Retired teachers aiding and abetting corrupt system..........

ethical

Just wondering what your views are on retired teachers sitting on interview panels/interview boards and just doing their time,pretending to interview the candidate,getting paid for it and not selecting the best candidates for the positions advertised.Some would say it is aiding and abetting a corrupt system,the teacher for the vacant position is already chosen but the legalities state that every thing must be above board,hence the corrupt nature of the 'set-up'. In fact any job advertisement that states '..is an equal opportunity employer' should be looked at closely! This is seemingly happening quite a lot in secondary schools in the northwest and west of Ireland.Have these people no shame,cronyism is rife and the Dept. is not doing anything to stop it? The number of positions filled to enhance pension payments in northwest and west is staggering over the past few years.Our banana republic is alive and well!:mad:

derb12

Why pick on the retired teachers? Surely everyone involved in the sham interviews should be exposed? This has been discussed a few times here and the general conclusion seemed to be that while there is undoubtedly cronyism in spots, there are also cases where a teacher is well established in the school and the principal wants to go with the devil they know but they are forced through the sham interview process, wasting time and money so that they can tick boxes. Not at all fair - but why your annoyance at retired teachers per se?

rainbowtrout

That's quite a lot of sweeping generalisations you're making there. Not every panel has a retired teacher on it. Not every person on a panel is just pretending to interview the candidate.

There seems to be a lot of issues in the way your school is managed ethical based on what you have posted on here before, but it doesn't mean it's happening in every school in the country.

I got my job in the northwest straight out of college. There were no retired teachers on the panel, my only experience was my teaching practice and I had no connections to the area and had no 'pull'. I got my job on merit and was made permanent straight away. I realise that doesn't happen now in terms of contracts but I certainly wasn't going through the motions and neither were the interview panel.

TheDriver

Sounds like sweeping generalisations too, "lots" isn't quantifiable. I am sure it has taken place but personally I want the best teachers working in my place, whatever their age. Plus you must think about the future i.e. a teacher who builts a strong reputation for next 20-30 years.

teacherhead

Looking back over posts here it seems that ethical has a massive axe to grind on this one.

I'm got my job after one year teaching in UK, PWT then moved on to CID. I knew nobody, still know nobody. I am aware that sometimes people who are in schools already get jobs but has it ever occurred to you that they may be the best for the job?

RealJohn

derb12 wrote: »

..... there are also cases where a teacher is well established in the school and the principal wants to go with the devil they know but they are forced through the sham interview process, wasting time and money so that they can tick boxes.

This is the thing really. If a teacher is doing a good job in the school, well established, fits in with the school, the staff and the students, why should the principal be forced to go through the process, wasting money on advertising, interviewing, correspondence with the candidates when he has a perfectly good teacher doing the job already. Why take a risk on someone you don't know when you've a perfectly good person already in place?

MathsManiac

If you have proof of a corrupt practice, you should report it to the relevant authorities and provide the relevant evidence. If not, perhaps you shouldn't go making allegations about it.

Is it possible that the explanation is simply that other people's professional opinions as to who is the best candidate for a particular job are not always the same as yours?