of themselves,taking funds and agreeing on a candidate that was given them by the acting princip before interview.The loosers in this are the candidates that made the interview process look good by actually attending interview.

And how exactly do you know this happened if you claim not to be any of the three candidates and the level of disdain for the interview panel/BOM in your posts suggests that you are not part of either?

Just on the third candidate. Basically you're saying he's kissing the principal's arse. Fair enough. But if he is the union rep and the staff rep on the BOM, why is he in those positions? I assume there was a vote for both and the staff elected him to represent them?

rainbowtrout

ethical wrote: »

I've also seen a school steward sit on BOM and attend interview panel in which there were other members of BOM and then the 'successful' if somewhat tainted candidate sat in on the BOM to ratify his own position......you wouldn't see the likes of it in Cuba!

Which of the candidates is this? No. 3 again or one of the others? Or someone completely different? Does anybody on your staff object to this behaviour?

ethical

staff are very afraid,of course there have been objections but whatever the 'religious' decide they decide! Morale is on the floor and staff (quite a few young with young children ) are afraid to voice their opinion too loudly.Staff are being bullied.The situation has deteriorated at an alarming rate over the past 2 years as the old 'religious head' retired and was replaced by one of her lackeys (lay) and a bully of a deputy who is now acting principal.in this particular case candidate no.3 got the job.....but let his colleagues down as he did not take their woes to the union,(when an older member said we needed the union Head Office people to visit the school the week before interview the school steward (now acting deputy princip) stopped him in his tracks as he was on a promise from the acting principal and so did not want to upset the boat,tough sh~t if he upset his colleagues! his career is more important than his colleagues.Very many protocols were broken by 'religious'order,by members of BOM and by interview panel......of course there were some of the same people involved in all three areas! Talk about cronyism........and the religious like 'closed shop'....my mate used the words 'open and transparent' quite a lot at interview so we all know now why he did not get the job!!

2011abc

Hey I thought MY school was only place that sorta thing went on ...you forgot OPTION D 'The principal's shamelessly promoted close personal friend' !

bdoo

ethical wrote: »

staff are very afraid,of course there have been objections but whatever the 'religious' decide they decide! Morale is on the floor and staff (quite a few young with young children ) are afraid to voice their opinion too loudly.Staff are being bullied.The situation has deteriorated at an alarming rate over the past 2 years as the old 'religious head' retired and was replaced by one of her lackeys (lay) and a bully of a deputy who is now acting principal.in this particular case candidate no.3 got the job.....but let his colleagues down as he did not take their woes to the union,(when an older member said we needed the union Head Office people to visit the school the week before interview the school steward (now acting deputy princip) stopped him in his tracks as he was on a promise from the acting principal and so did not want to upset the boat,tough sh~t if he upset his colleagues! his career is more important than his colleagues.Very many protocols were broken by 'religious'order,by members of BOM and by interview panel......of course there were some of the same people involved in all three areas! Talk about cronyism........and the religious like 'closed shop'....my mate used the words 'open and transparent' quite a lot at interview so we all know now why he did not get the job!!

You don't have to be the school steward to contact head office. If things are that dire why doesn't someone else get in touch.

ethical

Thankfully a number of people have recently got in touch with Union HQ and we are now awaiting their next step.Brazenly the 'new' duo carry -on as if everything is hunky dory! The cheek of it!Seemingly this sort of underhandedness and cronyism has been going on in Ireland for a long long era.Its way past time we rallied the troops and got justice!

bdoo

ethical wrote: »

Thankfully a number of people have recently got in touch with Union HQ and we are now awaiting their next step.Brazenly the 'new' duo carry -on as if everything is hunky dory! The cheek of it!Seemingly this sort of underhandedness and cronyism has been going on in Ireland for a long long era.Its way past time we rallied the troops and got justice!

Your one person crusade is commendable

2011abc

No need to be sarcastic bdoo , O.P. sounds like theyre obviously 'in the right'...certainly no basis for attacking them ...

evolving_doors

Maybe its just me, but what goes on in your classroom is what counts.

