Rank: Super forum user 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
I find it ridiculous that the press has branded it as "elf & safety" when it actually seems that it was more to do with him not having the Head's permission and that he "denied the allegation when questioned by the head." According to the BBC report he was actually cleared of the specifc H&S allegations (not making a risk assessment and not following H&S guidelines). But then it apeears that the media seldom lets the truth get in the way of a good "elf & safety-bashing" story
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Once again, poor reporting misleads the reader, although at least 'H&S' is only in the text, not the headlines this time.
'He was dismissed for failing to follow the school's health and safety policy'
It transpires in the article that 'The GTC's professional conduct committee hearing in Cardiff found him guilty of four out of nine charges: That he allowed pupils to go sledging, didn't have head teacher's permission, ignored cautionary words of warning from colleagues and denied the allegation when questioned by the head'
So, a breach of school policy, not Health & safety.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Can't wait for the Daily Mail's Littlejohn to get hold of this one!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Is there really such a charge as 'ignoring cautionary words from colleagues' ? Again, I'm staggered.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I too have read a report on this case in the Western Mail (The National Newspaper of Wales) In the case it is stated that he should have completed a written risk assessment and submitted it to the school Head or the school Governors for approval, this would have course been done before the snow melted (having a laugh), and what competence does the school head and the Governors have to judge it? In the report it is stated that an independent assessment had been made following the case and found there were no significant risks was presented by the teachers actions. Where does this fit in the brave new world of school risk assessments, does it not fly in the face of what has been suggested by his Lordship?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
..."oooh you dont want to do that" would they qualify as "cautionary words from colleagues"... :-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
But interestingly he was found 'not guilty' of all the offences directly related to health and safety eg not having a risk assessment, not having parental consent and not having followed In other words he wasn't dismissed for Health & Safety reasons but for others
The ones he has been found guilty of are all school policy type ones ie not informing HT, lying to the HT etc. At the bottom of the report it talks about his previous disciplinary record so it sounds like he may have a history of flouting rules in general.
But of course as soon as the press see the words Health & Safety that's all they care about.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Having a history of flouting rules suggests to me that he was probably a good teacher - ie someone that wanted to get pupils interested in his subject and to have some fun in their learning process. The idea that he brought the sledge in the first place was for the design of the sledge - using something relevant at the time (and he probably intended to allow them to have a go on it as reward for their classroom involvement). As a parent I'd rather have someone teaching my kids with a passion and generating a genuine interest from them in his lessons rather than be sat ina classroom doing what the textbook tells you day in and day out. Don't get me started on the headteacher, why couldnt this have been dealt with in-house? Maybe I'm just too old fashioned for this country these days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Poor reading, not poor reporting. We're tending to self-perpetuate the myth with this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
The last sentance says it all really...
Quote
""Clearly the decision to dismiss Mr Tremelling was the right one given the circumstances and his disciplinary record."
More to this story than 'elf n safety.
'nuff said.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Slightly tangential but if lying to the HT is a dismissable offence does that mean that every time a politician lies to the electorate i.e. breaking electoral promises then they can be dismissed?
Just heard that Top Gear are going to snow test this sledge and Littlejohn is doing the RA to show us how its done.
Keep doing what you are doing already, saving lives, stopping serious injuries and generally making work safer for all including journalists even when the latter are bent on ridicule.
Take Care
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user 
|
Fletcher wrote:Slightly tangential but if lying to the HT is a dismissable offence does that mean that every time a politician lies to the electorate i.e. breaking electoral promises then they can be dismissed?
If only....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Not for a while, I think: MP's only automatically lose their seat if their jail sentence is twelve months or more. Being convicted of a crime does not lose them their seat in purely legal terms, although in practice their party and voters may have some say in that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
I think Phillips 20760 has it - I have the feeling that there is more to this story than meets the eye, and that it has little (or nothing?) to do with health and safety!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
If it was not for H&S the press/TV would have to find other stories or find other work so be thankful the subject is mentioned at all and when U talk to individuals they all have a diferent opinion when things effect them!
I think that the good people of these islands are not as the press thinks that they are and the press/TV will work themselves out of stories
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.