Parents are the blockage at schools re-opening, not teaching unions

[noblegiraffe]

The government has spent months demonising teaching unions and blaming them for blocking schools re-opening, including in June when it was actually the government’s own guidelines that prevented the further re-opening of primary schools.

This has left them in a bit of a pickle because schools are re-opening in September, the unions aren’t blocking it, there are no plans for teacher strikes, but the latest survey data from the ONS says that only 90% of parents are fairly or very likely to send their kids back. If the data is similar to back in June, better off parents are more likely to send their kids back, and more disadvantaged families are less likely.

So the government are now running a campaign aimed at parents, putting out articles across all newspapers. The Chief Medical Officers have dutifully said that schools are safe. And the responses are ‘see, schools need to reopen, our kids are being thrown under the bus’. The message is being read the wrong way. It’s being read as being targeted at teachers and unions who it is supposed are stopping schools opening, and not at parents who don’t want to send their kids back.

And this is the government’s fault. Because they have spent months creating a fake war, they have dropped the ball on a real issue - creating safer schools that parents are happy to send their kids back to.

To the pp asking about shielding. You have to have certain types of cancer, certain hardcore immunosuppressant therapy, a live organ transplant, very severe respiratory disease or be pregnant with a significant heart disease in order to shield at my school.

Would be strange if 2 of the same subject teachers fell into those categories.

Turns out 2 of the 3 teachers who teach Business Studies are shielding/vulnerable so won't be returning to school.

All of the shielding staff at my school will be returning to school next week. As far as I know, shielding has ended.

Have they just left? They could have resigned in May.

@Thunderpunt as it stands under my local authority, teachers have the choice of working in class or resigning, there is no remote teaching available.

A teacher working in a sixth form colllege may be employed under different terms and conditions to the Burgundy Book (standard teachers pay and condition booklet) - in which case their working conditions will be subject to their own contracts.

However, because shielding has paused, teachers - and workers - can only now wfh at employers discretion, and that's a no for teachers employed under the standard ts and cs.

To give a sense of who it affects we have 3 shielders returning in a 2 form entry primary and that seems fairly standard for schools I know here. Many of our governors are continuing to work from home though as they are also ex shielders.

Shielding is not currently in force so working age Shielders have no protection from being forced back to work. This is as true of teachers as anyone else, since a "covid secure workplace" seems to be another bit of meaningless nonsense.

@TheHoneyBadger

To the pp asking about shielding. You have to have certain types of cancer, certain hardcore immunosuppressant therapy, a live organ transplant, very severe respiratory disease or be pregnant with a significant heart disease in order to shield at my school.

Would be strange if 2 of the same subject teachers fell into those categories.

The local NHS trust is similar my friend jokes that you need to be over 65, pregnant and a man simultaneously to get the requisite 9 points.

@Appuskidu

Turns out 2 of the 3 teachers who teach Business Studies are shielding/vulnerable so won't be returning to school.

All of the shielding staff at my school will be returning to school next week. As far as I know, shielding has ended.

Have they just left? They could have resigned in May.

Yes that's what I thought, hence wondering if they've been spun a line... and just didn't want certain people back in the school i.e. the less academic (the 30 students remaining are those with the higher grades, the others offloaded to local FE colleges) Who knows...

Or they don’t want to admit they’ve had teachers quit and are unable to replace them.

Chavvy indeed. Being an obese, name, heavily pregnant with moderate copd would score you nil points.

My fat and asthmatic status doesn’t get a bat of an eyelid let alone some extra hand gel

That should say bame not name. Autocorrect is really determined not to accept bame

@TheHoneyBadger

Or they don’t want to admit they’ve had teachers quit and are unable to replace them.

Chavvy indeed. Being an obese, name, heavily pregnant with moderate copd would score you nil points.

My fat and asthmatic status doesn’t get a bat of an eyelid let alone some extra hand gel

Hand gel?! You should be so lucky on the budget the government have provided schools to make them "covid safe" It's a big fat £0 isn't it?

