part time teachers HELP with parents evenings on days OFF

[GordianKnot]

ok so i do three days
parents eve always on day off
dont mind dointg EXAM classes at all, but in KS3 is complusory subject so its tough titty really.
so i said " are you goign to pay me or not expect me in"

teh solution they propose is that my LOVELY HoD reads out what i write down

dont know what do do

They don't 'hire back', they agree to employ on a part time basis.

actually, forget it, tethersend, i've just re-read your post of 11:46. It's so ridiculous i'm giving up. uh, yes, i think teachers should work for free.

"Do you fancy answering any of my questions, poutine?"

i assumed they were rhetorical, tethersend. surely, they weren't serious?

Oh, ok.

If you don't want to debate, just say so. I think your views on this issue are ridiculous, so chose not to debate them- but you said you wanted to?

Make your mind up.

You stated that the interests of the children were paramount.

Were that the case then teachers could reasonably be expected to work for free.

I agree it's ridiculous, but it was bourne of your argument.

"surely, they weren't serious?"

Nice use of my own question to you, BTW

Doing that awful thing of have not read any but the first few posts, so you might be talking about nuns now for all I know.

As a parent, I wouldn't expect to see a part time teacher on her day off. But I have this theory that I shouldn't learn much new at parents' evenings - if there's a real problem, someone should have told me earlier. And if I feel the need to speak to a teacher, I book an appointment when said need is felt, I don't wait until a 5 min slot on a manic night.

Think it depends what age, too. Primary school parents are nuttier about that sort of thing ime (again speaking as a parent of both primary and secondary school children).

I work 4 days a week as a teacher (primary) and my DH does 4 days a week as an RE teacher in a secondary school.

We both attend well in excess of the required 0.8 of the staff meetings/training/parents' evenings but sometimes it simply isn't possible for us to be present at parents' evenings on our respective days off because when we're not at school we're each caring for our pre-school aged children.

Although I only have a few parents' evenings per academic year DH has lots because he teaches a subject that is compulsory for Y7-Y11 and he teaches A-level, IB and GCSE in a different subject. In the past year half of my parents' evenings have clashed with his which is problematic enough when they are on days that we both work. I give parents the option of meeting with me after 6pm (until which point I have childcare) on the timetabled day but with the possibility that I will have my small children with me or choosing another post 6pm day when DH doesn't have a parents' evening so can have the children.

Whether or not I could attend parents' evening if it fell on my day off would very much depend upon available childcare but I would expect to be paid. As someone who teaches 0.8 and has done for the past 4 or so years I've always done 100% of the parent meetings - I'm not going to refuse to meet 20% of the parents because I'm only contractually obliged to do 80% of a full-timer's work! However, it may mean that the parents of the pupils I teach have to meet me on a day other than that timetabled for appointments. I've met parents at 0700 and 1900 on alternative days as I consider meeting with them to be part of my job on my working days, I don't however believe that it's unreasonable to expect to be paid for a day I don't work.

Part time workers in many types of employment are always at a disadvantage. I don't get to read 80% of my emails, do 80% of my admin tasks, fill out 80% of a form or go to 80% of meetings. This leaves me with proportionately less time than a full timer to do the supposedly core part of my job. yet I am fairly sure that when my peer review comes along next week it will be conveniently forgotten that I work part time at all and my performance will be measured against full timers.

I think this is less about whether the parents evening is on your day of and more about the proportion of this work that part timers should do. Why should someone who works part time on the days when parents evening always falls have to do more parents evening than another part timer who doesn't work that day?

Agree with everything tethersend has said, and if missing out on parents evening is going to be so detrimental to a student there is really a bigger issue here.

When I worked in industry, had I insisted that I only work my 37.5 hours per week and walk out on the dot of five, I would not have been a well-regarded employee. I would have been given the most rubbish of assignments until I quit. Same if I did not travel, which inevitably meant staying away overnight.

There is such a thing as cutting off your nose to spite your face.

