Resignation timeline
-
Lebenstraum
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 5:39 pm
Resignation timeline
Newbie question here - it seems like ITs have it kind of tough if they want to leave their current school. They have to notify early and then HOPE that something works out or end up unemployed. What happens if a teacher says they will be returning, then ends up finding another position and resigning after their school's notification date? Is there some international blacklist of sorts? The belief that once a cheater (of the system) always a cheater? Just curious
-
Thames Pirate
- Posts: 1188
- Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2013 8:06 am
Re: Resignation timeline
It completely depends on the school. The school that hired us in London told us they had a few teachers at the fair and that they were tentatively interviewing for those positions, but that the positions were clearly tentative. Their teachers were checking in with them at the fair.
In some countries labor laws are firmly on the side of the teacher--they might have until spring to notify the school. Anything earlier is a courtesy. So the teacher can (and they often do this even if the law isn't on their side) apply and then tell the school once they are hired somewhere. It's trickier when you are at a small school and attending a job fair, especially if your school is also there. The schools know when the job fairs are, so it could be problematic.
It really is a case-by-case thing. If you are in "get me the heck outta Dodge" mode, you can apply and just leave your school in the lurch (long term ramifications? Word gets around). Pulling a runner is not uncommon, especially at lower tier schools. It can, however, cost you with those administrators, and the IS world is small and mobile. It would really stink to learn the administrator you ran out on is now in charge of your dream school. However, the late notification might not be bad if you do it early enough. A friend didn't tell her school she was looking, but she had feelers out. She got a job that was a phenomenal opportunity for her and that she didn't expect to get in late May. She took it, then politely went to the principal and informed her that she had been offered this awesome job. They parted on good terms and with a good letter of rec, the school filled the job over the summer, and the friend is in her dream job in her dream city (she said she's never leaving).
If you are on good terms with your admin, you can make it an ongoing conversation in which you go to the fair together--your admin can back you up (and even put in a good word) while you keep him/her abreast of how your search is going--keeping things positive on both sides, though of course you have the advantage of keeping the old job (though be careful! You might get bitten by sneaky admin who says he's only interviewing tentatively but then jumps on someone and leaves you without a job) until you have the certainty of the new. This option can work well with a straight-shooting administrator who has a good rapport with the teacher. Incidentally, cultivating that rapport is recommended (different from brown-nosing, which may or may not help and which most administrators see through anyway). The more reputable schools will have those administrators who will want to work to a mutually beneficial situation and will appreciate your honesty. It could turn ugly on either side, so it requires a bit of finesse--but it has the potential for the best outcome.
Or you can do the least safe option short term, commit to leaving, letting the school advertise your position, and then risk being left unemployed. The latter option gives power to admin, but they do prefer firm answers early in the game, so of course long term ramifications are the smallest in terms of keeping your own reputation intact. If you're good with the risk and good at the search, you'll find something!
It really depends on the admin, your relationship with them and the school, your likelihood of needing them later, etc.
Hope that helps!
In some countries labor laws are firmly on the side of the teacher--they might have until spring to notify the school. Anything earlier is a courtesy. So the teacher can (and they often do this even if the law isn't on their side) apply and then tell the school once they are hired somewhere. It's trickier when you are at a small school and attending a job fair, especially if your school is also there. The schools know when the job fairs are, so it could be problematic.
It really is a case-by-case thing. If you are in "get me the heck outta Dodge" mode, you can apply and just leave your school in the lurch (long term ramifications? Word gets around). Pulling a runner is not uncommon, especially at lower tier schools. It can, however, cost you with those administrators, and the IS world is small and mobile. It would really stink to learn the administrator you ran out on is now in charge of your dream school. However, the late notification might not be bad if you do it early enough. A friend didn't tell her school she was looking, but she had feelers out. She got a job that was a phenomenal opportunity for her and that she didn't expect to get in late May. She took it, then politely went to the principal and informed her that she had been offered this awesome job. They parted on good terms and with a good letter of rec, the school filled the job over the summer, and the friend is in her dream job in her dream city (she said she's never leaving).
