private school staff fee reductions - place refused - discrimination?

[frenchlion]

OK; so I work in a fee paying school which offers staff discounts. The policy say "We off staff discounts depending on length of service, up to 2 years, 20%, between 2 and 5 years, 50 %, after 5 years, 70%"

A few (not many) staff have dc in the school (which goes from nursery all the way up to secondary).

In the primary school, there are about 30 members of staff - all but 3 are women of child-bearing age!

Anyway, a colleague applied for her twins to join the preschool. They were invited in for a trial day. Her dh had to take the day off work to bring them in. She was told that they did well, and that they were a good fit, but actually too many staff have places in the nursery/preschool, so on those grounds, her dc were refused places.

She is really angry, as the above doesn't suggest any limitations, why invite them in in the 1st place (they know how many staff kids attend!), she feels it is also discriminatory as they were turned down, not on ability, but purely on the grounds that she is staff. There is another member of staff for example with dc in the nursery, who only works for 8 hours a week, yet she works full time, and with 10 years service, is one of the longest serving members of staff there!

She wants to seek legal advice. I'm curious - what do you think?

Oh, and the boss cleared off on holiday and left the secretary to tell her - by the time boss gets back, the contracts will be being sent out, so too late.....

And yes, I imagine management are considering that the children would be there through secondary tops.

"After much consideration and given the exceptional circumstances we can now offer your DS a place"

Yeah right.., helped along by our threat to take action.

DS did end up joining as DD was already there but we've since pulled them both out!

Re Pt pro rata fees for staff.

School I know of offers 20% -50% discount (depending on start date) subject to it being no more than 50% of the actual salary earned by the staff member.

Well, I work PT, in fact, I'm the only PT member of staff in the whole of primary - and I get the same reduction. No pro rata reduction. But anyway, the colleague in question is FT.

Considering the vast, vast majority of the staff are young women, the place is astonishingly non-child friendly. Ante-natal and maternity considerations are beyond amazing. Once you have a baby and return to work it's pretty much FT or nothing. Like I said, I am the only PT staff member.

No different to airlines - staff get discounted travel but only if there are empty seats and can be bounced up to the doors closing.

You can get round the "discrimination" by paying the full fees.

"Like I said, I am the only PT staff member."

The school turns down flexible working requests?

The school turns down flexible working requests?

They can if there is good business reason to do so.

I know of teaching colleagues in the past that have been refused.

If op isn't working in England or even UK flexible working requests etc may not apply.

On a practical level it is expensive to have 2 kids in a class with as much as 50% discount so the reasoning is financial.
Kids can be refused to enter a private school for pretty much any old reason and I doubt you could argue it.
Your colleague will create bad blood if she forces the issue as most perks are discretionary in any job.

well, they will not be winning any 'family friendly' awards any time soon. Let's just leave it at that

Hi Piglet

I know that. I was curious as to whether such requests had actually been put in.

I know. I feel bad for her, but I do also understand the school's pov inasmuch as if every member of staff put their dc into the nursery or preschool, there wouldn't be that many places left for full fee payers!

If the school doesn't earn money, it ceases to be viable, and all our jobs come under threat. At the end of the day it's a business.

OTOH, they state "we offer staff a discount of..." with absolutely no mention of limitations or restrictions of any kind, and until now, there doesn't seem to have been, hence this being a total shocker. (like I said, in the actual primary school I think there are only 2 staff dc, and maybe 4 in secondary). No one has ever heard of a staff request being turned down - and the one whose is turned down is practically part of the furniture! (no one knew about the maternity teacher's request being turned down a couple of weeks ago)

So, they need to deal with this situation, then get their shit together and make a very clear policy. I can see both sides, and I feel my colleagues shock and pain. I also get the business decision, although until now, it has been handled really craply.

I just wondered if people had and thoughts, or even knowledge on the subject. Her taking any sort of legal action actually has potential consequences on many people.

It's because she has worked there more than 5 years and will get 70% reduction, I take it the 8 hour worker hasn't been there that long so won't get a big a discount?
maybe they can only afford to give the lower end assistance.

I do think your school should have said "the twins can come but only a 10% discount is viable owing to oversubscription" or whatever.

There's all sorts of things they could have and should have said.....

Unfortunately they said, Yes, come in for a trial! Your kids did great! - but we won't take them!

I think the 8 hours pw worker has been here a while but I'm not sure how long. Probably in the 50% rather than 70% bracket.

As far as I'm aware, staff fee discounts are never stated in employment contracts because to do so would make it a taxable perk.

