Striking Stourbridge teachers vow to fight academy conversion

11:36am Tuesday 5th February 2013 in News

Teachers on strike today at Redhill school. Buy photo: 061326L Buy this photo » Teachers on strike today at Redhill school. Buy photo: 061326L

STRIKING teachers at a Stourbridge school have vowed to fight on to prevent a campus conversion to academy status.

Staff at Redhill School, Junction Road, walked out today and will do so again tomorrow (Wednesday) after similar action last Friday and union chiefs say there could be more industrial action to come.

School governors voted in November to press ahead with conversion to academy status, which would take the school out of local authority control.

A working group of governors and staff will report within weeks on the  detail of the conversion process before governors vote on a final decision to make the change.

Among striking Redhill teachers is Paula Rowe, who is president of the NASUWT, the union which called the strike action which handed extra days off to a number of year groups at the school.

Paula Rowe said: "We believe putting power in the hands of the head and governing body who have little accountability is wrong.

"Teachers feel it is an unnecessary change, it's not just teachers its parents, I have never been involved in any action nationally where we have had this level of support."

In a statement, school head Steve Dunster and chair of governors, Linda Bonehill, said: "We are very disappointed that the NASUWT are instructing their members not to come to work thus causing disruption to our pupils and parents. The governing body is now collecting detailed information and has yet to make a final decision.

"This decision will be on the basis of what is best for the long term future of the school and its pupils."

Victor Aguera, NASUWT national executive member for the West Midlands, said: “We hope the governing body ensures that in reaching its final decision, it does so in a fair and transparent manner.”

Comments(18)

Russell Eden says...
12:13pm Tue 5 Feb 13

Redhill is already an excellent school, and I don't feel it needs Academy status, but teachers and the NASUWT have already caused me to reconsider. I didn't expect them to totally disregard my son's education in his GCSE year and cause him and his peer group to lose classroom time.

Stealing education time from young people is a disgrace, and the ringleaders should be ashamed of themselves for reverting to this politically motivated action.

These children get one chance. Please grow up and let them have that chance.

Report this post »

paulinef says...
4:29pm Tue 5 Feb 13

The teachers who are on strike have presumably worked hard for your son over five years and will continue to do so once the strike is over. No teacher takes strike action lightly so it is a measure of how worried they are about the change in school status.
Changing a schools status to academy is a politically motivated action and I believe will do more harm to all pupils' education. Passing micro management of a local school to national government is a contradiction of a governors role.
Redhill governors are making this decision against the will of the majority of teachers. A petition of over 500 signatures given in prior to the meeting that decided to go for academy was not shown to the governors until after the vote and they then said it would not have affected the way they voted. The vote was a very close win for academy status so nearly half the governors are against it anyway.
The meeting for the final decision is being brought forward possibly to avoid new parent governors voting against the plan.
It seems to me that the head and the school are doing everything to make sure this goes through as quickly as possible against a lot of opposition.

Report this post »

Parental Choice says...
6:51am Wed 6 Feb 13

Having fought the recent local election with a very community spirited manifesto, how utterly disappointing to read Mr Eden's personally motivated comments. I too have a child in their GCSE year, however they have had five years of outstanding education. Three days off at a time when they could be revising will not disrupt their results.
Unlike Mr Eden, it would seem, I also have a younger child at the school and I thank the morally responsible staff who are standing up for her rights and those of children who are yet to come to Redhill - fighting for their 'one chance'. It takes real grown-ups to take on manipulative authorities and work for the rights of all the children, not just one.

Report this post »

schoolteacher says...
8:31am Wed 6 Feb 13

Are all parents and members of Redhill concern group aware that the NASUWT has managed to organise for members who are striking to be paid their normal salary whilst on strike? They have also put on sandwiches for members who join the picket line at a local pub. Is this the standard action for when a school is on strike? I have striked before and never been paid for it or been provided with food.