If you are on good terms with your admin, you can make it an ongoing conversation in which you go to the fair together--your admin can back you up (and even put in a good word) while you keep him/her abreast of how your search is going--keeping things positive on both sides, though of course you have the advantage of keeping the old job (though be careful! You might get bitten by sneaky admin who says he's only interviewing tentatively but then jumps on someone and leaves you without a job) until you have the certainty of the new. This option can work well with a straight-shooting administrator who has a good rapport with the teacher. Incidentally, cultivating that rapport is recommended (different from brown-nosing, which may or may not help and which most administrators see through anyway). The more reputable schools will have those administrators who will want to work to a mutually beneficial situation and will appreciate your honesty. It could turn ugly on either side, so it requires a bit of finesse--but it has the potential for the best outcome.
Or you can do the least safe option short term, commit to leaving, letting the school advertise your position, and then risk being left unemployed. The latter option gives power to admin, but they do prefer firm answers early in the game, so of course long term ramifications are the smallest in terms of keeping your own reputation intact. If you're good with the risk and good at the search, you'll find something!
It really depends on the admin, your relationship with them and the school, your likelihood of needing them later, etc.
Hope that helps!
Response
There is no black list. The closest (and very distant) events are that if both ISs are repped by the same premium agency you could find yourself barred and both offers/contracts rescinded. Aside from that about 2-4 times a year a HOS may post a message to AISH saying if anyone hired "X" IT to contact them. Those messages quickly fade away, are vague and archived.
In some regions namely WE and EU, labor laws or union rules allow an IT to submit notice between 30-90 days before contract expiration and any earlier notice is non-binding.
You could easily find yourself with a burnt bridge, recruiters leadership have long memories, and depending how bad of a staffing situation you leave them in, they could have a neutral reaction or a poor disposition towards you.
The best option is how you spin the story, tell the departing IS that you have a family, medical, existential emergency of serious change in your family and personal life (gold fish died) and regrettably you have to withdraw your contract acceptance. Then just fade away. There is no network with real time recruiting data, no recruiter is going to email/phone blast all HOSs everywhere on some secret network. Most likely they will wish you well, and good luck, and maybe even contact them when our scenario improves.
I would strongly advise never trusting a recruiter or leadership after such an event, you never know what they will say about you behind your back or out of earshot, and working with them gives them access to your opportunities. The system works when the leadership . has no information, when they know your pursuing "X" IS than its easy to sabotage you.
In some regions namely WE and EU, labor laws or union rules allow an IT to submit notice between 30-90 days before contract expiration and any earlier notice is non-binding.
You could easily find yourself with a burnt bridge, recruiters leadership have long memories, and depending how bad of a staffing situation you leave them in, they could have a neutral reaction or a poor disposition towards you.
The best option is how you spin the story, tell the departing IS that you have a family, medical, existential emergency of serious change in your family and personal life (gold fish died) and regrettably you have to withdraw your contract acceptance. Then just fade away. There is no network with real time recruiting data, no recruiter is going to email/phone blast all HOSs everywhere on some secret network. Most likely they will wish you well, and good luck, and maybe even contact them when our scenario improves.
I would strongly advise never trusting a recruiter or leadership after such an event, you never know what they will say about you behind your back or out of earshot, and working with them gives them access to your opportunities. The system works when the leadership . has no information, when they know your pursuing "X" IS than its easy to sabotage you.
-
Thames Pirate
- Posts: 1188
- Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2013 8:06 am
Re: Resignation timeline
No, there is no black list, but recruiters/HOSs move around just as teachers do, and they DO talk to each other. I knew of an IT who took paternity leave in one country in WE, then accepted a position in China, leaving his wife and new baby behind in Europe. He was collecting a double paycheck. It was brilliant until the two recruiters met at one of the early job fairs and figured the whole thing out. He lost the WE job pretty quickly!
So do your best not to burn bridges (as PG says, how you spin it matters) and do your best to do right by the schools while still looking out for yourself.
So do your best not to burn bridges (as PG says, how you spin it matters) and do your best to do right by the schools while still looking out for yourself.