I just don't 'get' being stroppy about perfectly reasonable duties. I will be working two weekends in a row shortly, helping out with our music/drama production. I am a science teacher, so it is nothing to do with me, except that I am a team player and I like to support my colleagues and students. What do I expect them to do - hire temps? We can't do that, and if a critical number of staff don't help out, the show won't go on.

lol" in industry"
teachers always say this
i imagine a blast furnace and googles

Who's being 'stroppy'?

What an oddly belittling term to use.

So everybody that claims overtime 'in industry' is unprofessional?

Why martyr yourself to prove a point that is already legislated for?

Nobody is saying you shouldn't volunteer your time freely; it's very commendable. To be required to do so is a completely different thing.

Some people think it 'perfectly reasonable' to employ teachers on temporary contracts, expand class sizes upwards of 40 and not grant ant paid maternity leave. Would objecting to those things be 'cutting off your nose to spite your face'? Or is it better to accept any working conditions for fear of losing your job?

'Part time workers in many types of employment are always at a disadvantage. I don't get to read 80% of my emails, do 80% of my admin tasks, fill out 80% of a form or go to 80% of meetings. This leaves me with proportionately less time than a full timer to do the supposedly core part of my job.'

I think this sums up the problem with part time working in some jobs. The whole point is that you can't get by on doing 80% of the job. As a general rule, the higher status the job, the less likely it is that you can carve the job up neatly into proportions. If you are doing a checkout shift at tesco, yes - it doesn't matter who is sitting behind the till, or whether it's the same person there at 3 pm as it was at 9 am. But when you are dealing with people, or managing people, or involved in big decisions, then it all becomes more problematic. Fact.

As a teacher, I think part time work is possible, but it depends on certain conditions- eg: job sharing if it's basically a full time job, with the proviso that both job sharers do liaison, planning etc in their own time so that the school isn't financially disadvantaged. As a parent, I would not be happy to be told at a parents evening that my child's teacher wasn't available because it's their 'time off'. I really wouldn't. parents' evenings are outside the normal working day for all teachers. I know some people are saying that two refreshed, energetic teachers are better than one tired worn out one - and I agree with that, but that's not really an issue about part timers per se. Many full time teachers are full of energy and do a great job.And equally, someone could be part time and not that great - it's about the quality of the person. I still think that if part time working is seen to throw up all sorts of obstacles, the consequence will be that part time jobs will become more rare, because employers don't want the disadvantages (quite understandably) and people will end up shooting themselves in the foot.

At the end of the day, as a Deputy Head, if I have two candidates in front of me, Mrs A who wants to work full time, and will commit to all the extras which it entails, including evenings, and Mrs B, who wants to work 3 days, which will entail the school finding someone else to work the remaining two days, and then dealing with all the hassle of Mrs B saying she won't do parents evenings on her days 'off'... what would you expect me to do? All things being equal, if they are both going to do the job well, but Mrs A will do it without the hassle, then I know who I'm going to go for. And I say that as a mother too.

*ant = any

days 'off'

WTF?

Why the inverted commas?

And why on earth would you be interviewing a part time candidate for a full time post?

The inverted commas are because parents evenings are time 'off' for full timers as much as part timers. Actually I don't really see it as 'time off' anyway, because it's part and parcel of being a professional.

As to the second question - you'd be amazed at how many people apply for full time posts when actually they want part time. Also, many part timers start as full time, and subsequently request part time work - that's actually how most of the part timers where I work started.

This is a subject dear to my heart as I've got two Parents' Evenings in the next fortnight, both on days off. This does inconvenience me and I don't get paid but I do work in a school which is generally supportive and flexible so there's plenty of ' give and take'.

I'm less enthusiastic at being expected to attend INSET days on days off and not be paid for them.I attend all these ( often 2 consecutive days before the start of term) plus all Open Evenings and Saturday Open Mornings. My full time colleagues do the same but get paid a full time salary.

