HARASSMENT AND BULLYING WORKSHOP

CASE STUDY – Harassment and Bullying

As an NUT local officer, you are contacted by a school representative who works in a small community school renowned for its ‘heavy-handed’ management style. The head teacher sees himself/herself as a dynamic ‘motivator’ who has been parachuted in by the local authority to pull the school out of its ‘serious weaknesses’ category. The head teacher’s definition of ‘motivation’, however, appears to involve the need to reduce staff to tears on a regular basis by shouting at them, constantly questioning their judgement and generally making them feel inadequate.

Currently the head teacher is having a ‘crackdown’ on what s/he perceives as absenteeism in the school workforce. Having just railroaded through a punitive absence management policy at a recent governors’ meeting s/he has already taken a number of staff to task for allegedly exceeding, albeit retrospectively, the new trigger points, including one female teacher who was on a managed return to work following extensive treatment for breast cancer.

The new regime includes a ‘return to work’ meeting with the head teacher after absences of any duration – even a day or less. Anyone failing to present themselves promptly for such a meeting will be deemed to be in breach of contract and therefore likely to face disciplinary charges.

Representatives or colleagues, however, are not permitted to be in attendance at return to work meetings. This has prompted the departure of one member on sick leave with stress, partly work-related, partly because his/her mother has recently died. The member is adamant that s/he is so terrified of the head teacher that s/he will refuse to attend a return to work interview with the head teacher unless s/he can be accompanied by his/her NUT representative – whatever the consequences.

The head teacher has indicated that s/he will not budge, and that if the member returns to work but refuses to attend the return to work interview on the terms previously given, s/he would commence disciplinary proceedings, at which, owing to the disciplinary procedure, the NUT representative would be allowed into the meetings.

Already, the following strategies have been tried:

  • offered support for those affected;
  • encouraged fellow members to rally round the victim/s;
  • gone into school for a meeting with members at which certain negotiating points are agreed, then taken forward to management;
  • argued for a proper debate followed by a whole school policy, agreed by management and staff together.

……but these initiatives have failed because members are too intimidated by the head teacher to do anything which might constitute ‘putting their headsabove the parapet’.

Everytime you attempt to communicate with the head teacher by telephone, s/he slams the receiver down in mid-conversation. Your emails are ignored.

What are your thoughts about how to proceed now? In particular:

How do you advise the member who is digging his heels in?

How do you handle the head teacher?

Who else could you involve?

This is based on a real life case. At the end of the discussion you will be able to compare your reactions and strategies to the one adopted by the division secretary in practice and decide whether you agree or disagree with that approach.