Report this post »

paulinef says...
12:07pm Wed 6 Feb 13

I am not sure what point schoolteacher is trying to make. Whatever the arrangements that the NASUWT have made for its' members it comes out of money paid by the members. Are you trying to suggest teachers will strike for a bacon sandwich?
The strike is a principled action to safeguard the education of all pupils and we should be supporting the teachers.

Report this post »

schoolteacher says...
7:26pm Wed 6 Feb 13

I am a teacher at the school, and one of many who have been in school and teaching our pupils. We all need to put aside our political views (this is not a strike against the government) and think about the good of the school. The strike is doing far far far more damage to the school than a conversion to academy would - hardly safeguarding the education of all our pupils. It is the staff who have remained loyal to their school and pupils who are safeguarding them, not those who are supporting unions national agenda. This is little more than a publicity stunt for the union. You have to ask yourself - how many would strike if they didn't have the safety of being paid?

Report this post »

shockedparent says...
8:07pm Wed 6 Feb 13

I am a shocked parent. Those teachers would never have had to strike had they been listened to in the first place.It's not what they want to do, it's what they have had to do in order to be heard.
Teacher morale at Redhill hit an all time low when this disregard for their views started back in October, not last week! Who has been listening to them for the last three months? Not their headteacher or senior leadership team that's for sure.
Parents and members of the community need to stand up for their rights to be heard by showing support and respect for those outstanding teachers and ask themselves who is really at the root cause of this upheavel?

Report this post »

schoolteacher says...
10:01pm Wed 6 Feb 13

You talk as if you are representing the entire staff at the school. Like the NASUWT are talking as if they do. Lets remember that a school is made up of far more than just teachers and senior management. There are lots of support staff, many of whom are also not opposed to the change. Add to this the fact that the NUT union voted against strike action and plenty of NASUWT members have not striked surely shows that you are not speaking on behalf of all the teachers. Yes some teachers feel like they are being ignored, but then everyone is entitled to their opinion, and if two opinions disagree there is no need to throw the toys out of the pram because we can't get our own way. What kind of example are we setting to our children? I thought we were meant to be educating our pupils, not making them think you can withdraw your labour if you don't get your own way.

Report this post »

shockedparent says...
11:44pm Wed 6 Feb 13

Equally there are many of the support staff who are opposed to the change. Add to this the fact that the NUT members represent a minority within the staff and not plenty but actually a minority of the NASUWT members did not strike.
So no I do not speak on behalf of all the teachers, I speak on behalf of the majority!

What kind of example do we want to set our children? One where it is seen to be acceptable to be ignored, where respect counts for nothing and compassion is non existent?

I think not.

Report this post »

paulinef says...
3:15pm Thu 7 Feb 13

The schoolteacher above is entitled to her opinion that a change to academy will not hurt the pupils. I believe she is wrong as a teacher whose school did change to an academy.
However, why do you feel the need to belittle what the striking teachers are doing? They are on strike because they feel strongly about this issue.
I would also say that not going on strike is also a political choice as is the school governors and head teacher wanting this change to the school.

Report this post »

schoolteacher says...
4:59pm Thu 7 Feb 13

Shockedparent: I find it hard to understand how you have better inside knowledge than someone who works in the school as to the number of staff who do not mind about the conversion. You have heard stories from the picket line. Surely we all know that those who oppose any change make a louder noise than those who don't oppose it. The volume of the noise isn't always representative of the majority opinion.

Paulinef: it is the strikers who have felt the need to belittle the non strikers. Trust me on this - it is more difficult to choose not to strike than it is to join in with striking. There is plenty of anecdotal evidence about the impact academy conversion has on a school, whether it be positive, neutral or negative. We cannot take into account what one person has experienced, as for every story singing praises for academies, there is one vehemently against it. We must look at what impact it is having on the pupils. What right do we have to play with their education when we have the assurances, and common sense, that there will be no change to the school. We cannot just assume the govenors and management are lying toy us so we can enact our political views on the school in the form of a strike. It is disgraceful.

Report this post »

ianmarrey says...
5:46pm Thu 7 Feb 13

Setting anecdotal evidence aside, actual evidence does not support converter academies. The early sponsored academies were failing schools who were provided with additional resources to generate new approaches - there is evidence that this transformational change improved these school, becoming an academy was a means to an end.

