Asking too much of teachers?

[DomDoesWotHeWants]

It's looking like masks are going to be a requirement in shops and possibly other indoor venues.

Yet teachers are expected to teach - for hours at a time - in confined, poorly ventilated spaces, with no social distancing. They have been told they do not need PPE. If I was still teaching there is no way I'd go into a room crowded with teenagers and not wear a mask at the moment.

Teachers should be allowed as much protection as possible not thrown under a corona bus because Johnson wants them for child care so their parents can go back to work.

I really can't understand why it's going to be compulsory in shops where meetings are fleeting but not in schools which are crowded and have people crammed in for hours.

Does the right of children to go back to school over rule the rights of of school staff (teaching and ancillary) to be as protected as possible?

This means they should be allowed to wear PPE, if they choose, and secondary children should be wearing masks as happens in some other countries. In some countries younger children also have to wear masks in school.

The safety of teachers has been ignored by Johnson and his chums in their urge to get people back to work and the cry of "back to normal" is taken up by those ignorant of the facts about the virus.

Teachers have been made out to be the bad guys almost from the beginning - as can be seen from many bile infested threads on here. They deserve better.

Be grateful some have bothered to do away with autonomy.

Others ram it down your throat at every opportunity but never implement it. And even though it's encouraged, be prepared to meet the wrath of slt for being a troublemaker 🤣(encouraged To raise issues, not be a troublemaker)

I'm Ex education. Jumped this shit show long before CV. Every time it gets tossed around about having a recruit drive aka NHS style, I 😂at the thought of going back. Retired or not, I'm. not too sure people would want to go back at the best of times.

I wonder who will be blamed for the shortage? Lazy teachers or shit schools? 🤣

Oh isn't one of the academy schools general policy that discourages staff to join unions, or has that been stopped?

@Kitcat122

I agree it's asking too much also gov guidelines say bubble only closes if 2 pupils/adults test positive in 14 days!!! So if pupil A has been sitting in very close proximity to children and staff, needed first aid etc tests positive we all carry on for another 2 weeks in our tiny squashed classroom and just hope alls OK 🙄

Do you have a link for this @Kitcat122?

I get fed up when one person’s experience is extrapolated to all schools and all teachers and I’m even more annoyed when people who don’t work in schools think posters are lying or exaggerating. This is why it’s important to share our own experiences of how we are told to implement the guidance. I get annoyed when English schools are shown in the news where there are visors etc being worn as it’s not true to assume that all staff have access to them or are even allowed to wear them. We don’t have to clean toilets yet but as I’ve read on here plenty of teachers and TAs have to with minimal or no protection. I feel for the poster who is only getting 20mins break in the working day who was told to nip out and leave their class to go to the loo (could be in another teaching thread I’ve read today.) Unless people are having to work like this they can’t fully appreciate what it’s like.

Has there been guidance on how subjects like drama will work in secondary?

www.gov.uk/government/publications/actions-for-schools-during-the-coronavirus-outbreak/guidance-for-full-opening-schools

@Tobermory

@GhostTypeEevee The short answer is no.

‘Resign and get another one’

Isn’t stress one of the biggest causes of sickness in the UK? Imagine if they all resigned and found another one? < ponders butterfly effect>

Work stress is usually not always but usually the fault of the employer not the employee.

6. Personal protective equipment (PPE)

The majority of staff in education, childcare and children’s social care settings will not require PPE beyond what they would normally need for their work, even if they are not always able to maintain a distance of 2 metres from others.

PPE is only needed in a very small number of cases:

where an individual child, young person or other learner becomes ill with coronavirus (COVID-19) symptoms and only then if a distance of 2 metres cannot be maintained

where a child, young person or learner already has routine intimate care needs that involves the use of PPE, in which case the same PPE should continue to be used

Education, childcare and children’s social care settings and providers should use their local supply chains to obtain PPE.

If education or childcare settings cannot obtain the PPE they need they should approach their local authority (LA). Local authorities should support them to access local PPE markets and available stock locally, including through coordinating the redistribution of available supplies between settings according to priority needs.