-
shadowjack
- Posts: 2140
- Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 9:49 am
Re: Resignation timeline
OP - if you screw a school over, it says what you would be willing to do to your next school. So if the heads do communicate - and at different levels in different areas, heads are in contact more than you imagine - you might be out your dream job. Or not.
Discussion
HOSs dont talk to each other nearly as much as they would like ITs to believe. There is no red phone, or global monitoring system. The aforementioned ITs plan could have just as easily worked, and it was more a series of unfortunate events that the IT was discovered. Leadership doesnt swap lists of staff and ask if any of them are moon lighting across countries on the side.
The issue of doing right by an IS is essentially collaborating with your adversaries, leadership isnt going to do right by you, when ownership gives them a directive thats adversarial to you. Leadership doesnt stay in leadership when they dont do as they are instructed.
The issue of doing right by an IS is essentially collaborating with your adversaries, leadership isnt going to do right by you, when ownership gives them a directive thats adversarial to you. Leadership doesnt stay in leadership when they dont do as they are instructed.
-
Thames Pirate
- Posts: 1188
- Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2013 8:06 am
Re: Resignation timeline
How is a teacher assuming admin is the adversary good for kids? No, they might not always act in the best interest of the teacher, but then again, that isn't their job. By the same token it isn't your job to act in their best interest, either. However, if you have a shared goal of what's best for kids, you might find working TOGETHER with admin advantageous. If not, well, certainly it is your job to look out for your own interests. However, working WITH admin whenever possible is advantageous in the long run, not just to avoid getting caught as in the scenario I posted, but to have a potential ally in the future. Burning a bridge is something people should try to avoid whenever possible. Sometimes the bridge gets burned anyway, but all we are saying is try to avoid it. No, heads don't always talk, but they talk often enough that if you can avoid a bad situation, you should.
Again, PsyGuy, what happened that has you so jaded?
Again, PsyGuy, what happened that has you so jaded?
Reply
@Thames Pirate
Your assumption is that leadership and ownership have a true and primary interest in student welfare and growth. The true mission for such ISs isnt the "kids". Its naive to believe all ISs and all leadership have students as their primary concern, they would like yo to believe that its true, but its not.
A component of leadership ethos is concern for faculty in a professional capacity.
Leadership is an extension of ownership, their agenda whether benevolent or malicious is of only minor importance, they are stewards of ownerships wishes, if ownership is focused on revenue generation, than leadership either serves that goal or is replaced.
No working with leadership is advantageous for the short term, as long as the ITs interests and priorities are being met. Often the leadership and IT relationship suffers and fails when the ITs needs are not met. Leadership are not allies, they are associates with supervisory authority who have not yet exhausted your purpose as a resource and discarded a particular IT, until of course they do.
Of course you should avoid a bad situation, but often in time success in IE is choosing the least of nothing but evils.
If you burn the bridge the adversary can not follow you.
No, they dont really talk often enough.
Your assumption is that leadership and ownership have a true and primary interest in student welfare and growth. The true mission for such ISs isnt the "kids". Its naive to believe all ISs and all leadership have students as their primary concern, they would like yo to believe that its true, but its not.
A component of leadership ethos is concern for faculty in a professional capacity.
Leadership is an extension of ownership, their agenda whether benevolent or malicious is of only minor importance, they are stewards of ownerships wishes, if ownership is focused on revenue generation, than leadership either serves that goal or is replaced.
No working with leadership is advantageous for the short term, as long as the ITs interests and priorities are being met. Often the leadership and IT relationship suffers and fails when the ITs needs are not met. Leadership are not allies, they are associates with supervisory authority who have not yet exhausted your purpose as a resource and discarded a particular IT, until of course they do.
Of course you should avoid a bad situation, but often in time success in IE is choosing the least of nothing but evils.
If you burn the bridge the adversary can not follow you.
No, they dont really talk often enough.
-
Thames Pirate
- Posts: 1188
- Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2013 8:06 am
Re: Resignation timeline
I would be very hesitant to work for any leadership who did not have this as a goal. Sure, there are people who lose sight of this (particularly as they near retirement, for example, or as they get bogged down), and there are people who want this but then go about achieving it in the most incompetent manner possible. Neither of those things makes them the enemy.
