School in the Wrong

Post Reply
Spawnboy99
Posts: 138
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2014 9:14 pm

School in the Wrong

Post by Spawnboy99 »

Ok, a moral question here let's stick to the topic, please.

So a contract wasn't renewed by the HOS, because the person didn't fit in even though the teacher was there for 4 years and had two contracts. The teacher has now found out through legal representation that in fact this was done illegally. So what does the teacher do in this situation?

How would this impact future employment situations?

If the teacher decides to go to Court what other implications could this present itself in the future?

Of course, this teacher will be seeking monies from the school for a number of things which hasn't be decided by the lawyer and the teacher if it went to Court or try for an out of Court settlement.

Has anyone else faced the same problem and what was the outcome both short term and long term?
Helen Back
Posts: 242
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2012 4:16 pm

Re: School in the Wrong

Post by Helen Back »

I'm not totally understanding. This teacher did two contracts and then didn't get their contract renewed for a third. What was illegal?
Spawnboy99
Posts: 138
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2014 9:14 pm

Re: School in the Wrong

Post by Spawnboy99 »

The teacher did 2 x 2 years contract so a total of 4 years.

Teacher contract didn't get renewed for the next 2-year contract as wasn't the right fit.

After seeking legal advice the teacher has now found out that this was illegal in the contract and the school didn't follow the correct due process.

The teacher still has to work until the end of the contract and end of the academic year but it seems is now actively seek new employment
Heliotrope
Posts: 1167
Joined: Sun May 13, 2018 1:48 am

Re: School in the Wrong

Post by Heliotrope »

Spawnboy99 wrote:
> The teacher did 2 x 2 years contract so a total of 4 years.
>
> Teacher contract didn't get renewed for the next 2-year contract as wasn't
> the right fit.
>
> After seeking legal advice the teacher has now found out that this was
> illegal in the contract and the school didn't follow the correct due
> process.
>
> The teacher still has to work until the end of the contract and end of the
> academic year but it seems is now actively seek new employment


I also fail to see what would be illegal about not renewing.
It's not unheard of to not be renewed after 4 years, although it's usually after the first contract that a lack of 'fit' is a reason to part ways.
What country is the IT in?
PsyGuy
Posts: 10789
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 9:51 am
Location: Northern Europe

Response

Post by PsyGuy »

I could see how this scenario would happen if the IT was automatically converted or considered a permenant/tenured IT as an exercise of statute or labor regulations. The IS had X amount of time under term limited/fixed contracts and the IS continued to offer those type of contracts until now it doesnt, but the IT was supposed to have been converted to a permenant tenured status and wasnt.
I can also see a scenario where a contract is presumed to have been renewed unless either the IT or the IS initiates some form of termination process, that typically requires notice from the IT an notice plus some form of cause by the IS by some prescribed deadline.
Violation of either could make the dismissal unlawful and invalidate it. the second is easier to get around for an IS, as they can either grit their teeth and keep the IT for the extra year and give the proper notice, or that usually would happen is the HOS/leadership suggests if the IT doesnt leave they will get a poor/negative reference. The first is more difficult as "poor fit" isnt typically the level of cause an IS would need to dismiss someone with a permenant contract or tenure. The reference isnt worth anything if the IT is going to keep the job indefinitely.

@Spawnboy99

Whats the IT want to do, do they want to stay, do they just want a financial windfall, what are they prepared to do about the experience?

