A primary teacher and union representative was awarded PS370,000 by her unfairly dismissed head teacher in “revenge” for opposing her plans to have unannounced lesson observations.
Michael Earnshaw was found to have been “unlawful and cruel” for stating in reference to other schools that Carmen Wood-Hope posed a “safeguarding risk” after her dismissal. This was done without any evidence.
Ms Wood-Hope was successful in her claims for automatic dismissal due to union activity, disability discrimination, and detriment.
Wood-Hope, who qualified in 2011, began working at The Friars Primary school in 2014. The tribunal concluded that she had been a highly accomplished teacher before the claim. She was a member of the senior management team (SLT), which led the school’s cohesion and liaison, and had responsibility for the relations with staff and parents.
She became a National Education Union representative in 2017. She unsuccessfully applied to become the deputy head. Earnshaw took over the role.
Ms Baker, who is the curriculum leader for English at the school, filed a complaint in December 2017 about Earnshaw’s presentation of her work as his own to the Governors, for ignoring and undermining the teacher in front staff and students.
Wood-Hope was Baker’s union representative at the grievance meetings. Pat Arnold, the headteacher at the time who upheld Baker’s complaint, had to apologize to Earnshaw.
Salford protocol
Earnshaw, shortly after assuming the position of head teacher on 24 September 2018, announced to his staff that all classroom observations were now conducted without prior notice. Wood-Hope was informed by union members that the collectively negotiated agreement on lesson monitoring – “the Salford protocol” – was not being followed.
She raised her concerns at the SLT meeting that followed. Wood-Hope was pressed to reveal who raised concerns but refused to name them. Earnshaw decided to continue with the four-week observation without warning staff. He had not discussed his decision with the school’s governing body.
Wood-Hope convened a union meeting the next day to get feedback about developments. Adam Curtis tried to enter the union meeting by claiming that he is a member of NEU. However, she checked, and refused him entry because he wasn’t. Curtis was heard by the tribunal standing outside the meeting room and watching the staff.
Earnshaw invited Wood-Hope and Mr Frascatelli to a meeting later that day. He told her he was issuing her a “formal warning” because of her behavior at the SLT. The tribunal found no procedural violations and deemed the warning as a result of her performing trade union duties.
‘Calm down’
Baker heard Frascatelli after the meeting expressing concerns to Earnshaw regarding his behavior at the meeting with Wood Hope and telling him to “calm himself down”.
The claimant’s GP diagnosed a panic disorder on 27 September.
The NEU staff voted on 3 October against Earnshaw’s plans for changing classroom observation. Earnshaw met with a regional NEU officer to discuss the Salford protocol for classroom observations, and to discuss the need to negotiate any changes.
The tribunal determined that Earnshaw refused to accept any compromise and, as a result of his intransigence, the staff voted for a strike.
The NEU sent a letter to the governors on 17 November about the impasse regarding classroom observations, but did not receive a reply. Earnshaw agreed to the request two days later to have a week-long period of observation, with five days notice.
Governors unaware
Earnshaw then reported to a meeting of all governors the progress made with the protocol. The tribunal did not find any record of the NEU’s letter, the dispute with the staff or the ballot for strike action. The tribunal found that there was no proof of either matter being reported to the governing bodies in any way.
The Wood-Hope, at a SLT meeting in March 2019, suggested that classes with an open-plan area take their lunches at different times to reduce noise.
A non-SLT coworker accused her of making noise complaints to the SLT shortly after. Wood-Hope then complained to Earnshaw on 15 March about a breach in confidentiality within the SLT.
Earnshaw then went to speak with the two teachers in the open-plan area. Wood-Hope was told by Earnshaw that her colleagues had brought up several concerns about her. These would need to be investigated.
He refused to tell her the issue or when the alleged conduct occurred.
The judgement stated that “Mr Earnshaw effectively turned the matter into an official investigation into the conduct of the claimant”.
Wood-Hope was diagnosed with stress at work and signed off from 18 March. When she returned to work gradually in June, Earnshaw assigned her planning, preparation, and assessment (PPA), and supply teaching duties for the remainder of the school year.
Unilateral decision
Earnshaw unilaterally determined that she would continue to perform PPA duties during the autumn term. This decision was not justified by the tribunal.
Wood-Hope was the subject of a series of unsubstantiated complaints about her performance, leading to a “support plan” that lasted nine weeks.
The tribunal determined that the school tried to suggest in evidence that the support plan is “informal”. Earnshaw wrote to the NEU that the claimant was not subject to professional capabilities procedures. The tribunal found Earnshaw’s email disingenuous, and his motives questionable.
Wood-Hope received a sick note on 18 November 2019 for stress at work. She never returned to the school.
The Friars School terminated Wood-Hope’s employment on 10 December 2020, after more than a year-long absence review, grievance meetings, and appeals. Her notice period ran until 30 April 2021.
Paul Scott, the Deputy Chair of Governors, wrote to Wood Hope and said: “We are pleased that your manager took reasonable steps to help you improve and maintain your attendance at work. It was therefore explained to you, that unfortunately, in the circumstances, it would be necessary to terminate your employment.
The reason for dismissal was due to your persistent and/or excessive sickness absence, which is a legal reason related with capability, or alternatively, is in law some other substantial reasons.
Wood-Hope appealed against her dismissal, but it was not upheld.
‘Safeguarding issue’
After her dismissal she applied for supply work at several agencies. One agency rejected her application, stating that the school had a problem with the reference. Another said there could be a’safety issue’.
The tribunal looked at the reason given by the school for dismissing her for incapacity, which was her absence. The tribunal accepted Scott’s opinion based on his case – that the claimant had been off sick and there was no prospect of her returning to work. It considered the situation to be “not so straightforward”.
The court found that Scott had been “deceived” by Earnshaw because he only received limited and selective information, and was influenced and guided solely by Earnshaw. Important context and key issues were also not disclosed.
The tribunal’s judgment stated: “Taking into account the circumstances that led to the dismissal of the claimant, it was determined that Mr Earnshaw’s actions and apparent desire to control grievances and dismissals were motivated by his desire to get rid of the employee.”
Extending revenge
The court ruled that the dismissal was “automatically unfair” because it was based on the trade union activities of the Wood-Hope.
The judgement stated that Mr Earnshaw could not explain his actions under cross-examination. In the absence of an explanation, the Tribunal concluded that Mr Earnshaw’s animus towards the claimant was a betrayal.
The tribunal also stated: “In at least one instance, the school’s reference included an explicit indication that the applicant was a “safeguarding” risk, but without any evidence. This was cruel, illegal and wrong.”
Compensation
The Tribunal ordered that the respondents, the Friars Primary school Governors and Salford City Council pay Wood-Hope a total of PS370,600, which includes:
- Automatic unfair dismissal: PS6,630
- Loss of Statutory Rights: PS500
- Loss of earnings due the application of sick leave: PS9,670
- She was awarded PS95,700 as compensation for her loss of income after being dismissed.
- PS135 for job-seeking expenses
- Damage to feelings: 25000 PS
- For psychological injury, the amount is 10000 PS.
- For aggravated damage, you can claim up to PS10,000
- A 15% increase in salary for non-compliance to the Acas code.
- Interest Rates of PS66.200
- Grossing up tax of 122,000 PS.
Subscribe to our weekly HR news and guidance
Every Wednesday, receive the Personnel Today Direct newsletter.
Personnel Today has HR positions in the Education sector.
Browse HR jobs in Education
