Search results

Are you stupid? (That's a rhetorical question* by the way) 1. The allegation is that the head effectively sacked the Governor - according to him, because of political affiliation. 2. I pointed out that she has no power to remove him from his position. 3. Thus the fact that it was not his place...

Has anyone mentioned that it WASN'T his workplace? :rolleyes:

FFS, I didn't 'put a defensive slant' on anything. I just pointed out a massive error in a few people's interpretation of the 'story', so that they could have a more intelligent debate (which suggesting that the Headteacher had effectively 'sacked' this guy, was clearly not). It's your post if...

Certainly agree that there is another side to be heard. the school is supposedly to issue a statement on Monday.

I've genuinely no idea what point you are trying to make. The difference between the Chair of the Board of Governors, and a member of school staff, is not 'a spurious technicality' - its utterly fundamental to this discussion. One is in a position of authority OVER the stupid HeadTeacher, one...

What are you disagreeing with you dunce!? I said that he could and SHOULD have refused to resign, because he is NOT her staff, and as such she has NO REMIT to tell him to do so. FFS. :facepalm:

He was a governor, not a member of staff. He has no job to 'get back' and would not have been anywhere near a classroom.

1. Since when were governors 'staff'? 2. The headteacher has no remit to TELL a governor to resign. She could suggest it. He could and should, have refused.