I can't see her claiming constructive dismissal on a job perk - what is she going to say, that she only worked there to get her children in at a discount? I will say that the school should have thought through the implications of two children both with 70% discount before inviting them in, though. But I can see that it might make the class unsustainable from a finance point of view (how many children are in the nursery class?).

Are you the 8 hours a week worker if there is only one part-timer

It isn't unlawful discrimination, since for that she would need to be a member of a protected class and be subjected to detrimental treatment because of that characteristic.

It may be breach of contract. Even if the term isn't written into her contract, it may have contractual force. This is why, for example, employers' bonus policies will usually stress that they are discretionary and can be withdrawn at any time.

Given that private schools often offer discounts to staff in order to attract the people they want to hire, and that it sounds as though the policy has always been applied I think there could be scope to argue that the policy formed part of her contract. (It is a while since I practiced employment law, but that's what I would look to do in this case).

Her options are to accept the breach, to continue to work but make clear that she does not accept the breach (and reserve the right to bring a later claim, although there would be time limits as to when the claim could be brought), continue to work but sue for breach of contract, or quit her job on the basis that the school's decision has made her position untenable (constructive dismissal). Personally I'd think the constructive dismissal argument would be hard to run - it is much easier with demotions etc.

She should bear in mind that working at a school she is suing (or threatening to sue) could be rather unpleasant.

Ha ha. No. The 8 hour pt employee is in secondary and already been here a while though dunno how long. I already said I'm in primary and work 4 full days. I'm the only pt primary. I think there are a few in secondary. They wouldn't accept it in primary.

It is a taxable perk. So not such an amazing deal as it 1st seems. The 1st month my DC started i brought home next to nothing. Literally significantly less than £100 because so much had gone on tax! she would be paying only 30 % for 1 dt and even less for the 2nd due to sibling discount....She clearly didn't take the job for the discount as her dc are 4 ish and she had been here nearly 10 years and they could have started nursery 2 years ago.

Although it's taxable, it costs the school the same in "lost" fees

It's morally awful that they don't make it clear children who pass the entrance test may not get a staff place. They should make it clear in advance and so people can put children down for other schools too. Our son went to his father's prep school and we only paid 15% of the fees (15% is the level the Pepper v Hart case decided was the marginal additional cost of a place for tax purposes). Our daughter had a friend at her (different school) with a much lower staff discount and the girl did pass to get in (probably a bit of pro teacher's child bias) but only lasted a year - not quite the right school for her they all decided. She wasn't coping well with the work.

Loads of people who apply for private prep schools don't get in. One of my daughters didn't get a place at her sister's school and that was in part because triplet girls got in that year so even fewer places than usual - competitive academic entry by test aged 4.

However this case just looks utterly badly managed -misleading teachers about discounts, wasting time for attending the interview (they should at least pay the husband's loss of a day's pay, travel expenses and any additional fees to be paid to alternative private schools now being considered if any), a right old mess up which is going to cause such bad feeling; also perhaps misrepresentation - people do take jobs on the basis of possible almost free school places. We know a couple with 3 children - the husban'd job got the 3 virtually free schooling the prep school and his wife worked at a leading boarding school (which also housed the family free of charge too) and the children went on there afetr - 3 children from age 3 - 18 plus free housing for 20 years - these are massive perks and reasons why people pick teaching jobs in some schools so to misrepresent the package when that teacher might have picked a different school down the road which would have offered big discounts to children but turned down that rival job because of this package offered to them sounds pretty dreadful to me.

Many private schools have a policy of no discounts at pre-prep level because of the disproportionate effect that it has on fee income (because they tend to be the smallest section of the school). That said if they haven't made this policy clear it sounds like the school have been morally unreasonable- you'd need an employment lawyer to know if they have been unlawful though.

In my experience of watching colleagues take legal action against a school (sadly more than one case, in more than one school I've had the misfortune to watch) it doesn't end well- for either party. It's just awful all round and I don't think it's a route I would ever recommend.

That's a great discount, ET.

Do you take it into account when you post about remuneration ratios?

Thanks everyone. Yes, I have a feeling the next few weeks/months will be fairly rocky - not just this but in addition several other things coming to a head.....
oooh.

Not a lawyer but don't think it's employment law that applies here, but contract law. I don't see though, OP, why your colleague taking legal action would affect "lots of other people": should she do so and win then the school would need to make their offer/policies on this clearer, but can't see why it would affect staff with DC already in the school, unless the decision was taken to reduce or end those fee discounts, and there again contract law would applyx