If you have ambitions to leave teaching behind and become management then you should leave the school and get another management position elsewhere (last I heard principal and dp jobs were the only jobs going).biting your tongue for the next twenty years or so in the same school will give you a nervous breakdown.

I suppose I admire your sense of justice but at the end of the day you should remember at your initial interview, you were probably asked if you agreed to abide by the ethos of the school. So really, your gripe against it being a religious cabal is moot.

have you considered doing further education in management to gear yourself towards a job in the private sector...its all supposed to be based on merit over there...

BTW... the more info you give the easier it may be to identify who you are, you might need to be careful in case you libel anyone!

ethical

thanks for your advice,taken on board!!.......but still can't get over how low some people can go,obviously morals are in short supply as far as a few of my 'colleagues' are concerned.Let us hope that the Union can sort it out and point spirits on an upward curve.

ethical

Just looking at some of the other posts on BOARDS and it is rather frightening the way people are being treated by education employers.I think the time may be right now to form a group to stand up to this sort of carry on.
A friend of mine just told me yesterday that she recently went for interview,she had the foresight to alert the Union beforehand advising them that she heard there 'may be trouble ahead'!,how right she was as you guessed it correctly,she did not get the job even though she said her colleagues thought she was a dead cert! Some one closely aligned to the boss got it.She is now awaiting Union action on this sorry affair.

bdoo

ethical wrote: »

Just looking at some of the other posts on BOARDS and it is rather frightening the way people are being treated by education employers.I think the time may be right now to form a group to stand up to this sort of carry on.
A friend of mine just told me yesterday that she recently went for interview,she had the foresight to alert the Union beforehand advising them that she heard there 'may be trouble ahead'!,how right she was as you guessed it correctly,she did not get the job even though she said her colleagues thought she was a dead cert! Some one closely aligned to the boss got it.She is now awaiting Union action on this sorry affair.

Come on. I might not get the job every time I go for an interview.

To be honest the opinion of colleagues doesn't really matter.

How about being capable and hardworking

ethical

Hardworking!!...full timetable,takes games on ones own time,hasn't had a 'sickie' in 8 years, doesn't cut corners,is at work at 8.30 every morning,is very capable and hardworking.................the problem is the person that has the clout is none of the above but is a renowned bully who cut corners when in the classroom,took time off regularly,never spent a full day in the classroom,signed up for s&s,didn't do it but got the money!!!!!! would never miss a photo opportunity and now leads people up the garden path....give me a break!!!!

evolving_doors

ethical wrote: »

Hardworking!!...full timetable,takes games on ones own time,hasn't had a 'sickie' in 8 years, doesn't cut corners,is at work at 8.30 every morning,is very capable and hardworking.................the problem is the person that has the clout is none of the above but is a renowned bully who cut corners when in the classroom,took time off regularly,never spent a full day in the classroom,signed up for s&s,didn't do it but got the money!!!!!! would never miss a photo opportunity and now leads people up the garden path....give me a break

By the beard of Zeus, why on earth would anyone want to promote the first person above, they re doing a brilliant job.how the heck could a school replace them if they moved into management...

Second person is being promoted in order to get them away from teaching obviously ...perfect fit for management

Being in management is all about the contacts and network as you so rightly point out..

Do you know anyone in management in another school maybe? If not then just have a good mtb and go back to the chalk face and do what you do best...

Vp or principal job has NOTHING to do with teaching,

2011abc

Armelodie wrote: »

Vp or principal job has NOTHING to do with teaching,

Well thats blinding obvious reading this thread if it wasnt beforehand ...maybe a mafia post grad diploma or something might assist?!

bdoo

2011abc wrote: »

Well thats blinding obvious reading this thread if it wasnt beforehand ...maybe a mafia post grad diploma or something might assist?!

Nothing to do with teaching until someone has a problem with a 'bad' teacher or a parent or group of parents decide that a teacher is no good / doesn't like their child / whatever else they have been told.