If the LA is not able to meet the PPE needs of education and childcare providers, the LA should approach their nearest local resilience forum (LRF) which will allocate stock if it is available once the needs of other vital services locally have been met. If neither the LA or LRF is able to respond to an education or childcare setting’s unmet urgent need for PPE, they will need to make their own judgement in line with their risk assessment as to whether it is safe to continue to operate.

All teachers and children in school need to wear a face mask. It doesn’t help if only the teachers wear it.

The stats from earlier April in terms of occupational risk were analysed and published by ONS (this was 3 weeks after lockdown when the U.K. was at its peak in terms of deaths). It’s true, teachers sadly died, with more male teachers dying than female. However, the risk was the same for other professional occupancy groups, many of whom I imagine work with adults only and in small work settings.

It was much lower than groups such as carers, sales assistants, (for females) and security, taxi and bus drivers for men.

Blog post here:

ieureka.blogs.bristol.ac.uk/2020/05/26/are-teachers-at-high-risk-of-death-from-covid19/

Im fine with visors being worn. I think some things like carrying books round can be mitigated in the short term as students can be asked to carry their own books -even in normal times my kids have some teachers who take in books and some who rarely do.

But there’s no evidence teachers are at higher risk and will go back fully when the R rate is much lower than it was in mid-March.

I work in a 'requires improvement' (but good reputation) MAT school.
Since lock down I've interviewed teachers for around a dozen posts of all levels.

I have been surprised that their is a lot more people trying to come back to teaching, from all walks of life and all ages (for the job security). A few teachers who had planned to leave or go part time have changed their minds and decided to stay put (again for job security).

Maybe we got lucky but not only are the numbers of teachers applying up but the quality of applicants are up, from NQTs (who didn't get to finish training) to SLT. Not one of them ever asked about Covid safety. (The only area still hard to fill is Maths).

Over 4 months of lock down we have made a lot of savings on cover teachers, catering etc. The government is giving us some Covid recovery money and now we have some reserves for the first time in years.

Getting more cleaners was hard as most of our existing ones only worked in the evening. But we now have cleaners working full time during the day. Plenty of hand sanitisers/wipes in every room & entrance. Some PPE (only for first aid situations). All teachers have already undertaken Covid training & pupils will do that first day back.

Looking forward to school being back in September. Am so lucky I work in a such a caring school.

Am so lucky I work in a such a caring school.

It's crap like this that doesn't help. Your staff don't care more because they're willing to risk their own health. They don't care more because they haven't asked about covid safety. This martyrdom throws everyone under the bus and creates an atmosphere of "well you'd do it if you cared". It's not a healthy attitude and I'd be concerned for the ongoing well-being of your staff. The fact you've had to recruit for multiple vacancies says it all really.

Over 4 months of lock down we have made a lot of savings on cover teachers,

They’re real people who won’t have had work, you know.

@Hercwasonaroll

Am so lucky I work in a such a caring school.

It's crap like this that doesn't help. Your staff don't care more because they're willing to risk their own health. They don't care more because they haven't asked about covid safety. This martyrdom throws everyone under the bus and creates an atmosphere of "well you'd do it if you cared". It's not a healthy attitude and I'd be concerned for the ongoing well-being of your staff. The fact you've had to recruit for multiple vacancies says it all really.

Hear hear

The fact you've had to recruit for multiple vacancies says it all really
Its actually a lower turnover than area average and none were because they were leaving teaching, just the usual promotions, relocation's & maternity leave.

They’re real people who won’t have had work, you know.
All contracts were honoured, all staff employed by us were paid.

This martyrdom throws everyone under the bus and creates an atmosphere of "well you'd do it if you cared"

Will have to agree to disagree. Its threads like this that give all teachers a bad name. Some teachers might rightly be afraid of going back to work but its wrong to say all teachers are, and it does not make me or any teacher a martyr for saying they actually do feel safe (within reason) to do their jobs.