Yes, the relationship suffers when the IT's needs are not met. Good leadership knows this and works to keep ITs happy, but of course we are all human, and things that are good for the goose aren't always good for the gander. That still doesn't make them the enemy. You are right that admin isn't always an ally, either. But to call them adversaries is a bit much and doesn't help the relationship along. In order for it to be collegial and subsequently better for the school and the kids, BOTH sides have to stop viewing the other as adversaries and start looking at them as human beings with the same goals for kids in mind.
If the board accepts or demands anything less than a valiant effort to do what is best for kids, I wouldn't want to work there. I'd rather stay at home. But that's me.
Yes, it's often a choice of lesser of two evils, and yes, the only person looking out primarily for an IT is the IT. But if it can be done without burning bridges, why not advocate that? It's often not hard, and if you ever need to cross back, the bridge is there. Admin generally have better things to do than follow you, so it's for your own sake you want to keep the bridge intact whenever possible. Again, it's pretty easy to do with just a bit of tact and finesse as well as a bit of transparency whenever possible.
Yes, the relationship suffers when the IT's needs are not met. Good leadership knows this and works to keep ITs happy, but of course we are all human, and things that are good for the goose aren't always good for the gander. That still doesn't make them the enemy. You are right that admin isn't always an ally, either. But to call them adversaries is a bit much and doesn't help the relationship along. In order for it to be collegial and subsequently better for the school and the kids, BOTH sides have to stop viewing the other as adversaries and start looking at them as human beings with the same goals for kids in mind.
If the board accepts or demands anything less than a valiant effort to do what is best for kids, I wouldn't want to work there. I'd rather stay at home. But that's me.
Yes, it's often a choice of lesser of two evils, and yes, the only person looking out primarily for an IT is the IT. But if it can be done without burning bridges, why not advocate that? It's often not hard, and if you ever need to cross back, the bridge is there. Admin generally have better things to do than follow you, so it's for your own sake you want to keep the bridge intact whenever possible. Again, it's pretty easy to do with just a bit of tact and finesse as well as a bit of transparency whenever possible.
Reply
@Thames Pirate
You may need to reevaluate your priorities and expectations, your "kids first" priority is not going to be too common. You will likely be staying at home often.
In IE there are two forms of board composition, parents and community members. They are not elected as is so common in municipal DSs. These board members in the case of community members are doing it for their CV, they often have little vested interest in what actually happens. Parent boards care about THEIR kids, and to a smaller extent their friends kids, they dont care about the ISs general population, and in the hierarchy ITs are at the bottom of the priority list.
It certainly does make leadership the enemy. Leadership will certainly burn the bridge and with you on it if they can. This is why evil wins, good keeps insisting on playing fair.
There is nothing allied between ITs and leadership. They are adversaries, and if you feel they arent you havent been used up yet. The isea that ITs and leadership have the same goals of best for the kids, is just naive.
I have no experience in avian science or poultry.
You may need to reevaluate your priorities and expectations, your "kids first" priority is not going to be too common. You will likely be staying at home often.
In IE there are two forms of board composition, parents and community members. They are not elected as is so common in municipal DSs. These board members in the case of community members are doing it for their CV, they often have little vested interest in what actually happens. Parent boards care about THEIR kids, and to a smaller extent their friends kids, they dont care about the ISs general population, and in the hierarchy ITs are at the bottom of the priority list.
It certainly does make leadership the enemy. Leadership will certainly burn the bridge and with you on it if they can. This is why evil wins, good keeps insisting on playing fair.
There is nothing allied between ITs and leadership. They are adversaries, and if you feel they arent you havent been used up yet. The isea that ITs and leadership have the same goals of best for the kids, is just naive.
I have no experience in avian science or poultry.
Re: Resignation timeline
It's a playing field that is and forever will be tilted toward the schools.
Re: Resignation timeline
"In IE there are two forms of board composition, parents and community members. They are not elected as is so common in municipal DSs. These board members in the case of community members are doing it for their CV, they often have little vested interest in what actually happens. Parent boards care about THEIR kids, and to a smaller extent their friends kids, they dont care about the ISs general population, and in the hierarchy ITs are at the bottom of the priority list.
