A principal at a prestigious Dublin secondary school will tell the Workplace Relations Commission that she did not retaliate against a teacher because she had signed a grievance document highlighting student indiscipline and concerns about how the school was being run.
As cross-examination of a former Spanish teacher at the school began, the hearing was told that principal Niamh Quinn will also be countering claims regarding school indiscipline.
On Tuesday the WRC heard how teacher Jennifer Clancy resigned from the school last summer after claiming that Ms Quinn penalised her for signing a grievance document by offering her a timetable that conflicted with her childcare needs.
Jennifer Clancy said the timetable she was offered in late August 2022, seven months after signing the grievance, required her to work afternoons when her previous arrangement over four years was that she worked predominantly morning classes.
Ms Clancy also alleged that Ms Quinn began a disciplinary procedure against her without giving her any details of what allegation was being made against her, who was making the allegation, or who was carrying out the investigation.
Rosemary Mallon BL began the cross-examination by saying that Ms Quinn will tell the WRC that while she found it difficult when the collective grievance was made, she "didn't take it personally and didn't do anything to specifically target [Ms Clancy]".
She said that while Ms Clancy may not like certain things that Ms Quinn did, the principal had her reasons and did not act in retaliation.
Ms Mallon put it to Ms Clancy that when Ms Quinn took over as principal in 2019, the complainant did not tell Ms Quinn that she had an agreement with the principal's predecessor that she would only work mornings. Ms Clancy responded that she thought it a "reasonable conclusion" that the previous principal had communicated her arrangement to Ms Quinn, which she said was evidenced by the morning classes she was given by Ms Quinn from 2019 to 2021.
Ms Mallon said the principal will say that the change to Ms Clancy's timetable was not malicious or done in retaliation. She said neither Ms Clancy nor Ms Quinn's predecessor had told her of the time-tabling arrangements and she had, in good faith, created the timetable in the best interests of students.
She said the afternoon classes were for Leaving Cert students and Ms Clancy was the best Spanish teacher in the school.
Ms Clancy did not agree that Ms Quinn had the best interests of students in mind and said two teachers within the department were fully qualified, capable and available to work those hours.
Ms Mallon said that Ms Quinn will deny that she was "frenzied" or aggressive in the meeting following the issuing of the 2022 timetable but accepted that "neither of you coated yourselves in glory".
She said that the reason Ms Quinn did not provide details of the subsequent disciplinary procedure against Ms Clancy was that Ms Clancy had gone on sick leave. Counsel said Ms Quinn thought it inappropriate to contact her in those circumstances. Ms Mallon suggested that Ms Clancy had taken the view that everything that happened which she didn't like was done with malice or in retaliation. In reality, counsel said Ms Quinn had other reasons for acting as she did.
Ms Clancy said she is sure that prior to her signing the grievance letter in February 2022, the principal would not have invoked a disciplinary procedure. She described it as a "knee-jerk reaction" following the meeting and added: "She looked at what she had in her arsenal, the disciplinary procedure was taken out and sent to me without telling me what it related to, no details given and despite repeated efforts for clarification... no clarification was given."
Ms Clancy agreed that after some time Ms Quinn did offer a reasonable compromise on the timetable and offered to withdraw the disciplinary procedure. However, Ms Clancy said that the offer also stated that this did not set a precedent for future timetable arrangements. Ms Clancy said: "I felt, in my heart of hearts, that going forward, in subsequent years, the same thing was going to happen again, that it would be all afternoon classes."
Ms Mallon also said the school wanted to respond to allegations of student indiscipline at Templeogue.
Ms Mallon said that Ms Quinn's evidence will be that she was never made aware of Ms Clancy's allegation of being assaulted by a student throwing his mobile phone. She said she had checked the records and found no critical incident report form and "not one jot of evidence or proof that any such assault occurred." Ms Clancy said it did happen and she immediately raised it with the deputy principal and left it in the hands of senior management.
In relation to the secret filming of a teacher's backside, Ms Mallon said Ms Quinn took the phone from the student but could not find any video. She said the student was suspended while the allegation was investigated but no evidence was found.
Adjudicating officer Breiffni O'Neill adjourned the hearing until April 24 when Ms Clancy will be required to give further evidence before other witnesses are called.
Ms Clancy has made two complaints of penalisation under the Protected Disclosures Act and one under the Health and Safety at Work Act.
