I FIND myself a little baffled at the outcry against the National Union of Teachers' advice to use grievance procedures when its members are denied a threshold increase.
Heads' leaders are reported as saying that grievance procedures would be bound to fail: this says rather more about the procedures than about grievances.
David Hart of the National Association of Head Teachers says that the use of procedures would create bad feeling. Would someone who was feeling good invoke the procedures?
He goes on to say that governors should not be dragged in as they lack expertise for the task (presumably, as opposed to their expertise on the curriculum, appointmnts and so on).
John Dunford of the Secondary Heads Association says it would make life difficult.
If John thinks that is difficult, has he read through the forms and procedures to apply for the threshold?
The point of a grievance procedure is that it provides an employee with a route to challenge what is seen as unfair or unjust behaviour.
Are the NUT's critics claiming that it would be impossible to act unjustly or unfairly in these matters or do they just prefer employment tribunals and European courts over internal procedures?
Surrey division NUT
42 Poynes Road