I do my work - and more- and I think I'm a bargain!!

part time workers are often a bargain

No, violethill, they're not. I'm not making this up, it's in the burgundy book. If a parents' evening falls on a day you normally work, it's directed time; if it doesn't then it's not. If you are full time, every parents' evening is therefore directed time.

"Actually I don't really see it as 'time off' anyway, because it's part and parcel of being a professional."

It matters not how you see it- the legislation sees it differently.

"you'd be amazed at how many people apply for full time posts when actually they want part time"

If they declare it when applying, why interview? If they declare it at interview, that is what makes them unprofessional, not the desire to work part time. If it's a full time post, the school is under no obligation to appoint a part time candidate.

"many part timers start as full time, and subsequently request part time work - that's actually how most of the part timers where I work started."

The school is free to refuse a request for part time hours if it feels the job can not be done part time. This is the time for the school to decide whether it wants part time staff, not once they have agreed to it. Reneging on it is unprofessional.

campion, sounds like you're all getting shafted!

Even full time teachers cannot be compelled to work on a Saturday.

You are entitled to be paid for the parents' evenings on your days off.

tethersend,

I am so glad I work in the independent sector.

I don't get PPA and have to do cover, but, boy, do we all root for the home team. We know that the occasional Saturday, whether for Open Day, Speech Day, or a gala performance, is part and parcel of being part of our wonderful school community.

Those teachers with small children are well accomodated because they are team players elsewhere - there is give and take. The colleagues that are difficult to support are those who are not team players, sadly. They can be like this because a critical mass of colleagues are happy to be involved in the full life of the school.

If we didn't work on the occasional Saturday, then enrichment activities would just not happen, and we would all be worse off for it.

Willingness eagerness to do extras was something I had on my covering letter, and something I promised in my interview. I dug my own grave, but am not regretting it.

I can't even be bothered to claim travel expenses when I have to go on a course, or take pupils out for an activity.

But it's my entitlement, lol.

tethersend - I am a Deputy Head, I am well aware of legislation!

The point I am making is that generally speaking, the higher status the job, the more difficult it is to parcel it up into neat 'components'. If you are a teacher, part and parcel of the profession is accessing training, and reporting back to parents about their child's progress.If these things fall in 'time off', then it creates a problem for the employer, the pupils and the employee. What about essential training, such as safeguarding, or child protection issues? Those things are necessary whether you are in school 100% of the time, or 80% of the time.

I am not arguing about legislation - I am simply saying that if part timers make themselves undesirable, then part time jobs will become much more scarce. At the end of the day, it seems that it's usually the employee rather than the employer who benefits from part time - most part timers I know don't want to work full time, or don't feel they could cope with it, rather than wanting full time, so it's in their interests to remain marketable!

violethill, I know you're a deputy head; you've mentioned it once or twice

"the higher status the job, the more difficult it is to parcel it up into neat 'components'"

You will know then that the legislation I am quoting does not apply to those on the Leadership or AST scale.

I don't agree that part timers 'make themselves undesirable' by virtue of working the days they are paid for; frankly, I find your attitude a little worrying, especially as a deputy head. Once upon a time women of childbearing age were 'undesirable'- still are in some sectors. Would you also put the responsibility onto them not to have children or would you campaign for change?

I reassert: If it is not possible to do a job part-time (without relying on a huge amount of goodwill on the part of the teacher), then do not appoint a part time teacher to the post.

"What about essential training, such as safeguarding, or child protection issues? Those things are necessary whether you are in school 100% of the time, or 80% of the time"

Would you be happy for full timers to be docked a days' pay and come in for an INSET day? It's part and parcel of the job after all, so why pay anyone?

My school has 'twighlight' training in order to add extra days onto the holiday- it is always on one of the days which I work. I always go. Yet I am not entitled to be paid on the day off which would have been an INSET day.

My head adds an extra days' pay onto part timers' wages when such a day occurs. This was completely unsolicited. Is he unprofessional too?