Now is the time to resolve the supervisory dispute, writes Gerard Looney, president of the National Association of Principals and Deputy Principals(NAPD).
In situations of industrial dispute, the all too common public perception is that money solves everything. Disputes leave bitter problems, however, that no amount of money ever solves. Long-term damage to relationships is often part of that legacy, but rarely if ever is there public discussion about this and when the production lines crank up again, the media move on to the next story.
People-centred organisations suffer particularly badly in industrial disputes. Relationships are at the very heart of these organisations, none more-so than in schools and colleges.
Schools reflect a network of relationships between principals, deputy principals, post-holders, teachers, students, parents and ancillary staff members. When disputes occur, principals and deputy principals are always in a particularly invidious position and invariably caught in the centre.
Most are members of one of the teacher unions, yet they are responsible for the day-to-day management of schools and consequently are viewed by many as being part of management. They are in a "no win" situation and inevitably suffer hugely during disputes. The real loser in a dispute is ultimately the institution, through the damage caused to the fabric of the school community.
We are justifiably proud of our education system in Ireland. Schools and colleges have changed enormously, particularly from the early 1990s onwards.
There is a new agenda working in education, which has placed an emphasis on partnership among the stakeholders, with teachers leading and participating in teams delivering Transition Year programmes, Leaving Certificate Vocational and Applied programmes, further education and so on. School retention and home-school liaison initiatives see teachers forging new links with families and dealing with a new range of problems at an entirely different level. Facilitation and negotiating skills are needed now in the profession as much as teaching ability in the classroom.
Many principals and deputy principals have worked long and hard leading these new initiatives, in a new spirit of partnership with teachers. Of course, the process has had to work both ways, because without the teachers new initiatives could not even be considered. The old hierarchical school structure is largely a feature of the past. The common denominators in the entire process are trust and the maintenance of strong quality relationships. It is here that the real damage is being done in the current dispute.
Principals, deputies and teachers will be left to repair the damaged relationships and rebuild the trust and partnership that have been so carefully built up over the years. By that stage the unions and the department will have begun to focus on the next issue and schools will once again be on their own.
There is infinitely more to managing a school than people realise. Equally, there is infinitely more to teaching than classroom, subject-based contact.
Much is unnoticed and, sadly, taken for granted. The pastoral care system, for example, which is the bedrock of our schools, operates largely on the goodwill of teachers. The system includes designated class teachers and year heads who look after the needs of students outside of class. There is also the less formal everyday contact with students, which is impossible to quantify.
The ethos of a school, the way people behave and interact, the whole area of character formation, are all intangible and immeasurable, yet they all extend beyond the classroom. The huge voluntary commitment of teachers to extracurricular activities and sports programmes is an aspect of the holistic education of students not often recognised or appreciated.
NAPD salutes this enormous additional contribution of teachers to schools and it is justifiably proud of the way principals and deputies manage the very complex entity that is the modern school.
Sadly, in the throes of the current dispute, schools bear little resemblance to what is described above. Extracurricular and sporting activities have had to be curtailed and there have been enormous difficulties in substituting for teachers released to undertake oral and practical exams.
Currently, teachers teach, supervisors supervise, and principals and deputies quite simply try to do everything else.
Indiscipline has undoubtedly increased during the last year, and this is no reflection on the people engaged to supervise and substitute in the absence of teachers. How can anybody reasonably expect that the same service can be provided in the absence of the people who are specifically trained and experienced in the area?
The irony of the situation is that the financial cost of keeping the contingency plan in operation is enormous, as supervisors are being paid above the hourly part-time teacher rate. Payment is guaranteed for a minimum of two hours' work per day, even when the work is not there. The inherent injustice is an inevitable source of tension.
Throughout this dispute NAPD has been consistent in all public pronouncements. Teachers are best placed and most qualified to supervise, substitute and engage in all the other typical non-classroom based activities which are part of everyday school life.
Teachers must also be properly paid for this work. The association has also consistently pointed out the damage being done to relationships in schools during this dispute and the intolerable strain on its members. Recently NAPD cried halt.
Enough is enough. After two academic years of continuous dispute, our members, our teachers, our students, their parents and the system we have all worked so hard to build have had enough. Somebody needs to listen and listen carefully, because by September next the time for talking may have passed us all by.