@TheHoneyBadger

Or they don’t want to admit they’ve had teachers quit and are unable to replace them.

Chavvy indeed. Being an obese, name, heavily pregnant with moderate copd would score you nil points.

My fat and asthmatic status doesn’t get a bat of an eyelid let alone some extra hand gel

Quite possibly- either way gutted for those that wanted to stay on and now can't

@TheHoneyBadger

So it’s not the pandemic that has killed tens of thousands of people that makes people concerned about safety? It’s the messaging?

Positive thinking isn’t a particularly effective infection control as far as I’m aware. It is a handy psychological defense against cognitive dissonance though. Such as trying to balance out strongly held beliefs with facts that contradict them eg I love my child and would fight to the death to protect them and my kid is going to be shoved in with 1500 kids with no protection in a pandemic. The former needs to be defended no matter what so you either choose not to send them or you chant soothing mantras like schools are safe, children can’t catch it etc.

Or you face the discomfort and realistically accept you are choosing to take that risk because you’ve decided it’s worth it etc.

I feel the people needing to trivialise the risks and shout at anyone who disagrees with them and repeat false facts are probably really really averse to dealing with cognitive dissonance and very angry when others say anything that challenges their denial.

I’m sending my son back and I’m going back. I know it won’t be safe and we won’t be able to spend time with my parents anymore. I doubt I or ds would die from covid but my parents I’m not so sure about.

Another good post.

Mh ds starts college. I've seen their set up, I know the plans and I know what plan B is.

I also know there's things in his EHCP that cannot be met fully. Not because college won't but because the social clubs etc cannot run safely. So I know safety is an issue and will compromise.

My ds also cannot wear a mask. He tried but his anxiety got the better of him after a few times (he's autistic). I still support they should be worn and would encourage him to try in corridors etc for short periods.

I don't believe it's completely safe to return but I know the things in place at college mean there is SD, there is bubbles, they cannot mix as canteen is click and collect etc.

He can also walk/get a lift from me as it's down the road!

I know I would feel differently if he was returning to his secondary school and travelling by taxi each day.

@TheHoneyBadger

Really what a vile personal and professional attack that was. Also completely false.

Though I’ve yet to meet a state secondary school teacher who hasn’t been sworn at before I don’t know where the hurling expletives or having poor behaviour management comes from.

Who was that character with the poisonous headline writing quill in HP?

I'll be honest that swearing pupil was my ds.

Autistic and had to change schools after bullying and having a knife pulled on him in a classroom.

He's panic and scream he wasn't fucking safe (this was in new school where he was) throw things and run off.

Thanks to the understanding and professionalism of the staff he was supported to manage his emotions and by end of year 8 he could manage to stay full lessons 2-3 times a day.

He's just left with amazing gcse results (matched mocks so were real!)

The thing is ime (most!) teachers get on with it however hard. Not one teacher made da feel unwelcome but I wouldn't blame them if behind the scenes they were asking for more support in some cases. He had a keyworker who was fab and 1:1 in some classes but I'm sure some teachers did need more.

@itsgettingweird I am so pleased for your son. My DS is in the waiting list for an ASD referral (he’s 6). I recognise his behaviour is challenging and I’m sure he’s driven his teacher to tears behind closed doors but I am so thankful to his school for helping to manage his behaviour. I would never ‘blame’ them for behaviour out of his or their control.

I hope your son continues to be successful.

The whole problem could be solved if there were the proper resources for cash-strapped schools on tight budgets to make the changes that would make the schools safer:

• locum teachers if a member of staff has to self-isolate or go off sick.
• extra teachers so children can be taught in smaller classes.
• rental for other buildings to create space for smaller classes
• funds for extra cleaning and the necessary materials and alterations (e.g. screens)

Schools have no slack in their budgets for all these things - they are all running on a shoe-string as it is.

I have written to my MP requesting his support in pressing for funds to be made available to make a return to school safe. It would be good if others could do likewise.

@Thunderpunt I would not let your friend's daughter do maths either - even a confident level 6 can struggle.

