Westmeath school gets temporary injunction banning a suspended teacher from it's premises

Faugheen

I can’t believe we’re on page 58 and the reasons behind Burke’s incarceration still have to be spelled out to people.

Quin_Dub

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119624692#Comment_119624692

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119624869#Comment_119624869

The suspension had nothing to do with Pronouns

Burke was suspended for a public outburst at a school event where he refused to stop interrupting the event despite being asked repeatedly to do so , he then continued the diatribe at a later event on the same day and pursued the School Principal around the room demanding to be heard.

That is the reason for his suspension - A potential case of misconduct.

As was previously referenced earlier in the thread a suspension on full pay pending a hearing is absolutely within the disciplinary guidelines for schools.

He was not suspended so they could hold an investigation "free of his influence" , he was suspended (on full pay) so that the school could go about their day to day activities without him causing disruption and shouting the odds at the Principal in front of pupils.

The reason that proceedings are on hold while he is in Prison are because he is entitled to be in attendance at the hearing which is the next step in the process. He cannot do that while he is in Prison.

Enoch can have his School disciplinary hearing and clear his good name at any time he wishes , all he has to do is agree to stay away from the school until that hearing is held , which I would imagine would be a matter of days once he purges his contempt of court as everyone else wants to get this over with as quickly as possible.

The ONLY person holding things up right now is Enoch Burke.

@Matchbox2021 - The case you reference has a key difference to the Burke case (aside from being in the US which has totally different laws etc.).

That teacher followed the process - He was suspended , he stayed away and lodged an appeal and went through the channels , made his case and eventually the law found in his favour. And THEN he went back to school.

And that's how it should be - There have been a number of other examples noted in this thread , some where the teacher won their case and some where they didn't, but in every case , they followed the process.

Enoch Burke refuses point blank to follow any process , he simply wants the world to do exactly what he wants with no questions asked. His obdurate refusal to engage with anyone is why he is in Prison , simple as that.

Tow

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119624938#Comment_119624938

There are multiple ways Burke can take part in the meetings regarding his suspension. From video link to day release, prisoners are often transported around. The reality is they could give him day release to go the meeting and he would go back to Joy in the evening to continue his martyrdom.

Quin_Dub

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119625041#Comment_119625041

I don't think that applies for someone in jail for contempt - I think they have to purge the contempt first , hence the current impasse.

Happy to stand corrected on this though.

Tow

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119625054#Comment_119625054

Probably true.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119625003#Comment_119625003

Never underestimate how hard the similarly minded and simple minded double down when things aren't going their way

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119625003#Comment_119625003

Honestly at this stage, I think anyone who is still posting this crap are doing it to bump the thread and keep it near the top of the page.

Everyone and their dog knows the real reason why Burke is in prison, and anyone who still tries to argue it has anything to do with pronouns, is being disingenuous.

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119624757#Comment_119624757

Guess what, religious schools (and hospitals!) have an exemption, and not just for religion teachers either

I mean, we couldn't possibly subject taxpayer-funded organisations to equality law in 21st century Ireland if they're run by a church...

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119624869#Comment_119624869

Nope. Still sticking with your preconceived agenda I see.

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119624938#Comment_119624938

Maybe he doesn't want the school's disciplinary process to take place because he knows he doesn't have a leg to stand on, despite all the bluster?

Plus he gets to continue to martyr himself in the Joy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119625041#Comment_119625041

This is an angle that could get some light thrown on it. His hearing on the case made against him by the then Principal to be held before, I assume, the Board of Management was fixed for a hotel in Mullingar. As the injunction is against him attending the school and he could be brought under escort by prison officers and therefore technically still be detained while at the hearing. Unless there is some other court rule forbidding that it might mean the hearing is done.

The first High Court judge he appeared before on the injunction told him his arguments about religion etc were to be made at this Board hearing or elsewhere. I think I quoted it earlier. If the Board decides to sanction him it is open to him to appeal that within the terms of the Department circular. That appeal is made to an independent usually external person appointed for the purpose. So there are places where the religious arguments could be made.

BattleCorp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119625375#Comment_119625375

I wouldn't say he doesn't have a leg to stand on, and in saying that, I am not batting for Burke by any means. I think he is a plonker but I've enough experience with court etc. to know that very little with regard to an outcome is guaranteed when you walk into the courtroom. There are many twists and turns and I've seen the unlikeliest cases win the odd time.

Burke has the odds stacked against him for sure, but if he can find any little error that the school made in relation to his suspension, he could find himself the victor here. He can do 99 things wrong but if the school did one little thing wrong with regard to procedure, his suspension could be found to be unfair.

I'm not saying that will happen. It's unlikely that will happen. But never say never. That's my experience anyway.

ohnonotgmail

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119625553#Comment_119625553

he also has a case against them to get his suspension lifted. he lost the initial hearing for that. while that is ongoing the disciplinary process is suspended.

Quin_Dub

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119625553#Comment_119625553

Why should the courts or anyone else facilitate Burke and his nonsense though?

He could attend that hearing today if he wanted , all he has to do is agree to abide by terms of the injunction as handed down from the courts. It's not exactly an unduly onerous request now is it?

Why should the tax payer incur even more cost to send him to a hearing just because he refuses to behave like an adult?

Also - The disciplinary hearing will not even begin to address his "Religious concerns". It will exclusively be about his alleged bad behaviour at a school event.

He either gets sanctioned for that or found not guilty.

Then and only then do we get back to the underlying issue of whether or not Enoch is willing to conform to the request from the school about how to address a child.