If they go, the IT has leverage to get some concessions out of the IS, okay poor fit, but if the HOS executive leadership writes a glowingly positive reference and supports that both in an opened and closed reference, than thats a strong benefit. Even more so if the HOS is willing to shop the IT off to another IS. The IT can probably get some coin and other benefits out of it. An extra months salary, summer housing, and of course all the benefits provided for EOC.
If the IT wants the windfall, a whole year of benefits and salary for example, then they will likely end up with a negative reference, and significant problems going forward. From the recruiter aspect this was a professional separation, but an IT pushing for that kind of coin over what theyre going to see as a procedural technicality is going to resonate in a recruiters and leadership mind as 'I dont want that kind of risk and liability". Yeah the IS was wrong, but fleecing the ISs coffers over it isnt something an IS wants to usually take on.
That leaves the It with what to do about the situation. On one hand they give up a lot of rights and possibly substantial coin and benefits but they get a positive reference and the experience on their resume, which isnt going to be a years salary, but could open up lucrative options sooner. If they dont exit nicely with the IS, than they have to strongly consider ghosting the experience, or else dealing with a very hard sell to future recruiters and possibly find them self dropped by the premium recruiting agencies.
Spawnboy99
Posts: 138
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2014 9:14 pm

Re: School in the Wrong

Post by Spawnboy99 »

PsyGuy wrote:
> I could see how this scenario would happen if the IT was automatically converted
> or considered a permenant/tenured IT as an exercise of statute or labor regulations.
> The IS had X amount of time under term limited/fixed contracts and the IS continued
> to offer those type of contracts until now it doesnt, but the IT was supposed to
> have been converted to a permenant tenured status and wasnt.
> I can also see a scenario where a contract is presumed to have been renewed unless
> either the IT or the IS initiates some form of termination process, that typically
> requires notice from the IT an notice plus some form of cause by the IS by some
> prescribed deadline.
> Violation of either could make the dismissal unlawful and invalidate it. the second
> is easier to get around for an IS, as they can either grit their teeth and keep
> the IT for the extra year and give the proper notice, or that usually would happen
> is the HOS/leadership suggests if the IT doesnt leave they will get a poor/negative
> reference. The first is more difficult as "poor fit" isnt typically the level of
> cause an IS would need to dismiss someone with a permenant contract or tenure. The
> reference isnt worth anything if the IT is going to keep the job indefinitely.
>
> @Spawnboy99
>
> Whats the IT want to do, do they want to stay, do they just want a financial windfall,
> what are they prepared to do about the experience?
>
> If they go, the IT has leverage to get some concessions out of the IS, okay poor
> fit, but if the HOS executive leadership writes a glowingly positive reference and
> supports that both in an opened and closed reference, than thats a strong benefit.
> Even more so if the HOS is willing to shop the IT off to another IS. The IT can
> probably get some coin and other benefits out of it. An extra months salary, summer
> housing, and of course all the benefits provided for EOC.
> If the IT wants the windfall, a whole year of benefits and salary for example, then
> they will likely end up with a negative reference, and significant problems going
> forward. From the recruiter aspect this was a professional separation, but an IT
> pushing for that kind of coin over what theyre going to see as a procedural technicality
> is going to resonate in a recruiters and leadership mind as 'I dont want that kind
> of risk and liability". Yeah the IS was wrong, but fleecing the ISs coffers over
> it isnt something an IS wants to usually take on.
> That leaves the It with what to do about the situation. On one hand they give up
> a lot of rights and possibly substantial coin and benefits but they get a positive
> reference and the experience on their resume, which isnt going to be a years salary,
> but could open up lucrative options sooner. If they dont exit nicely with the IS,
> than they have to strongly consider ghosting the experience, or else dealing with
> a very hard sell to future recruiters and possibly find them self dropped by the
> premium recruiting agencies.


@PsyGuy.

That's pretty much what has happened even though the IT has had yearly pay rises as well, the IS has given the person their notice period and will not renew the IT contract as not a good fit. The legal counselling as stated this is unjust and that no due process was implemented. I think the teacher is ok that they will not be working at the school at the next academic year 2020, of course, the IT needs the reference even though these have already been done on SA/ISS as confidential. But of course, any new school is going to contact the previous school to seek more information.

So that's the dilemma does the teacher start negotiating a win/win for both IS/IT says pay full salary including all allowances etc until the end of the academic year + reference which is going to be of a higher standard, personal etc and then the IT is free to seek other employment without any penalties. Or does the IT dig in the heels fights the fight seeking full salary etc as technically they should be issuing another two-year contract knowing that that person will probably not be able to teach overseas again? But could be a big payday at the end which would mean for a year or so that IT may not need to work.

