Defend Adrian Swain: ELTA need to add their support

On Monday 20 October 2008 the National Union of Teachers (NUT) branch of St Paul’s Way Community School discussed an emergency motion to the East London Teachers Association (ELTA) asking them to support Adrian Swain’s campaign against victimisation. (Download petition here)

Adrian Swain, a teacher and NUT rep, is being victimised for refusing to accept a new dress code imposed by the head teacher. The dress code was decided upon by the head teacher without consultation with the union. It instructs teachers, amongst other things, not to wear trainers.

The school NUT group has strongly backed Adrian’s stance and launched a campaign to oppose the dress code and threat of disciplinary action against Adrian. They recognise that behind the head’s decision on clothes there is an attempt to weaken trade union organisation and subdue, possibly even dismiss, a leading trading activist.

This is the reality of the situation at the school and the teachers defending Adrian can see the attack for what it is. It seems others on the NUT left cannot see things so clearly. The campaign suffered a set back when the East London Teachers Association (ELTA, a body with a very strong left presence) refused to support a motion in defence of Adrian.

Prominent Socialist Teacher’s Alliance (STA) and Socialist Workers Party (SWP) members argued against the motion in its entirety. It is the view of teachers at St Paul’s that this was a mistake and should be changed at the first opportunity.

The stated reasons for opposing the defence of a socialist teacher by other socialist teachers did not recognise the gravity of the situation. They ranged from "I'm not sure I could get everybody in my school to sign it and anyway I'm busy", to "Adrian's not really being victimised because he just has to do what the Head says and he'll be alright" and "we can't support this because if we do it will encourage Adrian to carry on being silly”.

As of result the motion fell 11-11.

ELTA’s lack of support for a trade union activist is an invitation to head teachers across the capital, and the Education Authority, to come up with all sorts of schemes to try and isolate and pick on activists. They now know that while the established left may talk a good fight when it comes to nuts and bolt trade unionism this same left will invent any pretext it can to avoid actually having one.

ELTA has made an elementary mistake by sending a signal to head teachers and the authority – can’t fight, won’t fight.

On Wednesday of the same week Alex Kenny, ELTA Secretary and left Executive member, attended the NUT St Paul’s school group meeting where speaker after speaker spoke in Adrian’s defence and questioned why ELTA wouldn't support the campaign.

Alex said that dress codes were lawful and that he didn't think we would win. He was backed up by Paul McGarr, SWP supporter and deputy rep at the school, who disappointingly had abandoned his previous support for the motion and an offer to propose it at ELTA.

It seems the party line is more important to such people than the defence of basic working class organisation. As for Kenny’s point – you don’t know if you can win until you test the resolve of the troops. At St Paul’s that resolve is solid. On this basis you can win – but only if you are prepared to fight.

Moreover, while dress codes are lawful, so are terms and conditions. And changes to terms and conditions that are imposed without consultation with the union should be challenged. If we don’t challenge them the bosses will start riding roughshod over every agreement in every workplace. Obvious we would have thought – but not to some people in ELTA who seem to have lost sight of why they became socialists and union activists in the first place.

Alex then proposed that the union group should instruct Adrian to agree to the dress code. This was completely at odds with the mood of the meeting and the demonstrable support for Adrian across the board. For his part Adrian made it clear that if the NUT group did accept Kenny’s proposal to capitulate he would resign as rep (something that could potentially speed up the victimisation process).

Alex then came up with a couple of ideas that were more positive, for example, a mass breaking of the dress code or making it look silly by wearing absurd clothes that "conformed" to the code.

However by the next day such ideas had been forgotten and an email from Alex informed Adrian that he was making “a gross error of judgement”.

Alex suggested that Adrian should conform to the dress code but that on the day he did so he should walk into school “followed by the whole Union group behind the school NUT banner.” The suggested slogan was "not in defeat, in solidarity". But if you add “not in trainers” then it is pretty clear it would have been a defeat!

It is disappointing that throughout this affair the main thrust of the local leadership has been to state that the issue was unwinnable and it was a silly issue to fight on given the other issues the school faced, rather than recognising that it was something that members supported in the school and felt the need to fight around.

On the Friday of that week Adrian had his first interview by the "independent" investigator. The investigator is now preparing a report to see whether the issue will be taken further. On the same day Alex met the Head where she insisted that she will not rescind the dress code, she will not drop the disciplinary and that she is not victimising Adrian.

In an email to the NUT Committee at St Paul’s Way on Friday evening Alex adopted a more conciliatory tone than had previously been the case and insisted that he would do his “utmost to defend Adrian.”

Let us hope this signals a real change of attitude, because it is clear from the head’s stance that victimisation of a union activist is exactly what she is after. And if she fails on the dress code issue she will be looking for something else to attack militants over.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For information here is the text of the emergency resolution:

ELTA notes and supports the following resolution passed by the St Paul's Way NUT group

The union group notes

• the Headteacher has decided to impose a staff dress code without any form of consultation taking place

• the Headteacher has still not made clear to all staff what she actually means by ‘appropriate’ dress

• this dress-code has been enforced in an arbitrary fashion (some members have been issued with warnings while others have not).

• given the many challenging and important issues that school has to face today, the implementation and enforcement of a dress-code is an unnecessary distraction and creates an unsettling and divisive atmosphere

• the Headteacher has decided to begin disciplinary proceedings against the NUT rep, Adrian Swain.

We call upon the Headteacher to drop the disciplinary proceedings.

We call upon the ELTA Secretary to write to the Headteacher and the Chair of the IEB condemning the decision to begin disciplinary proceedings against Adrian Swain and to send a mailing to all NUT groups in Tower Hamlets informing them of the campaign and encouraging them to support it.

