Can Head Teachers get supply teachers to cover classes if teachers strike?

[NoelEdmondshair]

Just wondering.

No

Funny way to spell 's c a b'?

Nope.

No

Why would a head teacher do that to her staff? - they're all in it together.

And the answer is no.

Why not?

No, they can't - even assuming that the supply teachers were members of non-striking unions. A headteacher's duty is to try to keep the school open regardless of the level of support for the staff, but headteachers are not allowed to take over responsibility for teaching a class that a striking teacher is not teaching, apparently, as that is 'crossing the picket line' - but fulfilling responsibilities as head is apparently not. [hmmm]

Employment Businesses i.e. supply agencies are prevented by law from supplying teachers to cover the work of regular employees taking industrial action. Other TUC affiliated unions ask their members not to cover and the head teacher would be in a very tricky position asking them to, as their union would back . Head teachers are going to be balloted on strike action soon anyway and it is very likely they will also vote yes.

Is it illegal for the HT to use supply teachers to cover striking teachers' classes?

xposted with Panda.

Thanks for all replies, apart from the infantile scab remark.

I've already decided to give DD the day off regardless.

Why not?

It's just not right is it - and even though not all teaching unions will be taking strike action - you don't undermine your striking colleagues by doing supply work - what would be the bleeding point in striking ?
I think it's illegal anyway.

xposts with the world

Carmina - I was curious (not being in a union myself). I hope this is sorted out over the summer because if teachers start striking in the autumn they will seriously piss off parents.

That's kind of the point though. To cause disruption.

I'm not in a teaching union either but I know people who are in NASUWT and they're not striking -

Hopefully it will be resolved soon. ( my son starts secondary school in September so fingers crossed! )

NASUWT haven't balloted their members yet whilst negotiations are ongoing. If there's no resolution they will and it is also expected to be a yes result.

Why are there so many teaching unions? Wouldn't they be more powerful if there was just a couple?

Yes they would be more powerful if there was one or two or if they worked together more often. Some unions have a reputation for being more militant than others although the ATL is striking on Thursday for the first time since they became the ATL.

Yes, its 'horses for courses' as different unions are there to offer choice to staff who have different opinions.

The NUT and ATL have worked very closely together on this campaign and will be marching to Westminster jointly on 30th June. There will also be several regional events attended by members from both unions.

I'm in the NASUWT so will not be striking as they haven't balloted, but they have sent us advice to say we should not cover the lessons of colleagues in other unions who are.

out of curiosity - what about using TA's to cover for the day?

The union is not advising TAs to cover classes as they have in the past campaigned for TAs not be teaching

OYBBK: TAs have been advised not to cover for striking teachers unless it us written in their contract that they must. Which for the majority it won't be. They do have to go to work (as they are not strikers) but must mot take any classes themselves unless they would have done anyhow (eg PPA time).

UNISON advice to TAs and other support staff.