Do schools close in a strike or do they get supply teachers in?

[pinkyponkyplink]

As the title.
Do they get supply teachers in?

www.tes.com/magazine/analysis/general/teacher-strikes-pay-schools-qa-everything-you-need-know

Unless you are a cover supervisor, you can't be compelled to cover. You should refuse.

Or join the NEU for one month only? You can keep your NASUWT membership too?

The DfE are striking on the 1st February! They’ve got a cheek giving guidance to enable headteachers to break our strike. Usual one rule for them and another for us.

We've been told that the govt have changed rules and school can get supply in!!! Told that today

Good luck finding any!

Whilst much of this is true-ish in theory, the practice is often different.

Heads could argue that creating shared planning is reasonable and comes under contracted duties.

TAs can be expected to provide short-term cover or act in the role of cover supervisor for the day: if the head asks directly, many would struggle to say no.

The bank of cover isn't the same as before: they aren't after retired teachers etc. Anyone will do: governors, parents, family members of staff. Anyone who can available and wants to get a paid day of work could take a place on this list, quality isn't important.

The government want to be able to say that less than X schools closed. They will permit practically anything to make that happen, except offer a fair pay and funding model for schools. It isn't right but staff need to be prepared so that, if they are willing to, they can refuse the "request" when it comes.

I have asked about this previously as I am not classroom based. I asked if I allocate a day’s work to strike day and refuse to complete it would the union support me. I was told that I should complete the work when not on strike. Surely this defeats the object. It’s one of the reasons I don’t want to strike.

The Head has asked if we intend to join the strike, and which union we belong to.
I'm inclined to say which union I belong to (NEU) and not give any other info. But is that in itself going too far?

fantastic. Thank you

Say nothing.

No, this is not the case. It’s got nothing to do with vulnerable children, despite what the education secretary is spouting. A one day strike is very different to a long period of school closure where there was a risk to vulnerable children. Given that heads may not know who is striking, they will have to make decisions on the day which will likely be the closure of some classes. No head should be expecting staff to cover striking teachers.

Genuinely, how many heads will do this? I know a few heads who support the strikes, who voted to strike in the NAHT ballot, and are disappointed it didn't meet threshold. There are also heads who are NEU members- I can't believe they will be doing any of this. I've also seen a lot of heads on twitter already saying they expect to close or partially close.

The DfE can want what they like, but I am genuinely not convinced heads will facilitate it. I have also seen a lot of supply staff on twitter saying they will not work on strike days.

Schools might be able to get any warm body (with a DBS through the school) in, in theory, but in practice there's also significant risk in doing so, and I think the risks also need to be explained to e.g. parent volunteers.

Say a parent volunteer was left in charge of two classes in the hall and a child hurt themselves severely (children do stupid things, we know it could happen)- who is responsible in that case? The parent? The supervising member of staff? The head who deemed them competent? What if an accusation was made against an untrained parent volunteer?

I agree we need to build solidarity and empower other staff, but I don't think being doom and gloom and undermining the strikes before they happen is helpful.

Are you employed as a teacher?

Yes

I agree we need to build solidarity and empower other staff, but I don't think being doom and gloom and undermining the strikes before they happen is helpful.

Informing others as to specifically what information heads have been given by the DfE is not being doom and gloom. You cannot prepare if you don't know and understand what's happening. For example, knowing the positions that heads are going to be put in may enable teaching staff to more effectively persuade their head to support the strike. Alternatively, it could help them strengthen the resolve of support staff so that they feel empowered enough to refuse to cover.

Do not overestimate headteachers support for the strike. Their union failed to meet the threshold which could potentially mean that over half of headteachers didn't care enough to vote or deliberately didn't in order to force a negative result. That was before all the additional pressure that the DfE have immediately piled on. Another poster on a strike thread referenced their head always following guidance to the letter because of a high percentage of parents working in the legal field. Other heads with schools in areas with a high rate of "professionals" may find themselves in similar positions.

I hope for the best here but failing to prepare for less than that is short-sighted and, potentially, will cause strikes to be ineffective.

I agree with you @Postapocalypticcowgirl
Looks more like a PR exercise by the DFE to appease the Daily Mail and any angry parents.
None of the heads I've ever worked for would have implemented any of that. They have always supported the right of their staff to strike. I'm sure most will do so this time around.

Also it appears to be merely 'guidance' so I'm not sure how binding it is unless it is statutory guidance.

I genuinely don't think being overly pessimistic is helpful. Don't make people feel like there is no point in taking action.

I don't think it can be statutory? Because in reality a lot of it is impossible for heads to implement.

I think they are also trying to rattle teachers and make us feel like a strike won't work. We don't need to do their job for them.

That's not at all what I'm saying. As teachers, we need to be ready to combat the narrative that the government and DfE will move to create. They are setting this up so that they can say "X% of schools didn't close". But that will only happen because:

• they only needed volunteer warm bodies in the room with large numbers of children,
• they suspended the curriculum so no lessons are needed, and
• they immediately put pressure on heads to remind them of their legal duty to do everything they possibly can to keep the school open.

Without knowing this, teachers cannot be ready to combat it with a narrative more based in reality. They also won't be prepared personally for the times where striking doesn't close their school (more likely at primary) and may be disheartened by this and have their resolve lowered, risking the effectiveness of strike action. Whereas if they understand why and how the schools have remained open, that's less likely and support for strike action will remain high.

Then imo you don't do any work on that day. Obviously some work would need to be caught up e.g. if a teacher has mocks to mark they can't ignore them forever.

But if you e.g. run interventions or similar then I would suggest you don't do additional to catch up?

I sort of get what you are saying but I think we need to build a mass movement to try and make the strike as successful as possible. Not every head wants to open at all costs, I have even seen heads on twitter talking about becoming neu members!

I think we have to talk to TAs and other support staff, really try to get them on side and explain to them what they can and can't be asked to do on strike days. If they are NEU especially, hopefully they can stand up and refuse to cover.

In terms of othe volunteers coming in, again I think we need to talk to governors if we can, and talk to regular parent volunteers and explain the reasons we are striking and why it's important it is successful. And also with parent volunteers it is worth talking to them about the potentially risky situations they could be put in and how to protect themselves if they do come in on a strike day - as we would with a pgce student for example.

I think we also need to talk to all staff about the importance of not saying if we are striking until the day - even non neu members. For the first day, it's partly the uncertainty which may close schools.

But if it was me and my head worked very hard to break the strike I would seriously consider looking for a new job. Not all heads are like that.

Any head who is prepared to cram kids into the hall and allow volunteers to supervise them would be making a very decision. The potential for things to go wrong is a risk that I can't see headteachers being prepared to take.

Strikes are meant to disrupt. Union members will be instructed to tell the HT as little as possible before hand. In the past when we have had school staff such as caretakers and canteen staff on strike the school had to close as health and safety could not be guarenteed. The numbers of staff of strike then were very small, but enough to close the school. A teacher's strike would involve far more staff.

All of my work is critical. I can’t not do it. I can only do it later. As I don’t have enough time to do everything anyway, I would be intensifying the pressure on myself by striking. In reality, I would have to sit at home working in secret.
This irony of this, has not escaped me!

To an extent, this is the same as if PPA falls on strike day. I still have to prepare my lessons (although at least it will have been a morning less to plan for the week before) and will have to do it at home where I can't photocopy etc. It's not as simple as just not working unfortunately.

Most of the support staff in my school have primary aged children in other local schools. If their children's schools are closed it's going to have a huge impact on levels of support staff available to carry out their normal duties nevermind provide extra cover.