Of course, this is all hypothetically as we can't predict what the courts and how they perceive things.

Touch decision for this IT but at what point to IT need to stick up for their rights and fight these situations. This is probably not the first time this has happened to someone nor the last. But if only the school had conversations with the IT highlighting there concerns and areas the IT needed to work on otherwise the IT contract wouldn't be renewed. Then the due process would have been done in the correct manner, but this hasn't happened.
Doctor
Posts: 98
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2018 1:28 am

Re: School in the Wrong

Post by Doctor »

As an Arkansan, I was raised with the notion that all employment is at-will so my advice is do everything possible to secure that vital good reference and move on.
PsyGuy
Posts: 10789
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 9:51 am
Location: Northern Europe

Reply

Post by PsyGuy »

@Spawnboy99

I dont see there being a win/win. The IS is going to be pretty rigid that winning for them is going to be the IT leaving graciously and a positive reference is going to be at their discretion and in the form they see fit. Anything less than that is going to be what degree of cost they can tolerate. From their point of view they are already being made to tolerate this IT for a year longer than they want to. Even your win for the IS as you described it is going to be through gritted teeth, and afterwards its going to be really really hard as time moves on for this IT to enforce whatever agreement in terms of a reference is reached. The IS win you describe "pay full salary including all allowances etc until the end of the academic year + reference which is going to be of a higher standard, personal etc and then the IT is free to seek other employment without any penalties" thats already a loss for the IS, thats them losing from their perspective. Its not a win for them its a 1 year loss or a 2 year loss.
The IT will be able to teach in IE again, its just an issue of how long they would have to ghost it for before adding it back into their resume.
If its only the option of a two year contract and they arent getting some kind of tenured/permanent contract out of it, and the IT is already moving on, then it sounds more like punishing the IS for what amounts too as hurt feelings over being rejected. Whenever Im asked to look at these types of scenarios, I substitute a romantic relationship for the work relationship. So what is this: "He" thought it was going great for four years, and then out of nowhere "She" says its over, its not you its them. "She" wants to move on, "He" wants "She" to suffer for the loss of the relationship. This IT is hurt that after four years their being dumped unceremoniously by their IS when they thought everything was fine. They feel hurt, betrayed, etc. The IT found a legal wedge that maybe lets them punish the IS. Theres probably some coin for actual damages the IT should get, but its probably nothing more than the EOC benefits in the ITs contract.

Im not really hearing that, Im not hearing incompetence, or negligence, or anything thats misconduct, its unfortunate but fit isnt something you usually can sit down with someone and resolve with a conference or a directive. Its probably in the ITs best interest both professionally and personally to just let it go, move on, and let it go.
GrumblesMcGee
Posts: 72
Joined: Wed Apr 17, 2019 7:53 pm

Re: School in the Wrong

Post by GrumblesMcGee »

@spawnboy

Given your previous thread about penalties for late notification and your revelation that the school was: a) being absurdly punitive in its policies, and b) ultimately decided to non-renew you for dancing around the issue, I'm just going to lump this altogether. And I'm not sure why you're pulling this awkward third-person phrasing (e.g., "The teacher..." and "but it seems is now actively seek new employment.") If you want feedback, provide clarity. Pretending you're not the subject of the post and therefore are not certain as to what "the teacher" is doing/thinking/wondering isn't going to get you good answers. And it's annoying.

Yes, the school seems in the wrong on multiple levels. Yes, the penalties for not providing enough notice seemed excessive (but perhaps you shouldn't have renewed if they were opening back up the possibility of taking back benefits you'd already earned).

Given the lack of information, it's hard to tell if/how the school is wrong in not renewing you. Let your lawyer guide you on that one.

As for the pros/cons of legal action, you're best positioned to figure that out. Your lawyer can give you better - as to your chances (and what you can gain). You can speculate as to what you can lose (time, reputation, etc.). Then just decide if it's worth it.

