to think that this person is not a suitable teacher

[MsJRMEsq]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-49177014

A teacher got drunk at a school's end of year prom, told male pupils the girls were "gagging for it" and threatened to "knock out" the school principal, a panel heard.

He told the panel he heard him say: "Lads, you need to go where this lot are for the after party, they are gagging for it", referring to the female pupils.

@lolasmiles Totally agree with both your posts.

Just gross.

I don’t think he made the comments because he was drunk. I think he got drunk so he could make the comments.

I was at our y11 prom 6 weeks ago. Along with 30+ other staff. Whilst we were officially off duty (some staff were 'on duty') any sort of drunken behaviour would have definitely lead to disciplinary action despite being in a public place - with a bar for adults only - and in our own time BECAUSE IT'S A SCHOOL FUNCTION. We attended as representatives of the school and quite rightly if we bring the reputation of the school into question then we should face the consequences. We have a legal if not moral responsibility to those students even if they've left school.

This idiot had already resigned but still should not have behaved in such a disgusting manner. Hopefully his new employer will reconsider his contract in view of this appalling outburst.

Someone who tells his male pupils to persue the female ones because they are 'gagging for it', particularly in the current climate of 'peer on peer' (as they call it ) abuse happening in schools at the moment, is not suitable to be a teacher.

Schools, governments etc will wring their hands over 'peer on peer abuse' - they will tell us how 'safeguarding' is the absolute priority which covers every aspect of school life, everyone will know their DSPs and will be tested regularly to make sure they know so that when OFSTED come in and ask them they don't fuck it up, schools will send their staff on safeguarding training courses with slides about how this sort of abuse is becoming more prevelant and 'let's mind map ways in which we can reach out to the pupils to lower the risk' blah blah blah.

But once again, as we so often see, when it comes to the crunch, they really don't give a fuck. Especially if it means having to hold a male to account.

I was very surprised when just said ‘it was a one off’

It’s not like he ‘just’ got drunk & threw up everywhere - they would have been bad enough. But his comment about the boys following the girls to the after party because the girls were gagging for it was beyond disgusting from any ‘adult’ Let alone a teacher & I think his comment makes him unsuitable to be on a position of shaping young minds

However, I do agree that it would be a shame to lose a good classroom teacher (if he is) and that banning him from teaching forbthe next 50 years probably isn’t a great idea. Hopefully though, this on his record will mean he’ll soend the next few years being very carefully monitored or stacking shelves in Tesco!!

I think it’s oerfectly normal for a 29 yo to ‘notice’ 16 year old girls. It’s just wrong to act in it, especially when you’re a teacher. Being seen to notice your pupils are ‘gagging for it’ is pretty bad form!

they really don't give a fuck. Especially if it means having to hold amaleto account.
Except he has been held to account. He's been taken to a public professional conduct hearing and been found guilty of the allegations. This will be on his record forever and show in all employment checks. He's not got a job.
In the court of public opinion he will be judged and no school with touch him any time soon and rightly so.

He just hasn't been given a prohibition order.

But once again, as we so often see, when it comes to the crunch, they really don't give a fuck. Especially if it means having to hold a male to account

Although to be fair to the school, they escalated this straight to an external disciplinary panel, rather than dealing with it internally.

I’m the DSLO for my school and my training is rather more than mindmaps and blah blah blah.

I must admit I sniggered a little at “my comments have been taken out of context”.

Basically he’s a misogynistic little dick who - thanks to not knowing when to stop - made his views clear.

Let’s face it, I don’t imagine many schools would touch him with a barge pole now.

Except he has been held to account. He's been taken to a public professional conduct hearing and been found guilty of the allegations. This will be on his record forever and show in all employment checks. He's not got a job.
In the court of public opinion he will be judged and no school with touch him any time soon and rightly so.

People on this thread, on Mumsnet, are defending this guy, so we shall see what 'the court of public opinion' says.

And if 'no school will touch him', why not just impose a prohibition order? He has made it clear that not only is he not equipped to uphold safeguarding standards but that he is possibly a safeguarding risk himself.

Although to be fair to the school, they escalated this straight to an external disciplinary panel, rather than dealing with it internally.

Yes, that is true.

I’m the DSLO for my school and my training is rather more than mindmaps and blah blah blah.

I know. I was trying to illustrate that govt issued safeguarding training is pretty meaningless if, when an education professional behaves in a way that shows that they are in no way equipped to uphold safeguarding standards and could be a risk themselves, it is described as a 'one off' and they are allowed to remain in the profession. Presumably this guy had all the training.

it is described as a 'one off'

Obviously we only know the details as described in the newspaper article, so pinch of salt and all that.

I’ve been involved in external disciplinary panels - staff from other schools are used to conduct the investigation, in order for it to be as objective as possible- and the evidence gathering is robust (or the ones I’ve been involved with have been).

Whilst we might know that saying what he did belies a despicable attitude that’s not enough. If there is no evidence that he has ever said anything similar, or behaved in an inappropriate way then it is, for the purposes of the panel “a one off”.

And if 'no school will touch him', why not just impose a prohibition order? He has made it clear that not only is he not equipped to uphold safeguarding standards but that he is possibly a safeguarding risk himself.
Because making disgustingly unprofessional comments doesn't automatically mean someone is going to endanger students.
His comments were wholly inappropriate and misogynistic, but to jump from those comments to him being a threat to pupils is a jump with a clean record otherwise.

If nobody touches him for a while then good. Does that mean his 40 year old self should be banned because of some terribly judgement aged 29? I'm not sure.