We call upon the ELTA officers/committee to include this (the decision to begin disciplinary proceedings against our NUT Rep and our resulting campaign in his support) as an item on the agenda of the next ELTA General Members’ meeting.

We call upon the ELTA Secretary to investigate this and other practices (e.g. alleged bullying, capability proceedings) currently going on at St Paul’s Way Community School and to meet with members to discuss these issues.

We resolve to set up a campaign to defend Adrian Swain and bring about an end to the disciplinary proceedings. This will involve circulating a petition and informing other union groups/branches across London about the campaign, inviting them to send letters of protest to the Headteacher and the Chair of the IEB and messages of support to St Paul’s Way Union Group.

We resolve to meet and discuss other forms of action should our requests not be met.

We instruct the ELTA officers and committee to carry out the relevant parts of the above resolution.

Sun 26, October 2008 @ 20:52

Bookmark with:

What are these?

discussion of this article

PR webby said…

Further comments here

http://www.permanentrevolution.net/entry/2371

Sun 26, October 2008 @ 21:03

Alison H said…

Having just been involved in the campaign for a no vote in the ballot for Parkwood School in Sheffield to become an academy (North Sheffield Anti Academies Alliance), I'm appalled that the ELTA is not backing Adrian 100%.
The vote was lost in Sheffield over Parkwood (by 199 votes to 83) and it's clear to me that what was missing from the campaign was real support from organised teachers (whether working at Parkwood or elsewhere in the city). The council bribed their way to winning the academy vote with promises of funding for a new school building if the vote was yes - plus the council and the school had money to spend on glossy brochures (courtesy of Edutrust) and roadshow events that excluded the no campaign. A small number of local teachers supported the campaign and some resources were put in by the NUT but support on the ground was minimal when we all know that academies mean privatisation, loss of accountability and weakening worker's organisation.
In this context, active and militant trade unionists are gold dust. If ELTA can't stand behind Adrian, with his long record of fighting for school staff and students who will they fight for!

Wed 29, October 2008 @ 20:40

Kate Ford said…

Adrian is a long standing and highly respected activist in the NUT. It is not surprising that he should be targeted by management. What is, to say the least, disappointing is that I understand some in Adrian's local branch, the East London Teachers Association, have chosen not to support his case. How can those who claim to be on the left of the union not defend any member being threatened with disciplinary action over a dress code? Does this mean that these people support dress codes and management's right to impose them?
It is interesting that dress codes have suddenly become a big issue in schools. I know of a number of schools, including my own, where management have introduced a dress code and where NUT members are fighting back. The idea has come partly from academies but was supported by David Cameron who a few months back announced that, if elected, the Tories would introduce dress codes for teachers in all schools. Little did he know that his policy would have the support of the SWP and others.
All trade unionists should support the position taken by rank and file members at St. Pauls Way and defend Adrian against any disciplinary action.
I would be interested in hearing from any other school groups or individuals facing disciplinary action over dress codes in order to link up and organise a broader campaign.
Kate Ford
Hackney NUT

Wed 29, October 2008 @ 22:04

Kirstie said…

The following letter was sent by officers from Greenwich NUT:

Dear Ms Page,
We are writing to you to express concern that you have decided to begin disciplinary proceedings against the NUT rep at your school, Adrian Swain.
We understand that you have decided to impose a staff dress code without any form of consultation taking place and that you have still not made it clear what you mean by ‘appropriate’ dress to the staff at the school. Our understanding from the NUT group at the school is that this dress-code has been enforced in an arbitrary fashion and that some members have been issued with warnings while others have not. We question whether the imposition of a dress code is lawful and therefore to discipline a member of staff on this basis is also potentially unlawful.
Under these circumstances the use of disciplinary proceedings against the NUT rep could be construed as an attempt to victimise Adrian for his role as the NUT rep within the school. We are also concerned that in the absence of a governing body that disciplinary procedures may not be carried out in a fair manner.
It seems unnessarily divisive to pursue such a course of action within the school when by all accounts there are far more challenging and important issues that schools have to face today. Surely you should be working to support excellent teachers like Adrian rather than bringing diversionary disciplinary procedures against them.
On the basis of all this we call upon you to drop the disciplinary proceedings against Adrian Swain.
Yours faithfully.

Tim Woodcock – Divisional Secretary, Greenwich NUT
Kirstie Paton - President, Greenwich NUT

Tue 04, November 2008 @ 22:24

Dan said…

This letter has been sent by Lambeth UNISON:

Dear Ms Page,

I am writing to you to express concern that you have decided to begin disciplinary proceedings against the NUT rep at your school, Adrian Swain. I am writing on behalf of the Lambeth branch of UNISON, the public service Union.

I understand that you have decided to impose a staff dress code without any form of consultation taking place and that you have still not made it clear what you mean by ‘appropriate’ dress to the staff at the school. Our understanding from the NUT group at the school is that this dress-code has been enforced in an arbitrary fashion and that some members have been issued with warnings while others have not. We question whether the imposition of a dress code is lawful and therefore to discipline a member of staff on this basis is also potentially unlawful.

Under these circumstances the use of disciplinary proceedings against the NUT rep could be construed as an attempt to victimise Adrian for his role as the NUT rep within the school. I am also concerned that in the absence of a governing body that disciplinary procedures may not be carried out in a fair manner.

It seems unnessarily divisive to pursue such a course of action within the school when by all accounts there are far more challenging and important issues that schools have to face today. Surely you should be working to support excellent teachers like Adrian rather than bringing diversionary disciplinary procedures against them. In order to improve our public services we need to work together and not to seek needless confrontation.

On the basis of all this I hope that you will drop the disciplinary proceedings against Adrian Swain.

Best wishes,

Jon Rogers

Branch Secretary

Lambeth UNISON

Thu 13, November 2008 @ 14:57