It does throw your more vulnerable colleagues under the bus though, doesn’t it?

I’m not in any particular risk category, I don’t live with anyone vulnerable so I can afford to be a bit more relaxed about catching it than others.

I’m not going to say ‘well I’m fine, therefore this is fine’. Because it’s clearly not fine and steps could be taken to make it safer for my colleagues who are in a scarier position.

It does throw your more vulnerable colleagues under the bus though, doesn’t it?
If all the teachers that can safely (within reason) come back to work do so then it makes it possible to protect those that are in a high risk category. Those who are very vulnerable will not be advised to come back to school. We are doing it on a case by case basis, although most of that has already been completed since partial reopening.

If teachers who are not vulnerable choose not to come to work it will be very difficult to open at all.

But I agree with most of this thread that some teachers do not feel safe and more should be done to make them safer.

You've spectacularly missed the point about martyrdom. This doesn't just apply around coronavirus safety. It's an attitude that permeates everything and leads to a culture that becomes unsustainable. It's not about whether staff "care" enough. It's about what is manageable, practical and ethical.

If you are in a governance position at the school I'd be wary of the lines being fed to you by the leadership team if they are using language like you are. If you're on the leadership team I'm glad I don't work with you.

I would wear a visor whether the head liked it or not.

I think PPE should absolutely be available to all teachers who would like to use it.

Really? I've never heard of a school allowing the extremely vulnerable to remain at home come September. Shielding ends shortly. All staff expected back with no protections is govt guidelines.

I mean who would ask about Covid safety in an interview? And, if they did, I suspect you would maybe have seen that as a black mark against them? I worry that, in the present climate, a head and governors might try not to appoint someone clinically vulnerable to a post. We have already heard that encoded for years in teacher recruitment via schools that boast about their 'young and energetic' staff.

A caring school cares first for the wellbeing and safety of all of its staff. A happy staff works harder, is more productive , and has more energy and does better in the end by its children. No doubt Michael Wilshaw would not agree! In the guidelines, school office staff have far more protection that anyone else, as it is specified that they could do admin work from home if vulnerable. This at the same time as implying that the parents of vulnerable children may be fined.

I think we also need to think about vulnerable staff more thoughtfully, and also - crucially - medically vulnerable students, their families, and children and staff with medically vulnerable people in their families. They are very anxious about this return and a frequent trope on MN is a minimising of this concern, to be honest.

Maybe a feeling of safety also depends on whereabouts in the country you are, the size of your school and its grounds, and , also, the trust a teacher has in their SLT and who that SLT think they serve in the interests of : community , staff, children - or their careers? I certainly know plenty of the latter.

I'm clinically vulnerable due to moderately severeasthma and an autoimmune condition. Myself and another extremely vulnerable staff member are in in September or we go off unpaid. I've been in since June because my head decreed that the 12 weeks were up, despite my gp letter outlining concerns. Because that's what the dfe guidelines allow heads to do. That was their purpose.

@NC4PR1VACY

It does throw your more vulnerable colleagues under the bus though, doesn’t it? If all the teachers that can safely (within reason) come back to work do so then it makes it possible to protect those that are in a high risk category. Those who are very vulnerable will not be advised to come back to school. We are doing it on a case by case basis, although most of that has already been completed since partial reopening.

If teachers who are not vulnerable choose not to come to work it will be very difficult to open at all.

But I agree with most of this thread that some teachers do not feel safe and more should be done to make them safer.

Those who are very vulnerable will be back in September-shielding will be over and they have no choice.

If teachers who are not vulnerable choose not to come to work, they will no doubt be sacked. Like any other person in any other job who chooses not to go to work.

I’m not sure they could be sacked if they said they felt their health and safety was compromised.

The majority of teachers will return. The ones who don't feel safe can resign if they want to. Although I can't imagine it will be easy to find a new job. And a safer job atm Im sure won't exist. The unions have missed out on a huge opportunity and are now stuck as there will be no appetite for industrial action.

are now stuck as there will be no appetite for industrial action

Really? Why not?