Another teacher had a five year old throw a crayon on the ground in defiance. He took the child's arm and pulled him to where the crayon was and made him pick it up. The child alleged he fell and hit his head, but there was no real evidence of this. Result —teacher censured and has given up teaching forever.
This is arrant nonsense, and for the teaching profession, currently reeling from having to deal with unworkable restraint rules, this sort of behaviour, no matter what the out-of-touch council believes, does nothing to make teachers believe in fairness and common sense, or that someone's got their backs.
The council has sent a rebuttal to the Northland Age (Kids' safety comes first, letters February 14). They claim they had no choice. Again arrant nonsense. At least one of the cases could have been dealt with by the Complaints Assessment Committee, as it was accepted as minor.
No matter that the council doesn't understand its own legislation. Under the Act there is no requirement for the council to impose punishment. There is no requirement to refer matters on if not deemed serious misconduct, if agreement can't be reached between parties.
The Act allows them to. It doesn't say it must happen.
The intent of any legislation, when one is interpreting it, is crucial. Was it the intent of the MPs
when passing the relevant Act to have teachers prosecuted and punished for such minor behaviour?
It is sad when one's own body doesn't actually understand its own legislation, and seems more concerned in pushing penalties for minor infractions than acting positively and independently on behalf of our profession.
PAT NEWMAN
President , Te Tai Tokerau Principals' Assn