SACKED

sbloom said:
I'm really glad my twenties were before the advent of social media (even my thirties when at least no-one brought phones to pubs and nightclubs on the scale they do now!)!
Click to expand...

Me too, the dancing on tables, snogging boys and seven shot challenges and beer pong probably would get me sacked if half the people on this thread had it their way.
 
sbloom said:
I think we're all worried about where the line gets drawn, not that any of us thought that behaviour was acceptable. And at what point it warrants sacking, not that it should not be punished.
Click to expand...
That's up to every individual employer really though. There is no straight line to be drawn. If she had been employed in a different industry her employers may very well not have cared. The story might not have picked up so much traction with "Waste Management Technician filmed kicking horse, would you want THIS PERSON picking up YOUR BINS?!" as a headline.
 
Birker2020 said:
No it doesn't, of course it doesn't. But there is an element of assumed risk and that risk needs to be assessed in the school environment.

But it wasn't just a smack or a tap on the nose. From what I saw it was a full attack on a defenceless animal. And kicking a horse is never right in any circumstance.

Schools have a duty of care to take any concerns raised against staff seriously and respond promptly. This is regardless of who the person is, what position they hold or how long they've been involved with the school. They will probably also have a code of conduct which sets out the schools expectations and will set out boundaries. If an allegation of wrong doing is made then an investigation is conducted to find if a person was guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute.
Click to expand...

I don’t think anyone is denying that either.

The school would have to go through the process. They are obliged to.

My gut feeling however is the outcome has been swayed by the extent of the social media coverage which is down to political reasons (hunting).

I can see how the school has bowed to what must be considerable pressure. But if I were them I’d be pretty concerned about a wrongful dismissal claim.
 
Birker2020 said:
I didn't say it did. Its in the public realm and therefore I am entitled to give my opinion, like you have given your opinion and like everyone else on this thread have given their opinion.

I may have given the same opinion if I had not worked on a Position of Trust team. But with the knowledge I gained whilst working there for 2 years I understand more than the average lay person how these things work. I'm sorry if you disagree with 'the punishment not fitting the crime' but I expect experienced professionals with many many years experience will have risk assessed the situation and drawn the conclusion they have drawn. And there may or may not be additional reasons why they came to the conclusion they did, none of us can know. I have not speculated anymore than anyone else so please try to stop getting a rise out of me all the time because its getting increasingly boring and laborious.
Click to expand...


You obviously don't understand STPCD. Please don't try to tell me about teachers' disciplinary processes, with the benefit of your 2 yrs as a note-taker. I worked in/with schools for 40 years. The last 7 of which I worked with unions and HR dealing with disciplinary and other contractual matters in State funded schools, including Academies - and have had the extensive training to do so.



ETA, if the woman inquestion had been a groom working with my horses, she certainly would have lost her job but she wasn't, so her actions that day are not relevant to her employment.
 
Pearlsacarolsinger said:
You obviously don't understand STPCD. Please don't try to tell me about teachers' disciplinary processes, with the benefit of your 2 yrs as a note-taker. I worked in/with schools for 40 years. The last 7 of which I worked with unions and HR dealing with disciplinary and other contractual matters in State funded schools, including Academies - and have had the extensive training to do so.
Click to expand...
So what have I said that is incorrect then please?
If I have made a mistake I would be happy to stand corrected.
 
DressageCob said:
I'm a bit conflicted on this.

Her treatment of the horse was unjustified and stupid. it was stupid because not only were "animal rights activists" watching, but it was completely counter-productive. The loose horse had gone over to her to be caught and she responded by repeatedly smacking it round the face. Next time it gets loose it might not be so keen to be caught.

In many professions I don't think that video would affect your work. However, I can see how a school would have an issue. It's their reputation, but it's also the effect of the footage on the children and their relationship with their teacher. If 8 year old me had seen my teacher do that to a pony there is no way I would be respectful of her going forward. Because a child doesn't understand the frustration, worry, stress or anything else which might have caused her reaction to the horse.

I don't think school teachers are alone in this response to out of work conduct of this nature. In my industry too I expect if there were footage of me treating an animal that way it could be argued to be against my code of conduct, because it would affect the public's perception of me and/or my profession, even though my work is unrelated.

Ultimately, I can understand the decision but I can also see that it appears disproportionate when compared with the minimal hours of community service given to some animal abusers. The difference is, of course, that this is not a criminal sentence.
Click to expand...

I get this too. I think it's worrying but sort of understandable - the school need to be out of the news, they don't need, for any of their children's or families sakes, to be targeted by a vicious media campaign which is absolutely what it would be if the anti-hunt lobby couldn't make an example of this woman because of her association with hunting. She may or may not have a good record at school; this action may or may not be convenient for the school - who knows? I don't think she 'deserved' to lose her job over an act of stupidity and temper tbh. As a hunt supporter I feel pretty aggrieved at her bringing hunting into the news again too but we have all made mistakes. The pony didn't deserve that attack of temper but probably no harm was done and actually the pony seemed pretty sanguine about it which, for me, suggests that he/she was not expecting to be smacked and that this is not a routine occurrence. Ime, horses show clearly when they are used to being treated like that - by becoming headshy or evasive of/reactive to the handler. That is pretty incidental though.

As for the relationship with children and role-model aspect of things; at our local school where my children have been educated a teacher was a strict vegan. She was a French teacher but stoutly refused to teach the children (even at GCSE level) the names of meat products or any non-vegan food item. Not only from a philosophical and educational point of view was this unacceptable to me, it also seemed utterly mad in a school where 80+ % of children will have a connection locally to farming; most very directly. She also told the pupils about her pet dog, that she fed on a vegetarian diet. Whilst I don't mind how someone lives their life, I thought the former was unacceptable and discussing the latter was unwise.

The pupils at school made it pretty clear this teacher was not respected and she moved on. I don't know how long the PTA would have had before complaints about her attitudes and behaviour flooded in tbh. No idea how the school would have dealt with it but I didn't want this teacher to be a role model for my children; from the perspective of her 'forcing' her own views and actions on them educationally. I have no problem whatsoever with her choices but school isn't the place to parade those choices. I wouldn't particularly want my children taught by someone who lost their temper with animals either but unless that is brought to attention how would we know?

I don't really know how she should have been 'punished' tbh. I just think that losing her job because of the filmed incident is too much.
 
ihatework said:
I don’t think anyone has said it’s acceptable example of behaviour to set to children ?‍♀️

It’s vile behaviour. But does it automatically become a safeguarding issue? I’m not convinced.

The alcohol comparison is completely valid. A drunken night and bad behaviour on social media is equally not suitable for children. If you want to extrapolate that out to the school setting you could claim the teacher was a raving drunk and it’s a safeguarding issue.
Click to expand...

I’ve never said it’s a safeguarding issue. We can argue until the cows come home about the ‘acceptableness’ of the behaviour and that nothing would have happened if it hadn’t been filmed, but it was and millions of people have seen it. What do you think those people that have no experience or understanding of horses would think of that behaviour towards an animal? I’d think they’d be more horrified and less understanding than we are. If she was filmed drunk and swearing on social media of course this could also potentially have an impact on her job, again not necessarily from a safeguarding point of view, but from the point of view of setting an example to young people because she is a teacher and also damaging the reputation of the school.

I’m not a teacher or employed to set an example to anyone, but being filmed hitting and kicking a horse or drunkenly shouting and swearing at people would both most likely get me sacked.
 
I do think that she has valid grounds to appeal.

But as a parent, and as a former Parent Governor at a small rural primary school, would I remove my child from a class taught by someone to be shown to have such a short fuse? Most certainly yes. Primary school teachers, amongst other attributes, must have endless patience.

The school and the Education Trust are damned if they do, and damned if they don't.

It wouldn't bother me a jot if she went naked clubbing every weekend, as long as I had confidence that she would be professional with my child in class.
 
Roasted Chestnuts said:
how completely ridiculous. Most of you commenting seem to have no experience of teaching or working with children. I do daily. For 45hrs a week. I have been frustrated, I have been annoyed, I have been up to my elbows in pee, poo and vomit, have been vomited on on several occasions. I have been assaulted by teenagers, I have been threatened by teenagers. None of this has driven me in my position of responsibility to hurt a child despite the fact I’ve reprimanded any number of horses in my over 30 odd years of life.

Smacking a horse doesn’t translate that you will hurt a child.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. I despise what she did and I think the school had no choice but to fire her to protect their reputation, but I do think there's very little risk that she would lose her temper like that with a child.

I am not a parent but I think the issue is more likely to be that parents don't want someone who treats a horse like that teaching their child, not that they are worried their child is going to be treated in the same way.
 
Pearlsacarolsinger said:
I have explained it to you several times. And the examples you gave of cases where you had taken notes and the employee had been dismessed were not relevant.
Click to expand...
I haven't given any examples of cases where I took notes and the employee had been dismissed. The one example I gave of the nursery worker hitting her own child was a made up example to explain what a possible scenario of a person in such a position and I don't remember anything else?
 
Here we teeter upon the edge of a purity spiral that ends with none of us owning horses at all.

"There but for the Grace of God go us all" indeed.

She was wrong to do it, of course. She had clearly lost her temper. I imagine the accumulated stress of teaching over the last couple of years is right there at the surface all the time and it clearly boiled over and it was not nice to see that directed at a pony. But personally I cannot be pleased about someone losing their livelihood because of this weird public surveillance/trial by social media thing we have going on now.

I also think that people have a very high view of their own behaviour and anyone who has got physical with a horse for any reason (justified and well timed or not) is now in the firing line if someone is going to be there with a camera.

Fwiw I was told very clearly when doing teacher training that we were free to be ourselves outside of work, within the bounds of the law obvs, that it would be best to lock down social media, but we were not expected to be held to a higher standard. The whole "you are a role model" thing is a personal choice. It's all a bit hazy but that was my impression. This was *just* before the real social media purity spiral insanity efforts properly got going. I suspect trainee teachers are given more cautionary tales these days.
 
palo1 said:
I get this too. I think it's worrying but sort of understandable - the school need to be out of the news, they don't need, for any of their children's or families sakes, to be targeted by a vicious media campaign which is absolutely what it would be if the anti-hunt lobby couldn't make an example of this woman because of her association with hunting. She may or may not have a good record at school; this action may or may not be convenient for the school - who knows? I don't think she 'deserved' to lose her job over an act of stupidity and temper tbh. As a hunt supporter I feel pretty aggrieved at her bringing hunting into the news again too but we have all made mistakes. The pony didn't deserve that attack of temper but probably no harm was done and actually the pony seemed pretty sanguine about it which, for me, suggests that he/she was not expecting to be smacked and that this is not a routine occurrence. Ime, horses show clearly when they are used to being treated like that - by becoming headshy or evasive of/reactive to the handler. That is pretty incidental though.

As for the relationship with children and role-model aspect of things; at our local school where my children have been educated a teacher was a strict vegan. She was a French teacher but stoutly refused to teach the children (even at GCSE level) the names of meat products or any non-vegan food item. Not only from a philosophical and educational point of view was this unacceptable to me, it also seemed utterly mad in a school where 80+ % of children will have a connection locally to farming; most very directly. She also told the pupils about her pet dog, that she fed on a vegetarian diet. Whilst I don't mind how someone lives their life, I thought the former was unacceptable and discussing the latter was unwise.

The pupils at school made it pretty clear this teacher was not respected and she moved on. I don't know how long the PTA would have had before complaints about her attitudes and behaviour flooded in tbh. No idea how the school would have dealt with it but I didn't want this teacher to be a role model for my children; from the perspective of her 'forcing' her own views and actions on them educationally. I have no problem whatsoever with her choices but school isn't the place to parade those choices. I wouldn't particularly want my children taught by someone who lost their temper with animals either but unless that is brought to attention how would we know?

I don't really know how she should have been 'punished' tbh. I just think that losing her job because of the filmed incident is too much.
Click to expand...



Palo, your example is one of a teacher not doing what is paid to do, i.e. teach pupils French to GCSE level, so after a full disciplinary process she would be liable to dismissal, if she continued to refuse to follow the curriculum fully.

I am amazed that any school feels it can dismiss a teacher for a minor incident like this, at a time when the DfE is begging retired/former teachers to go back into the classroom, 'even for 1 day a week' in order to avoid closing schools.
 
Sorry up the creek, I have no idea what point you are trying to make.

The lady gets sacked if the conduct meets the criteria set out in her contract and the various policies for sacking. Likewise if you displayed those behaviours you would get sacked if it met the relevant criteria for your employment.

It’s an intricate argument, that the lawyers will take on if the lady in question wishes to go there. In a court of law, where you don’t have the sabs applying as much direct pressure on teachers, parents and children, I suspect the outcome could be in the ladies favour.
 
Pearlsacarolsinger said:
Palo, your example is one of a teacher not doing what is paid to do, i.e. teach pupils French to GCSE level, so after a full disciplinary process she would be liable to dismissal, if she continued to refuse to follow the curriculum fully.

I am amazed that any school feels it can dismiss a teacher for a minor incident like this, at a time when the DfE is begging retired/former teachers to go back into the classroom, 'even for 1 day a week' in order to avoid closing schools.
Click to expand...

I quite agree!! I totally understand the difference too between my vegan French teacher and this incident - what I was trying to convey was that even when personal actions/views have a direct impact on education, there is a process which has to be gone through. Perhaps this teacher was halfway down that road already? If not, it seems extraordinary to me that she was just dismissed. It is bad news too as it sets a precedent for any pressure group to see as tactically worthwhile. I am glad that in the UK we don't have the same Pro Life/Pro Choice groups that the US has, for example...
 
palo1 said:
It has been out and out bullying and harassment for a long time. The current theme is to harass pubs that provide any form of support to hunts; through the Hunt Sabs 'Huntpubs' tweets. Horrible stuff.
Click to expand...

True sabs are vile human beings.
(Difference to the monitors, who engage in activities, reasonably politely and legally, for a cause they believe in).
 
ihatework said:
Sorry up the creek, I have no idea what point you are trying to make.

The lady gets sacked if the conduct meets the criteria set out in her contract and the various policies for sacking. Likewise if you displayed those behaviours you would get sacked if it met the relevant criteria for your employment.

It’s an intricate argument, that the lawyers will take on if the lady in question wishes to go there. In a court of law, where you don’t have the sabs applying as much direct pressure on teachers, parents and children, I suspect the outcome could be in the ladies favour.
Click to expand...

The point I was trying to make, obviously badly, was that you quoted me about safeguarding, when that would not be my concern if she was my child’s teacher.

And that people need to be mindful that their activities and behaviours outside of work can have consequences for their employment.

I don’t feel she deserves her life to be in ruins and her safety and that of her family to be threatened. She made a mistake and has paid a high price for it.
 
I can understand the arguments that it's disproportionate in comparison to the sentences for more serious abuse.

The problem is though, if this was my daughters teacher, would I allow her to be taught by her again. Probably not. Maybe, possibly, if it was a total one off and if there was clear action taken, such as anger management classes for the teacher and some sort of explanation to the pupils that makes it clear it was wrong and a one off. I certainly wouldn't let her near my animals unless I was certain she had changed and learnt to control herself, so why should I let her near my daughter?

Maybe I've been lucky, but in many years around horses I've never seen anything as unprovoked and violent as that. I've over reacted violently when I felt my safety was threatened and felt bad for it afterwards. I've seen people loose their temper and over react if a horse is acting up and making then feel unsafe or stupid or causing them to lose a competition. But that wasn't the case here.

I also don't see why people think it is so impossible she would do the same to a child, since it seemed she was taking out unrelated frustrations on a random creature who can't fight back.
 
cauda equina said:
All those saying her punishment didn't fit her crime - well the pony's punishment didn't fit his 'crime' (ie none) either
Sometimes things are just really unfair
Click to expand...
It didn't do the pony any good either. It will have gone home, to the same family, and on the scale of things I have seen worse in the horse box lines at shows.
I would imagine there is a clause in the schools contract, about disrepute, I think safe guarding would be difficult to use.
I think anyone who has been out for day, and it doesn't have to be hunting with children and ponies, up at five, and not being home till late, doing horses then and then coping with tired children, and had pony that decides not to be co-operative, we had one that charged off across a hotel car park, will feel for her.
The usual thing when this sort of storm brews is to leave, not wait to be sacked, so she was a bit naive.
 
Upthecreek said:
The point I was trying to make, obviously badly, was that you quoted me about safeguarding, when that would not be my concern if she was my child’s teacher.

And that people need to be mindful that their activities and behaviours outside of work can have consequences for their employment.

I don’t feel she deserves her life to be in ruins and her safety and that of her family to be threatened. She made a mistake and has paid a high price for it.
Click to expand...
The trouble is we don't know the full story and probably never will. I think that only outcomes of serious allegations like physical and sexual abuse are published and sometimes they mention the name of the person, other times they don't.

The POT team has thresholds for implementation of a multi agency investigative meeting when an allegation has been made against a teacher of volunteer and should be applied when there is an allegation or concern that any person that works with children has:
  1. behaved towards a child or children in a way that indicates they may pose a risk of harm to children
  2. behaved or may have behaved in a way that indicates they may not be suitable to work with children
  3. behaved in a way that has harmed a child, or may have harmed a child
  4. possibly committed a criminal offence against or related to a child
No. 2 seems the most obvious choice.
 
Although I think that what she did was vile, I do not believe she should have lost her job over it. I wonder if the school felt backed into a corner due to the social media storm that followed, and perhaps parents who were unhappy having her teach their children.
I was a teacher. Have I ever lost my temper and given a horse a smack? Yes, I’m not perfect. Have I ever lost control with a child? No. The two don’t always go hand in hand.

I wonder if she will appeal?
 
Why were the sabs filming there that day?

Now, while I know neither that hunt nor have any idea of what the local sabs get up to, I can hazard a guess.

They would not have been expecting to get the footage that they did, which was pure anti hunt gold. It would be to hope to add to the footage they have of hunts and their followers blocking roads to through traffic, which is pretty common.
 
Tiddlypom said:
Why were the sabs filming there that day?

Now, while I know neither that hunt nor have any idea of what the local sabs get up to, I can hazard a guess.

They would not have been expecting to get the footage that they did, which was pure anti hunt gold. It would be to hope to add to the footage they have of hunts and their followers blocking roads to through traffic, which is pretty common.
Click to expand...
It was the Cottesmore hunt and they are quite notorious for illegal hunting.
 
shortstuff99 said:
It was the Cottesmore hunt and they are quite notorious for illegal hunting.
Click to expand...
Well, yes, so I've heard too :rolleyes:. But it's more that's likely why the sabs were filming the horses being loaded back up when those particular followers had finished for the day. They were IMHO probably looking for footage of the hunt followers causing a nuisance.
 
eahotson said:
We have

We have all done both from time to time and then felt guilty afterwards and apologized.Who hasn't lost their temper with a child when they have been very worried,tired,ill etc. Hopefully the worst that has happened is that they have shouted a lot.
Click to expand...
I’ve never lost my temper with someone else’s child in my care, and that’s the issue here isn’t it? She’s a teacher, and with the way things are nowadays, her governing body no doubt had to set an example as if there’s any doubt she could ‘lose it’ with a child in her care, then I guess, couldn’t take that chance?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top