There are not lots of competent teachers out there to fill the gaps of teachers whom schools 'get rid of'. Secondaries need teachers who understand exam specs and can teach students to access the marks. Therefore the school is probably hoping they will come back sooner rather than later.

[quote StaffAssociationRepresentative]@Thunderpunt I would not let your friend's daughter do maths either - even a confident level 6 can struggle.

There are not lots of competent teachers out there to fill the gaps of teachers whom schools 'get rid of'. Secondaries need teachers who understand exam specs and can teach students to access the marks. Therefore the school is probably hoping they will come back sooner rather than later.[/quote]
No it wasn't to do maths A level. To stay on and do any A levels at this school you have to have at least a 6 in English and maths. As she got a 5 in maths - she wouldn't be able to do A levels at all, could only do Btec courses.

@TheHoneyBadger

So it’s not the pandemic that has killed tens of thousands of people that makes people concerned about safety? It’s the messaging?

Positive thinking isn’t a particularly effective infection control as far as I’m aware. It is a handy psychological defense against cognitive dissonance though. Such as trying to balance out strongly held beliefs with facts that contradict them eg I love my child and would fight to the death to protect them and my kid is going to be shoved in with 1500 kids with no protection in a pandemic. The former needs to be defended no matter what so you either choose not to send them or you chant soothing mantras like schools are safe, children can’t catch it etc.

Or you face the discomfort and realistically accept you are choosing to take that risk because you’ve decided it’s worth it etc.

I feel the people needing to trivialise the risks and shout at anyone who disagrees with them and repeat false facts are probably really really averse to dealing with cognitive dissonance and very angry when others say anything that challenges their denial.

I’m sending my son back and I’m going back. I know it won’t be safe and we won’t be able to spend time with my parents anymore. I doubt I or ds would die from covid but my parents I’m not so sure about.

I know that this has been quoted, but I think it is worth quoting again. This is an insightful post. As a scientist I find that it isn’t people panicking that is the problem, it is the ‘it is less dangerous than flu’ or whatever that is the problem.

There are risks. But we do have to live our lives if we can within those risks. But ignoring that there are risks just promotes bad decision making.

I’m already having to talk with my son’s school - who seem to have got the ‘message’ that kids cannot transmit the virus in primary. That translates into no attempt at social distancing at all for children, only teachers. This ‘fact’ is not a fact, but has been a ‘message’ to ‘reassure’ but it is doing more harm than good - it just isn’t something that we know yet, transmission between primary aged children is an unknown. So let us face that fact, and not assume things to be safe unless we know. And do as much as we can socially distance all children until we do.

@Thunderpunt I've just check our school risk assessment and a whopping 84 percent are either in the extremely clinically vulnerable category or someone they live with is. That's a huge number.

I wonder what others schools number are?

[quote Oldbagface]@Thunderpunt I've just check our school risk assessment and a whopping 84 percent are either in the extremely clinically vulnerable category or someone they live with is. That's a huge number.

I wonder what others schools number are?[/quote]
Wow that is shocking! I'm not sure what clinically vulnerable includes but surely that's a higher rate than in the general population?

@Thunderpunt Yes. That was teaching staff but support staff are similar numbers. We do live in a diverse area so bame people may be pushing up those numbers. Even so it's huge.

And I don't think it will do my DC's MH any good if God forbid any of his teachers die of covid.

[quote Oldbagface]@Thunderpunt I've just check our school risk assessment and a whopping 84 percent are either in the extremely clinically vulnerable category or someone they live with is. That's a huge number.

I wonder what others schools number are?[/quote]
That is so high. I think in general population it’s around 3% (2.2m).

My eyes popped out when o read it. I'm going back to double check I didn't dream it.

Being an outer London school we have a fair percentage of BAME students and staff.

No idea what our vulnerable number is on staff but we have all been informed that there will be a cover requirement in the autumn term

I can’t find number of clinically vulnerable in population but it’s more than ECV, includes diabetes etc. It may be CV rather than ECV?

I don’t believe BAME are on the list but here’s the distinction

CV v ECV NHS