It comes down to their knowledge and experience of teaching to understand and address classroom matters.

I'm my view principal and deputies should be most concerned about teaching. That's what schools are for, if there's no teaching theres no learning.

I think that while there may be cases of nepotism and cronyism it's is not the order of the day. Some posters are stating as fact that it is. This gives a very poor impression to outsiders looking in and also doesn't account for the vast majority of people who got jobs on merit and leaves me wondering what the agenda is here.

This forum gets more negative by the day.

anfield liv

The idea of cronyism etc happening once is once too many! I seem to remember a case in the West of Ireland last year where the principal left fairly suddenly and was replaced rather quickly by one of his own.(he was a member of a religious community as was his successor).The interview for the deputy was supposed to be 'monitored as if it was a UN appointment' according to a teacher that applied,there were shocks all round when the position was filled.Needless to say the people that had a chance of getting the job did not and there were at least 3 of them,male and female,any of which would have done a superb job.Morale does not exist in that school since.
I personally can vouch for the system in the UK,apply for the job,do an interview ,and if you are good enough you get the position.Ireland has been destroyed by 'who you know' and not 'what you know' and unfortunately this situation looks like its not going to end anytime soon.....and do not get me started on the VECs.Yes ,some are straight but others are like a corrupt banana republic1

NinjaTruncs

Something like this happened in my old school (i was a student not a teacher) the headmaster retired. A new headmaster was brought in which caused a huge amount of unhappiness with the existing teachers as they all expected one teacher to get it. The teachers revolted and got the new HM out of the role and the teacher they wanted into the role as HM. That teacher lasted less than a year in the role and ruined moral in the school along the way.

rainbowtrout

anfield liv wrote: »

The idea of cronyism etc happening once is once too many! I seem to remember a case in the West of Ireland last year where the principal left fairly suddenly and was replaced rather quickly by one of his own.(he was a member of a religious community as was his successor).The interview for the deputy was supposed to be 'monitored as if it was a UN appointment' according to a teacher that applied,there were shocks all round when the position was filled.Needless to say the people that had a chance of getting the job did not and there were at least 3 of them,male and female,any of which would have done a superb job.Morale does not exist in that school since.
I personally can vouch for the system in the UK,apply for the job,do an interview ,and if you are good enough you get the position.Ireland has been destroyed by 'who you know' and not 'what you know' and unfortunately this situation looks like its not going to end anytime soon.....and do not get me started on the VECs.Yes ,some are straight but others are like a corrupt banana republic1

You are forgetting that any secondary school in Ireland run by a religious order is essentially a private school, despite the fact that they are funded by the department and teachers' wages are paid by the department. So they are going to put someone in as principal who is a member of the religious order if it is possible, in order to preserve the ethos of the school. This is becoming less and less of a possibility as so few are members of the religious orders these days. Schools with a nun or priest as principal are few and far between these days, and probably won't exist at all in 15-20 years.

Your example is not a very good one. It is not an example of cronyism.


As for your comment on VECs, yes that's probably true, but the same could be said of many companies in the private sector too. How many business do you know where the son/daughter of the owner has been put into a management position and that person is as lazy as a dog's arse and hasn't done a stroke of work in their lives? How many people do you know that have got jobs because their parents know the guy that owns the business? It's not just the public sector where this happens.


On the other side of the argument: I got my job with my VEC straight out of college. I have no connections of any type to anyone within the VEC, or the county in which I work. I work a long distance from my home town/county. My family don't have business, religious, or sporting connections. I don't play sport. There are no teachers in my family. Yet, as an NQT (albeit 12 years ago) I was given a permanent position, one which I'm still in. So I got my job on merit alone, and all the work I've done since then has been on merit.

rainbowtrout

NinjaTruncs wrote: »

Something like this happened in my old school (i was a student not a teacher) the headmaster retired. A new headmaster was brought in which caused a huge amount of unhappiness with the existing teachers as they all expected one teacher to get it. The teachers revolted and got the new HM out of the role and the teacher they wanted into the role as HM. That teacher lasted less than a year in the role and ruined moral in the school along the way.