Converter academies (like Redhill proposes) are basically just being told to carry on doing what they are doing - which begs the question why change? How will Redhill converting to an academy benefit the wider education community in Stourbridge in ways it could not do while remaining in the LA and the family of schools?

The 'consultation' at Redhill is more or less based on the same set of benefits that have been trotted out since the very first academy was proposed - greater freedoms etc. Is it really the case that after 10 years of Academy schools we are still seeing the same benefits being put forward as the reason to become an Academy? Where is the evidence?

Surely by now if the evidence to support Academies was so overwhelming there would be something new to offer in support of academies and not just evidence that relates to failing schools which were subject to additional resources. It wasn't becoming academies that made these schools better, it was the significant additional resources, the transformation of the school and the teaching. This evidence can't be used to support an outstanding school's desire to become an academy, it is misleading at best.

Redhill won't be getting significant additional resources, it won't be transformed and the teaching is already excellent. Why change?

This decision, which is wholly in the hands of the Governing Body, impacts not only on the pupils of today but all those to come and those not yet born. We have an equal responsibility to the next generation as we have to the current generation and it is important that both sides of the debate are fully explored by all stakeholders before a decision is made.

I really hope that the leaders and governors at Redhill take a breath and recognise that the debate has not ended and that there is no need to rush through such a fundamental decision.

Industrial action should always be the last option and if the school are willing to talk so too should the teachers, the parents, the unions and the wider community.

Report this post »

The Villan says...
6:22pm Thu 7 Feb 13

Excellent, nonemotional comments Ian.

If only you were in a position to chair such a debate, maybe an achieveable conclusion could be reached based on fact that is relevant, up to date and not based on heresay and 10 year old data.

All sides should remember it is the pupils education that is the important factor here, not balance sheets.

Report this post »

paulinef says...
2:43pm Fri 8 Feb 13

School teacher the governors and head teacher are enacting a political view in changing to academy. You cannot have it both ways they are either not going to change anything in which case why bother with the upheaval or things will change and maybe not for the better. The decision was made with such a small majority it seems wrong to make such a large change as this. Also what is the rush the headteacher has changed the date bringing forward the final decision before they can know the financial situation and certainly before the new parent governors are in place.

Report this post »

schoolteacher says...
6:55pm Fri 8 Feb 13

The governors and head have been very transparent about the reasons for a conversion. They would end up with more money available (if the finances don't support this, they have made it clear that the decision is still not yet final, so not bound to make the conversion). Also, it means they can make an application to the dfe for funding to further develop the school. It also allows for some form of protection in numbers as the majority of secondary schools are now academies. When looking at it like that, it is clear to see that it is not a political decision, but one with the interests of the school at the heart of it.

Ianmarrey: I'm not sure what point you are attempting to make, nothing seemed particularly relevant to this discussion.

Report this post »

ianmarrey says...
10:10pm Fri 8 Feb 13

schoolteacher - you referred to anecdotal evidence, I invited examination of real evidence. I think that is relevant. You referred to this being political, I suggest it is about whether there are any real benefits in converting to an academy. You talk about the benefits to the school, I referred to the potential loss to the wider community now and in the future.

I think my contribution was as relevant and informed as yours.

Report this post »

The Villan says...
7:54am Sat 9 Feb 13

Not once did school teacher mention the most importnt issue here, the pupils.

His or her argument is all about finances and the school. Maybe he or she has a vested interest i.e. is the headmaster or deputy head with sycophantic tendencies?

Hence the disparaging comments to Ian who made relevant points wish he/she does not wish to take on board.

Schoolteacher, may I remind you that if someone doesn't agree with your point of view it doesn't make them wrong.

A debate is all about involving opposing viewpoints.

Report this post »

viktoria says...
10:56pm Mon 11 Feb 13

Why is Conservative M.P. Margot James a governor of Redhill School? She has no children so will never be a parent or teacher at the school. Who chooses the governors?

Report this post »

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree