SACKED

We all have different thresholds for behavior. If the woman had no past prior behavior like this, shows genuine remorse, and has otherwise good character, some might give her a second chance, some might say this one incident was enough to turn them off and never trust this woman.

There's also the fact that there is a bit of a double standard sometimes(not saying whether this is right or wrong). For example, a parent might make a mistake or commit a certain action, but they're still around their kids everyday because they're the parent. Someone else makes the same mistake and/or action and it's "Oh no, I could never leave my children with them!" Then suddenly this other individual is a "lesser being" clearly unworthy of being around children, but has the parent looked at themselves and their actions and mistakes? Or do we spend so much time looking at others, that we forget self reflection, because it's more difficult?

I totally support the right to choose who you want your kid to be around and that you want to put them with the most perfect person possible, that's human nature, I think, and not my exact point here.

Sure, some of us, or most of us, would never behave as this woman did, but if you did, if you snapped like she did, and your kids saw the video, how would you explain your actions to them and would it be different vs how you explain the actions of a stranger and/or outsider (non immediate family member)?

I mean, the easiest answer is "Well, I have never done and would never do such a thing, so that's not even an issue or question for me." Which is fair enough.

I also think the crux of the matter is proportionality. Did the consequence fit the action? That's where a lot of the disagreement is. Sure, we also have disagreements about how to handle animals physically, but I'm not sure that the consequence was proportionate. There are some other details I'd need to know.

There's also the fact that this person would be known as the "lady that hit her horse" by the kids and there would be chatter. It's possible with a public apology and some time, this would eventually fade a bit, but also, how does it reflect on the employer keeping someone like this around? They're possibly concerned with their image too. Then you get the narratives of "If she hits an animal, what else will she do?" "It's a poor example for the children." "I can't leave my kids around someone like that." It puts the employer in an odd spot.

I do think (and maybe she has, but I haven't paid attention), the woman should apologize for her actions regardless of if her employment was terminated or not if people really value the "what about the kids" stuff. Yes, they'll see that she's no longer there and that she was sacked, but in order to complete the message that this wasn't right and to instill the fact that we need to take responsibility from our mistakes/actions, a public word/apology would be valuable, I think. You can't force it, of course, and if this was already done or discussed then my ramblings are invalid anyway.
 
Last edited:
Do I think what she did was awful? Yes.

Do I think she should have lost her job over it? No.

The thing is that this could affect her whole life. She has lost her job and may well struggle to find another teaching job (in fact almost certainly will), because a quick google of her name will bring this up. She may well struggle to find another job full stop. As a punishment I don't think that is in proportion with what she has done. She may well never raise a hand to another horse again, but she will be paying the price for this video potentially for decades to come.

As to why she lost her job, I'm willing to bet that it has a lot to do with the reputation of the school. I also work at an independent school and there is no way I would keep my job if a video like this went viral.
 
Roasted Chestnuts said:
I am, I’m training a youngster, so should I lose my job because he’s stood in my foot and I’ve smacked him to get off, I’ve been in a position of trust most of my life. Get a grip and stop being sanctimonious.

As I said I hope all you who feeling good about this are good with karma.
Click to expand...
Well that’s not what happened is it, it would be different if it but kicked or stood on her foot but she didn’t! She didn’t do anything wrong! She kicked punched and slapped that horse for no reason. A child tried to load her from an angle didn’t work, and she got loose. That horse did not load because she abused her, she only loaded because she was lined up straight and was asked to load. This women deserved what she got. Nobody should be backing her! Actions have consequences and I’m afraid the consequence for her abusing a horse was her loosing her job.
 
HashRouge said:
Do I think what she did was awful? Yes.

Do I think she should have lost her job over it? No.

The thing is that this could affect her whole life. She has lost her job and may well struggle to find another teaching job (in fact almost certainly will), because a quick google of her name will bring this up. She may well struggle to find another job full stop. As a punishment I don't think that is in proportion with what she has done. She may well never raise a hand to another horse again, but she will be paying the price for this video potentially for decades to come.

As to why she lost her job, I'm willing to bet that it has a lot to do with the reputation of the school. I also work at an independent school and there is no way I would keep my job if a video like this went viral.
Click to expand...

That the thing, isn't it; the lost income, the potential of lost income over the course of one's entire life (consider pension too), and a career essentially ended over this action. People have received far less of a consequence having done far worse.

There are consequences to our actions, and being held responsible is important, but this may indeed go too far. However, I can see all sides here and I'd have to think a bit as to what the appropriate and proportionate reaction should be, but I also don't know every detail involved in the decision making by the school.
 
CanteringCarrot said:
That the thing, isn't it; the lost income, the potential of lost income over the course of one's entire life (consider pension too), and a career essentially ended over this action. People have received far less of a consequence having done far worse.

There are consequences to our actions, and being held responsible is important, but this may indeed go too far. However, I can see all sides here and I'd have to think a bit as to what the appropriate and proportionate reaction should be, but I also don't know every detail involved in the decision making by the school.
Click to expand...

What in your opinion would she have to have done to the horse to justify losing her job? Thresholds will be different for all of us. Does the person slightly over the drink-drive limit deserve a different consequence to the person twice over the limit? They have both done the same thing, but is one worse than the other?

Every day people in authority such as judges and headteachers have to make decisions on what consequences are appropriate. I would strongly suspect in this case that a teacher would have a clause in her contract about not doing anything that could damage the reputation of the school or not bringing the school into disrepute. I think the situation was made worse because of the association with hunting and I think dismissing her was probably the only course of action that would have been acceptable to the majority of parents of children who attend the school.
 
Cruelty to horse. I will try and condense what is actually a long story. We will call her B.She was on our yard.Her horse was never allowed out of its stable but not for any reason, other than to be walked round the school for half an hour or so.Yard complained and said it must start going out.She moved.
Three months later she returned with absolutely starved, and I mean starved, not just a little bit skinny.Yard owner shocked as were we all.She was told she must feed and get out vet,farrier and dental technician asap.This she did and horse started to put on weight.His back dropped and so did his abdomen as he had no muscle there.Still not allowed out.More complaints made and she has now left yard.Everyone worried about horse.
She spent hours each day with this horse.I think she was tormenting him in the stable in sly little ways.At no time was she seen hitting him and to hear her talk you would think she was the most caring and knowledgeable of horse owners.
I know whose horse I would prefer to be even at the cost of the odd unpleasant kick or slap.
 
Upthecreek said:
What in your opinion would she have to have done to the horse to justify losing her job? Thresholds will be different for all of us. Does the person slightly over the drink-drive limit deserve a different consequence to the person twice over the limit? They have both done the same thing, but is one worse than the other?

Every day people in authority such as judges and headteachers have to make decisions on what consequences are appropriate. I would strongly suspect in this case that a teacher would have a clause in her contract about not doing anything that could damage the reputation of the school or not bringing the school into disrepute. I think the situation was made worse because of the association with hunting and I think dismissing her was probably the only course of action that would have been acceptable to the majority of parents of children who attend the school.
Click to expand...
Hunting, conducted properly,is a legal activity.Some people may not agree with it and that is fair enough but it is not, to me, grounds for sacking anyone.
 
eahotson said:
Hunting, conducted properly,is a legal activity.Some people may not agree with it and that is fair enough but it is not, to me, grounds for sacking anyone.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. But I do think the fact that the incident happened at a hunt will have increased pressure on the school to dismiss her. I didn’t say that was right.
 
eahotson said:
Cruelty to horse. I will try and condense what is actually a long story. We will call her B.She was on our yard.Her horse was never allowed out of its stable but not for any reason, other than to be walked round the school for half an hour or so.Yard complained and said it must start going out.She moved.
Three months later she returned with absolutely starved, and I mean starved, not just a little bit skinny.Yard owner shocked as were we all.She was told she must feed and get out vet,farrier and dental technician asap.This she did and horse started to put on weight.His back dropped and so did his abdomen as he had no muscle there.Still not allowed out.More complaints made and she has now left yard.Everyone worried about horse.
She spent hours each day with this horse.I think she was tormenting him in the stable in sly little ways.At no time was she seen hitting him and to hear her talk you would think she was the most caring and knowledgeable of horse owners.
I know whose horse I would prefer to be even at the cost of the odd unpleasant kick or slap.
Click to expand...

Why didn’t anybody report her if the horse was being starved?
 
Birker2020 said:
Again I didn't say that, you are putting words in my mouth. You asked me 'was it fair for her to lose her job?'

I answered 'yes she is in a position of trust. As I explained painstakingly throughout this thread, many, many times. Just because you don't agree with what I say doesn't make it any less valid I'm afraid.

You did not ask me 'should she be sacked'. Please stop trying to twist my words. How can I know whether she should have been sacked or not, you can only make a balanced judgement based on facts and risks assessed at the time. I don't know why you are so adverse to me explaining (or trying to) how the system works based on the experience I gained. when you hear things like 'I can't believe she was sacked because of something on social media' that is a completely inaccurate statement that someone has made. Its not black and white like that.
'
The case would no doubtedly gone before a professional conduct panel meeting similar to the cases in the links below. Its not a case of one morning the head teacher decides she wants to get rid of one of her teachers because of something she's seen on social media. Its not her choice to make, the world doesn't work like that.

There are protocols that have to be adopted and meetings that have to be held surrounding the person in a position of trust (they are never present). And like I (and many, many people have said) we are not party to all the facts and maybe there are previous issues in respect of her conduct that we know nothing about, and so the decision may seem particulary harsh to the majority of people.

Here are forthcoming meetings in relation to teachers:
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/teacher...professional-conduct-panel-hearing-or-meeting

I found that link almost straight away, its in the public realm.
Click to expand...
Upthecreek said:
What in your opinion would she have to have done to the horse to justify losing her job? Thresholds will be different for all of us. Does the person slightly over the drink-drive limit deserve a different consequence to the person twice over the limit? They have both done the same thing, but is one worse than the other?

Every day people in authority such as judges and headteachers have to make decisions on what consequences are appropriate. I would strongly suspect in this case that a teacher would have a clause in her contract about not doing anything that could damage the reputation of the school or not bringing the school into disrepute. I think the situation was made worse because of the association with hunting and I think dismissing her was probably the only course of action that would have been acceptable to the majority of parents of children who attend the school.
Click to expand...



Drink driving is a crime, slapping a horse isn't. Someone upthread said that the school is in a rural, farming area. If that is the case, I would be astonished if the majority of parents were baying for her dismissal. If she has been deemed tohave broughtt he school into disrepute it is purely because of the anti-hunting lobby outside the school gate, most of whom will have come from outside the area. Other schools have had similar problems with out-of-area campaigners demonstrating at the school gates and making life difficult for every-one.
 
eahotson said:
Cruelty to horse. I will try and condense what is actually a long story. We will call her B.She was on our yard.Her horse was never allowed out of its stable but not for any reason, other than to be walked round the school for half an hour or so.Yard complained and said it must start going out.She moved.
Three months later she returned with absolutely starved, and I mean starved, not just a little bit skinny.Yard owner shocked as were we all.She was told she must feed and get out vet,farrier and dental technician asap.This she did and horse started to put on weight.His back dropped and so did his abdomen as he had no muscle there.Still not allowed out.More complaints made and she has now left yard.Everyone worried about horse.
She spent hours each day with this horse.I think she was tormenting him in the stable in sly little ways.At no time was she seen hitting him and to hear her talk you would think she was the most caring and knowledgeable of horse owners.
I know whose horse I would prefer to be even at the cost of the odd unpleasant kick or slap.
Click to expand...

I had one of those on a yard I was on. A horse just being slowly tortured and tormented. Instagram looked perfect though. Yard owner tried but no changes made ultimately, kept slipping back. The owner was a carer actually (the idea of her being in charge of the welfare of vulnerable people made my blood run cold BUT it is entirely possible that she was perfect at her job and only acted out with the horse, people do that too) clearly personality disordered in my view. I saw her parking in the disabled bay at the supermarket once too, like a total sociopath ?. No consequences for her though. Noone let the horse get bad enough to report to anyone and she was oblivious to the social derision on the yard that was the natural consequence on her actions. Localised, in person derision is how we are adapted to control each other's behaviour. The problems start when this is amplified by social media and hung on political causes and people pretend that we're just doing the age old localised social derision. No. It's a different thing, with much worse consequences for individuals and society.
 
Upthecreek said:
Why didn’t anybody report her if the horse was being starved?
Click to expand...
OK the horse was starved on another yard.This woman has previous convictions for animal cruelty.When it reached our yard and the owner/staff saw the condition it was in it was fed believe me.Reporting someone is actually quite difficult.
I tried with the Horse Welfare.They can't enter private premises without the owners permission.They asked me if I could take some photos without putting myself in danger.It was almost impossible as she was always there.I complained to yard owner (and I was not the only one) and she said she was working with horse owner to improve situation which it did a lot to be fair.Her cruelty was often very subtle and covered with this gloop of caring.She has now left the yard again.
RSPCA say that so long as the horse is fed and watered (and on our yard this did happen) there is not a lot they can do.
 
Pearlsacarolsinger said:
Drink driving is a crime, slapping a horse isn't. Someone upthread said that the school is in a rural, farming area. If that is the case, I would be astonished if the majority of parents were baying for her dismissal. If she has been deemed tohave broughtt he school into disrepute it is purely because of the anti-hunting lobby outside the school gate, most of whom will have come from outside the area. Other schools have had similar problems with out-of-area campaigners demonstrating at the school gates and making life difficult for every-one.
Click to expand...

I don’t think it makes a difference whether or not a crime has been committed. My point was that thresholds of what is acceptable behaviour and what is proportionate in terms of consequences will be different for us all.

She has not brought the school into disrepute purely because of the anti-hunting lobby though. She has brought the school into disrepute by being filmed hitting a horse on the face and kicking it. The fact it happened to be at a hunt just makes it worse. I live in a very rural farming area, which is now largely inhabited by people who are not local ‘country people’, but have moved to the area or have second homes here. I can’t think of many who are pro-hunt.
 
Upthecreek said:
I don’t think it makes a difference whether or not a crime has been committed. My point was that thresholds of what is acceptable behaviour and what is proportionate in terms of consequences will be different for us all.

She has not brought the school into disrepute purely because of the anti-hunting lobby though. She has brought the school into disrepute by being filmed hitting a horse on the face and kicking it. The fact it happened to be at a hunt just makes it worse. I live in a very rural farming area, which is now largely inhabited by people who are not local ‘country people’, but have moved to the area or have second homes here. I can’t think of many who are pro-hunt.
Click to expand...

I honestly do not believe that if the incident had been reported to the school as something seen by a few people in the moment, she would have lost her job.

It was the actions of the antis and CP in videoing it and sending it viral that resulted in the woman losing her job.

I don't condone what she did, but the pure vindictiveness of CP makes me shudder.
 
Rowreach said:
I honestly do not believe that if the incident had been reported to the school as something seen by a few people in the moment, she would have lost her job.

It was the actions of the antis and CP in videoing it and sending it viral that resulted in the woman losing her job.

I don't condone what she did, but the pure vindictiveness of CP makes me shudder.
Click to expand...

I don't see it as vindictiveness though. I think of it as being everyones responsibility to report an abuse of a position of trust. However, I do get that they probably didn't know she was a teacher when they put the film online and that they (sabs) were making a point not realising the implications of doing so.

But the same thing I've been saying all along and I've condensed it from a website. Where there is an allegation or concern about an adult that works or volunteers in a position of trust, employers and organisations should have clear procedures in place setting out the process, including timescales, for investigation and what support and advice will be available to individuals against whom allegations have been made. Misconduct outside of the education setting will only amount to unacceptable professional conduct” if it affects the way the person fulfils their teaching role or if it may lead to pupils being exposed to or influenced by the behaviour in a harmful way.

'Conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute' should be judged by a panel in a similar way. Misconduct outside of the education setting may be considered to be relevant if it is serious and the conduct displayed would likely have a negative impact on the individual’s status as a teacher, potentially damaging the public’s perception of them, therefore bringing the profession into disrepute. Panel members should use their knowledge and experience to take into account how the teaching profession is viewed by others, and the influence that teachers may have on pupils, parents and others in the community. Panels should take account of the uniquely influential role that teachers can hold in pupils’ lives and that pupils must be able to view teachers as role models in the way they behave
 
Rowreach said:
I honestly do not believe that if the incident had been reported to the school as something seen by a few people in the moment, she would have lost her job.

It was the actions of the antis and CP in videoing it and sending it viral that resulted in the woman losing her job.

I don't condone what she did, but the pure vindictiveness of CP makes me shudder.
Click to expand...

I agree with you, but the fact is it was filmed and has been viewed by millions, regardless of who filmed it or why. It is what it is. If a few people had seen it and reported it undoubtedly it would have had far less impact and not so severe consequences, but that isn’t what happened. If they had filmed her calmly loading her horses nobody would have been interested. Of course CP’s intention was to show that people who hunt are nasty individuals that also abuse their own animals.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top