Having said that , if the sanction for his alleged outbursts results in him being fired , then he'll never get to have his "religious concerns" heard.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119624869#Comment_119624869

I linked previously to a good overview of suspension in Irish employment law. That referenced an important court case here. You will see that the Irish court acknowledged that suspension itself may have an adverse effect on a reputation but that it is permissible in certain circumstances (and the article outlined them) pending the actual hearing into the case itself against an employee.

The US case you quote (and I haven’t read it all yet) was about action taken against a teacher who made a public statement at a public meeting into a proposed policy change. As soon as I saw the grounds for the decision against the district it was obvious that you can’t set up a public meeting to get public feedback on a proposed change and then discipline an employee who spoke as a private citizen at that meeting. The school seems to have believed that it could govern employee speech there on the basis of parental complaint after the speech.

That is not the scenario for Mr Burke. If action had been taken against him for making his case at a staff meeting discussing policy then it would be similar. Or if he had written to the Board about his objections to the policy or written to the Patron and action was taken there might be similarity. Mr Burke’s actions are why he is in Mountjoy.

Oddly enough Irish courts look at other common law jurisdictions; the US has moved on considerably but it is a quirk of our colonial history that their foundation too was English law.

TaurenDruid

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119624869#Comment_119624869

This is not America. Burke was not suspended for refusing to use pronouns. He was suspended for disrupting two school events.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119625665#Comment_119625665

The answer to facilitation is straightforward: I think it is the best interest of everyone that the thing end as soon as possible. I’m obviously putting someone other than Mr Burke front and centre there.

I’m going by what the High Court judge said that he could put his concerns there. I’m assuming the judge means that when the case against him is outlined he will with his right of reply say that he acted on his beliefs. In other words he can offer his view of his motivation. Now the Board might well say back to him that his motivations are irrelevant and they are dealing with the complaint about his actions. But he will have had his say. Now will that be enough for him? All the evidence says no.

If a sanction other than dismissal is applied and he is still a teacher then the issue of will he obey school policy arises. I think we can see difficulties there.

In short he may well get to publicize his views but in terms of a “hearing” (ie a forum that can adjudicate on whether the Boards policy or his evangelical view coheres best with CoI policy ) I can’t see him finding an Irish court to do that. A hearing on religious discrimination? Earlier in the thread I quoted the French hijab case lost at ECHR.

In short his hearings on the religious bits isn’t going anywhere. The tragedy is that under Irish education law he was under the impression that ethos gave him some sort of basis for action.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119625328#Comment_119625328

Just for clarity, and I’m not disagreeing, what exemptions?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119625558#Comment_119625558

I agree with a cautious approach. I can’t see how he could but we don’t have the full facts or even a complete account of what happened in court. The timing of the events fell very well for the school in terms of getting advice etc. That said anyone who has any experience with law or employment law would always be cautious.

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119625815#Comment_119625815

https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1998/act/21/enacted/en/print.html

37.—(1) A religious, educational or medical institution which is under the direction or control of a body established for religious purposes or whose objectives include the provision of services in an environment which promotes certain religious values shall not be taken to discriminate against a person for the purposes of this Part or Part II if—

(a) it gives more favourable treatment, on the religion ground, to an employee or a prospective employee over that person where it is reasonable to do so in order to maintain the religious ethos of the institution, or

(b) it takes action which is reasonably necessary to prevent an employee or a prospective employee from undermining the religious ethos of the institution.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119625899#Comment_119625899

Yes. It’s useful to see it set out in black and white. Still as awful as it always was.

Brendan Bendar

Love to know who is footing the bill for all this fückery?

Quin_Dub

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119625802#Comment_119625802

Of course everyone wants to see this finished off as quickly as possible , but the unwaivering intransigence shown by Enoch Burke means that it's going nowhere.

He himself has made the holding of the hearing moot anyway as he has now launched court proceedings looking to have the suspension summarily over-turned without the hearing every happening.

He believes he has no case to answer in the 1st place so doesn't want to even engage with the process.

The only solution that will make him happy is for everyone to just accept that he has done absolutely no wrong and that he is 100% correct in all that he has said and done and for the school to refuse to allow the student to be called by anything other than their original name.

For Enoch, there will be no compromise or acceptance of any other viewpoint other than his own.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119624692#Comment_119624692

You do understand that he went to the court to block them doing the investigation, right?

They put a hold on it because he is refusing to leave the jail so they can't hold the hearing without him

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119626126#Comment_119626126

Costs were awarded against him, so to answer your question, Enoch is

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119626158#Comment_119626158

I think as another poster said too that the injunction he sought and lost the other day had an impact on hearing going ahead.

It’s down to him with out doubt.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119626180#Comment_119626180

Just for clarity and you had a post early in the thread with mention of some of this, do you mean the hearing in your above post?

So, you have disruption of ceremony and meal.

Principal prepares report for disciplinary hearing.

Board meets with Mr Burke and sister and given seriousness of report puts him on administrative leave pending full disciplinary hearing.

He attends school regardless.

Board gets injunction.

He breaches injunction

Jail.

So the Board’s role is to hear both sides on the report before it and decide sanction. Going on the link I posted before the Board should have had a preliminary investigation to see if immediate admin leave was merited. Is it’s role now to hear both sides like a court and not investigate any further?

ohnonotgmail

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119626337#Comment_119626337

the process is halted.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119626337#Comment_119626337

I only know what's been reported and cannot make assumptions as to what the board should or should not do. That is for the board to decide and there are guidelines and procedures in place which will determine the steps they take.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119626380#Comment_119626380

Yes I was asking about the role it has and just that. You had a media summary way back in the thread that’s why I asked.