It certainly does make leadership the enemy. Leadership will certainly burn the bridge and with you on it if they can. This is why evil wins, good keeps insisting on playing fair.
There is nothing allied between ITs and leadership. They are adversaries, and if you feel they arent you havent been used up yet. The isea that ITs and leadership have the same goals of best for the kids, is just naive."
And Dave calls other people fear-mongers! In and among the abundance of his witless posts, this is certainly in the top ten stupid list. Dave swears by data though. Opinions and beliefs don't matter. So where is the data that supports the statement: "Leadership will certainly burn the bridge and with you on it if they can." I asked you in another thread for data to support your claim that school leaders who are honourable are in a very distinct minority and for a copy of your survey instrument. No answer of course. I do understand, Dave, why you currently feel wounded by administrators, but have you ever thought that this may be your own fault?
It certainly does make leadership the enemy. Leadership will certainly burn the bridge and with you on it if they can. This is why evil wins, good keeps insisting on playing fair.
There is nothing allied between ITs and leadership. They are adversaries, and if you feel they arent you havent been used up yet. The isea that ITs and leadership have the same goals of best for the kids, is just naive."
And Dave calls other people fear-mongers! In and among the abundance of his witless posts, this is certainly in the top ten stupid list. Dave swears by data though. Opinions and beliefs don't matter. So where is the data that supports the statement: "Leadership will certainly burn the bridge and with you on it if they can." I asked you in another thread for data to support your claim that school leaders who are honourable are in a very distinct minority and for a copy of your survey instrument. No answer of course. I do understand, Dave, why you currently feel wounded by administrators, but have you ever thought that this may be your own fault?
-
Thames Pirate
- Posts: 1188
- Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2013 8:06 am
Re: Resignation timeline
The day I stop teaching for the kids is the day I lose my joy in the job and become cynical and bitter like you.
The kids are what motivates me. Every time I get bogged down, a kid has a breakthrough or says something sweet or funny or pushes me to think more deeply. I care about their emotional and intellectual growth. When that stops, I may as well go into something easier and better-paying.
I find that seeking out administration and schools where this value is at the center of what happens, I don't have adversaries. I may still butt heads with admin, and I am okay with that. I also know that there are unscrupulous people everywhere. But there are also good people everywhere. If I didn't believe that, I wouldn't have much faith in humanity, wouldn't have relationships, and would be better off becoming a hermit. As it is, I believe that people are not always inherently selfish or motivated by money only. Sure, it happens, but there are also many people out there, particularly in education, who are NOT like that. After all, I can't be the only person who wants what is best for students!
FWIW, the board of the school we are joining is made up of parents, community members (one of whom is an alumnus of the school), a teacher, and the HOS. This means there are multiple voices represented, which helps the board keep focus and balance. The bios of the community members make it clear that they do not need a school board to build their resumes. Is it so hard to believe that some of us really did get into the profession out of a sincere love for kids? Is it so hard to believe that there are people who like to give back to their community and invest in the next generation?
What happened to make you so cynical? I hear of great examples of professionalism and courtesy between admin and staff regularly--and yes, on the IS circuit as much as anywhere.
If you aren't in it for the kids, why are you in IE? Maybe you are the tourist teacher you so disdain.
The kids are what motivates me. Every time I get bogged down, a kid has a breakthrough or says something sweet or funny or pushes me to think more deeply. I care about their emotional and intellectual growth. When that stops, I may as well go into something easier and better-paying.
I find that seeking out administration and schools where this value is at the center of what happens, I don't have adversaries. I may still butt heads with admin, and I am okay with that. I also know that there are unscrupulous people everywhere. But there are also good people everywhere. If I didn't believe that, I wouldn't have much faith in humanity, wouldn't have relationships, and would be better off becoming a hermit. As it is, I believe that people are not always inherently selfish or motivated by money only. Sure, it happens, but there are also many people out there, particularly in education, who are NOT like that. After all, I can't be the only person who wants what is best for students!