Now I'm just going to be blunt. You have to own up to your end. Sure, if the IS was wrong, you have every right to go after them and force them to employ you for two more years (or settle), etc. Sure, you could have fought over whether the punitive clauses in the second contract were appropriate/legal/reasonable. Hold the schools accountable. But this whole time I've followed your story (over multiple threads) I got the sense that that IS shouldn't renew you.

You didn't want to stay, but with their unusual calendar, weren't sure you'd find work in the middle of the year if you didn't renew. Then you didn't want to abide by the decision deadline because you wanted more time to test the market, and repeatedly pressed them on how their terms were unfair. Finally, they decided not to renew you and you found problems with that decision, so you're trying to see how to get the maximum from them without jeopardizing your future prospects. Am I missing anything?

At every turn, some agreed-upon provision didn't suit your needs, so you poked and prodded until the bear finally bit your hand off. Now you're wondering if you can sue the bear and still live in the woods.
Spawnboy99
Posts: 138
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2014 9:14 pm

Re: School in the Wrong

Post by Spawnboy99 »

GrumblesMcGee wrote:
> @spawnboy
>
> Given your previous thread about penalties for late notification and your
> revelation that the school was: a) being absurdly punitive in its policies,
> and b) ultimately decided to non-renew you for dancing around the issue,
> I'm just going to lump this altogether. And I'm not sure why you're pulling
> this awkward third-person phrasing (e.g., "The teacher..." and
> "but it seems is now actively seek new employment.") If you want
> feedback, provide clarity. Pretending you're not the subject of the post
> and therefore are not certain as to what "the teacher" is
> doing/thinking/wondering isn't going to get you good answers. And it's
> annoying.
>
> Yes, the school seems in the wrong on multiple levels. Yes, the penalties
> for not providing enough notice seemed excessive (but perhaps you shouldn't
> have renewed if they were opening back up the possibility of taking back
> benefits you'd already earned).
>
> Given the lack of information, it's hard to tell if/how the school is wrong
> in not renewing you. Let your lawyer guide you on that one.
>
> As for the pros/cons of legal action, you're best positioned to figure that
> out. Your lawyer can give you better - as to your chances (and what you can
> gain). You can speculate as to what you can lose (time, reputation, etc.).
> Then just decide if it's worth it.
>
> Now I'm just going to be blunt. You have to own up to your end. Sure, if
> the IS was wrong, you have every right to go after them and force them to
> employ you for two more years (or settle), etc. Sure, you could have fought
> over whether the punitive clauses in the second contract were
> appropriate/legal/reasonable. Hold the schools accountable. But this whole
> time I've followed your story (over multiple threads) I got the sense that
> that IS shouldn't renew you.
>
> You didn't want to stay, but with their unusual calendar, weren't sure
> you'd find work in the middle of the year if you didn't renew. Then you
> didn't want to abide by the decision deadline because you wanted more time
> to test the market, and repeatedly pressed them on how their terms were
> unfair. Finally, they decided not to renew you and you found problems with
> that decision, so you're trying to see how to get the maximum from them
> without jeopardizing your future prospects. Am I missing anything?

@GrumblesMcGee seems you have got slightly lost in your comments and missing things, firstly the teacher just asked the question to their HR department, nothing wrong with that, by simply asking the question has resulted in the teacher's contract not being renewed as a poor fit. All PR over the four years were excellent. There was no testing the market don't know where you got that idea from. The teacher asking the question about penalties from a completed contract should be challenged as to it's not written in the contracts. Under the circumstances, other Teachers also are challenging that issue. The bear didn't bite the hand, as the teacher is fighting the bear, and why shouldn't the teacher fight this when the teacher is in the right. Yes, you are correct the teacher should seek the advice of the lawyer which is currently happening as far as I'm aware. The teacher never had an issue with the penalties the issue was the penalties with the first contract so please stick to the facts and reread the post then (Teacher had an issue with paying back airfares and shipping on the first completed contract).