If you're telling that from a student perspective, I suspect there was more to it than that. Principal's are appointed on a permanent basis. That principal would have had to resign from the position, not be given the boot. There is probably more to this situation than meets the eye. But on the face of it, a person was appointed from outside rather than within staff. The teachers weren't happy and probably decided as a staff to refuse to cooperate with the new principal and possibly undermined them to the student body making their job more difficult. That is probably what ruined morale in the school, not the principal. That to my mind, is unprofessional. The teachers don't have a say in who gets appointed as principal.

ted1

ethical wrote: »

Hardworking!!...full timetable,takes games on ones own time,hasn't had a 'sickie' in 8 years, doesn't cut corners,is at work at 8.30 every morning,is very capable and hardworking.................the problem is the person that has the clout is none of the above but is a renowned bully who cut corners when in the classroom,took time off regularly,never spent a full day in the classroom,signed up for s&s,didn't do it but got the money!!!!!! would never miss a photo opportunity and now leads people up the garden path....give me a break!!!!

why would you promote this person?
There is a difference between being a good employee and being a good manager.

RealJohn

This is actually the worst thread this forum has seen for a while. It started off with the OP having an anti-religious chip on his shoulder and has descended into every second poster telling stories which either sound made up or are nothing more than hearsay, probably heard from people bitter at being overlooked.

The whole thread makes everyone involved in teaching look bad (which might have been the OP's intention in the first place).

seavill

Agree with RealJohn, I could tell you a story of someone I know who got a job cause of who they knew. However for that one person I could tell you about 20 people who got jobs in the same time without any connections.

Yes it happens, but these days very very very rarely, someone who is already in a post is doing a good job and is kept on is not an example of what ye are talking about here.

As someone said it happens in all walks of life, the fella who owns the local spar by me employed his son as manager as he wants him to take over the family business. This person would not have got the job otherwise. Surely a prime example

ethical

''This is actually the worst thread this forum has seen for a while. It started off with the OP having an anti-religious chip on his shoulder and has descended into every second poster telling stories which either sound made up or are nothing more than hearsay, probably heard from people bitter at being overlooked.

The whole thread makes everyone involved in teaching look bad (which might have been the OP's intention in the first place).'' Real john

You obviously live in a world where everything is near perfect...this poster happens to be just as religious and probably more religious than his employers,just because he does not wear a habit and just because he pointed out the truth as he saw it he gets harangued by the likes of you.....justice will win out in the end,remember YOU CANNOT CHANGE THE TRUTH...AND THAT'S WHY I TELL IT AS I WITNESSED IT IN THE FIRST PLACE,I do not need a habit to hide behind!

implausible

ethical wrote: »

You obviously live in a world where everything is near perfect...this poster happens to be just as religious and probably more religious than his employers,just because he does not wear a habit and just because he pointed out the truth as he saw it he gets harangued by the likes of you.....justice will win out in the end,remember YOU CANNOT CHANGE THE TRUTH...AND THAT'S WHY I TELL IT AS I WITNESSED IT IN THE FIRST PLACE,I do not need a habit to hide behind!

This type of hysterical posting completely detracts from any point you have been trying to make and makes the chances of an interesting, rational discussion very slim.

seavill

implausible wrote: »

This type of hysterical posting completely detracts from any point you have been trying to make and makes the chances of an interesting, rational discussion very slim.

+1

evolving_doors

RealJohn wrote: »

This is actually the worst thread this forum has seen for a while. It started off with the OP having an anti-religious chip on his shoulder and has descended into every second poster telling stories which either sound made up or are nothing more than hearsay, probably heard from people bitter at being overlooked.

The whole thread makes everyone involved in teaching look bad (which might have been the OP's intention in the first place).

Hold on a second there now, I think you meant, "... it makes everyone involved in teacher recruitment look bad." Which really is what the OP was getting at, (even though I'd disagree with him on other points).