FWIW, the board of the school we are joining is made up of parents, community members (one of whom is an alumnus of the school), a teacher, and the HOS. This means there are multiple voices represented, which helps the board keep focus and balance. The bios of the community members make it clear that they do not need a school board to build their resumes. Is it so hard to believe that some of us really did get into the profession out of a sincere love for kids? Is it so hard to believe that there are people who like to give back to their community and invest in the next generation?
What happened to make you so cynical? I hear of great examples of professionalism and courtesy between admin and staff regularly--and yes, on the IS circuit as much as anywhere.
If you aren't in it for the kids, why are you in IE? Maybe you are the tourist teacher you so disdain.
Reply
@Thames Pirate
ITs can be about the students all they want, thats a good thing, and many ITs have a primary interest in student development and welfare. The majority of leadership and ownership is not on the same side as ITs.
I am motivated internally not from extrinsic sources.
You may not have adversaries, but your adversaries do and you are likely one of them. ITs can turn the other cheek all they want but then those ITs just get beat up. There are individuals who believe the human race was seeded by a spaghetti monster. There are also many ITs who can act like they care, its called the professional mask. There are also people who believe that customer service reps really want to help you.
Reliance on published bios to determine ownership motives is not a scenario I would put a lot of credibility in. One IT on the board, thats 2 hours a month that IT is never going to get back. being the lone IT on a board is like being Puerto Rico in the legislature, you go to all the meetings and sessions but your vote doesnt count.
I agree with the portion of the motivation for ITs and DTs getting into the education profession, what they leave believing is more often a very different position.
I touch the future, I teach.
ITs can be about the students all they want, thats a good thing, and many ITs have a primary interest in student development and welfare. The majority of leadership and ownership is not on the same side as ITs.
I am motivated internally not from extrinsic sources.
You may not have adversaries, but your adversaries do and you are likely one of them. ITs can turn the other cheek all they want but then those ITs just get beat up. There are individuals who believe the human race was seeded by a spaghetti monster. There are also many ITs who can act like they care, its called the professional mask. There are also people who believe that customer service reps really want to help you.
Reliance on published bios to determine ownership motives is not a scenario I would put a lot of credibility in. One IT on the board, thats 2 hours a month that IT is never going to get back. being the lone IT on a board is like being Puerto Rico in the legislature, you go to all the meetings and sessions but your vote doesnt count.
I agree with the portion of the motivation for ITs and DTs getting into the education profession, what they leave believing is more often a very different position.
I touch the future, I teach.
-
Thames Pirate
- Posts: 1188
- Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2013 8:06 am
Re: Resignation timeline
It isn't about turning the other cheek, but about not needing to turn either cheek.
I have had one adversarial relationship with an administrator. I played nice until she attacked, and I didn't take it lying down. Incidentally, the other admin at that school? They also had the same adversarial relationship with her. So did the kids. Oh, and the school is facing a lawsuit from parents. So yes, those adversaries do exist, but they don't have to be that way most of the time. I am a union rep here in the US, and I have sat in on some interesting meetings between admin and teachers. I can say with certainty that there are admin who play favorites at random and only attack some staff, that there are admin who play favorites based on some arbitrary criteria and only attack staff that fail to meet their standards, and there are admin who hate just about everyone. I can also say that there are lots of administrators who are just trying to do their jobs and who are eager to find solutions that work for both sides or teachers who play the victim card who really need to be disciplined or whatnot. I simply believe that if you come in expecting admin to be targeting you, you are the latter, and the troubles you incur are of your own making.
There is no need to pull a runner on a school when you can just as easily politely inform the admin that you have a new job and are leaving. The former has no advantage for you and has YOU burning the bridge. The latter means you left the bridge intact, and if the school burns it, well, fine. You were already gone. Meanwhile the latter could potentially even land you with a nice letter of rec (as happened to my friend) that you weren't expecting because, while you and admin never saw eye to eye and they aren't sorry to see you go, they respect the classy way you did it and that you are a professional. All because instead of seeing them as adversaries, you saw them as professionals in their own right and saw yourself as one, too.