GrumblesmcGee you write well - but stick to the facts and no doubt you will write another reply.

Looking forward too it.


>
> At every turn, some agreed-upon provision didn't suit your needs, so you
> poked and prodded until the bear finally bit your hand off. Now you're
> wondering if you can sue the bear and still live in the woods.
GrumblesMcGee
Posts: 72
Joined: Wed Apr 17, 2019 7:53 pm

Re: School in the Wrong

Post by GrumblesMcGee »

Spawnboy99 wrote:
> GrumblesMcGee wrote:
> > Given your previous thread [...]
> > I'm just going to lump this altogether. And I'm not sure why you're pulling
> > this awkward third-person phrasing (e.g., "The teacher..." and
> > "but it seems is now actively seek new employment.") If you want
> > feedback, provide clarity. Pretending you're not the subject of the post
> > and therefore are not certain as to what "the teacher" is
> > doing/thinking/wondering isn't going to get you good answers. And it's
> > annoying.
> >

@Spawnboy wrote:
> @GrumblesMcGee seems you have got slightly lost in your comments and missing things,
> firstly the teacher just asked the question to their HR department, nothing wrong
> with that, by simply asking the question has resulted in the teacher's contract not
> being renewed as a poor fit. All PR over the four years were excellent. There was no
> testing the market don't know where you got that idea from. The teacher asking the
> question about penalties from a completed contract should be challenged as to it's
> not written in the contracts. Under the circumstances, other Teachers also are
> challenging that issue. The bear didn't bite the hand, as the teacher is fighting the
> bear, and why shouldn't the teacher fight this when the teacher is in the right. Yes,
> you are correct the teacher should seek the advice of the lawyer which is currently
> happening as far as I'm aware. The teacher never had an issue with the penalties the
> issue was the penalties with the first contract so please stick to the facts and
> reread the post then (Teacher had an issue with paying back airfares and shipping on
> the first completed contract).
>
> GrumblesmcGee you write well - but stick to the facts and no doubt you will write
> another reply.
>
> Looking forward too it.

Thanks. Just between the two of us: I've worked hard on my writing--perhaps too hard, to be honest.

Well, if the facts are that you're truly describing a completely different person/scenario from your earlier thread on May 24 (https://internationalschoolsreview.com/ ... f=1&t=7177)...

...and your question about the market in UAE on June 3 (https://internationalschoolsreview.com/ ... f=1&t=7187)...

...and your question about cover letters (the sort of thing one writes when testing the market) on June 5 (https://internationalschoolsreview.com/ ... f=1&t=7192)...

...and your June 19 question about finding a job for next year (https://internationalschoolsreview.com/ ... f=1&t=7212)...

...then I apologize for about 25 percent of my frustration with your ham-handed request for advice in this particular thread. This "moral question here let's stick to the topic" framing is bad enough. Then you present some vague scenario without admitting that it involves you (even though it seems to match up with what happened to you, as explained in previous threads), but you aren't explicitly saying it's someone else--just using confusing, robotic language like "the person" and "the teacher" again and again. Then you ask whether others have faced similar problems and what the outcome was (wait, I thought this was a "moral question").

Please.

Look, these forums are all about advice. I've sought it. I've given it. I've participated in the (sometimes productive) tangents and disagreements. If you want advice, that's fine. But enough with the dance that this isn't related to your previous inquiries. It's the equivalent of, "Doctor, I have this friend who an embarrassing medical issue...what should I tell my friend to do?" And chastising people to "stick to the topic" is just arrogant. It's an internet forum. The conversation'll go where it goes.
PsyGuy
Posts: 10789
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 9:51 am
Location: Northern Europe

Discussion

Post by PsyGuy »

@Spawnboy

I dont find it annoying, I also dont care if it is you or another IT, my response wouldnt change and only the data matters.
Though I agree with @GrumblesMcGee that saying stick to the topic is largely going to be ineffective. Discussions will go where they are going to go.
Post Reply