I don't know what motivates community members to sit on a board of a school, but I am saying that if you are the CEO of an international corporation, that school board seat isn't helping your resume. You were the one who put that motive forward, not me. And most boards have no teachers, so just having a seat allows the teacher to explain the perspective that parents and community members may never have considered. You ascribe horrible motivations to boards who may simply be acting in ignorance. Again, instead of seeing everyone as the adversary, you could see them as people who want the same thing you do--to touch the future.
I plan to leave the teaching profession with the same energy I entered it. I find the longer I teach that there are more and more people whose roles I better understand and whose contributions, while sometimes opposing my own, are valuable to educating kids. I find the profession full of people doing their best every day to make things better for kids--and that includes parents, admin, board members, and community members as much as it does teachers. I see professionals who, yes, sometimes have to moderate each other--and while it's frustrating to be checked, the system of checks is necessary to keep kids' interests at the forefront. Yes, sometimes the forces don't just check, but collide, and sometimes in a negative way--and yes, in those circumstances a teacher has to look out for him- or herself. But to think of the others as adversaries is a negative view on life. Mostly, though, it's a negative view on the professions and the professionals in them.
I have no problems with a teacher hunting quietly and only informing the school once a new position has been secured. If you can get around the references, by all means--do what you need to do, personally and professionally. If you aren't happy, you aren't helping the school or the kids. But don't see admin as adversaries. Look out for yourself, but don't burn bridges. If the bridge is burned, let it be because the other person set it afire.
I have had one adversarial relationship with an administrator. I played nice until she attacked, and I didn't take it lying down. Incidentally, the other admin at that school? They also had the same adversarial relationship with her. So did the kids. Oh, and the school is facing a lawsuit from parents. So yes, those adversaries do exist, but they don't have to be that way most of the time. I am a union rep here in the US, and I have sat in on some interesting meetings between admin and teachers. I can say with certainty that there are admin who play favorites at random and only attack some staff, that there are admin who play favorites based on some arbitrary criteria and only attack staff that fail to meet their standards, and there are admin who hate just about everyone. I can also say that there are lots of administrators who are just trying to do their jobs and who are eager to find solutions that work for both sides or teachers who play the victim card who really need to be disciplined or whatnot. I simply believe that if you come in expecting admin to be targeting you, you are the latter, and the troubles you incur are of your own making.
There is no need to pull a runner on a school when you can just as easily politely inform the admin that you have a new job and are leaving. The former has no advantage for you and has YOU burning the bridge. The latter means you left the bridge intact, and if the school burns it, well, fine. You were already gone. Meanwhile the latter could potentially even land you with a nice letter of rec (as happened to my friend) that you weren't expecting because, while you and admin never saw eye to eye and they aren't sorry to see you go, they respect the classy way you did it and that you are a professional. All because instead of seeing them as adversaries, you saw them as professionals in their own right and saw yourself as one, too.
I don't know what motivates community members to sit on a board of a school, but I am saying that if you are the CEO of an international corporation, that school board seat isn't helping your resume. You were the one who put that motive forward, not me. And most boards have no teachers, so just having a seat allows the teacher to explain the perspective that parents and community members may never have considered. You ascribe horrible motivations to boards who may simply be acting in ignorance. Again, instead of seeing everyone as the adversary, you could see them as people who want the same thing you do--to touch the future.
I plan to leave the teaching profession with the same energy I entered it. I find the longer I teach that there are more and more people whose roles I better understand and whose contributions, while sometimes opposing my own, are valuable to educating kids. I find the profession full of people doing their best every day to make things better for kids--and that includes parents, admin, board members, and community members as much as it does teachers. I see professionals who, yes, sometimes have to moderate each other--and while it's frustrating to be checked, the system of checks is necessary to keep kids' interests at the forefront. Yes, sometimes the forces don't just check, but collide, and sometimes in a negative way--and yes, in those circumstances a teacher has to look out for him- or herself. But to think of the others as adversaries is a negative view on life. Mostly, though, it's a negative view on the professions and the professionals in them.
I have no problems with a teacher hunting quietly and only informing the school once a new position has been secured. If you can get around the references, by all means--do what you need to do, personally and professionally. If you aren't happy, you aren't helping the school or the kids. But don't see admin as adversaries. Look out for yourself, but don't burn bridges. If the bridge is burned, let it be because the other person set it afire.