If membership of the BNP doesn't interfere with their work in the class room there is no case to ban it. The NASUWT believes that it would interfere with the job:
"Maurice Smith seems to have focused, to a point of obsession, on the number of incidents," she said. "One incident is one too many. How many incidents would there have to be before Maurice Smith would be persuaded that further action is needed?
"The idea that a person who signs up to membership of the BNP can simply leave these beliefs at the school gate and behave as a 'professional' when they walk into school is risible.
"A principled stand was required. This is a matter of social justice, staff wellbeing and child protection."
Well if the NASUWT believes that it is impossible for teachers to leave their beliefs at the school gate, then fine but if they really believe that behaving professionally is an impossible task for teachers then there are other implications that flow from that. It would make it very difficult to argue that members of a religion could be science teachers or that politically active socialists could be trusted to take history lessons.
The logic of the NASUWT position means that teachers require a much greater degree of supervision and less autonomy. However I have more faith in the teaching profession than their union does though. I'm sure they can act professionally and if they can't and any teachers, BNP or not, start talking about the myth of the Holocaust during History lessons then they can be sacked for that.
In fairness there are some organisations with a track record of trying to disrupt the education of children and promoting political extremism however on balance I don't think I would ban membership of the teaching unions.
7 comments:
I probably agree, but I think there is a difference between being a member of the BNP and being a religious scientist or a socialist historian (or Richard Dawkins and Andrew Roberts for that matter). The BNP's raison d'etre is essentially about a dislike of people, non-white people specifically. The examples are about issues. One doesn't have to imagine too hard that someone who believes a child should be deported and his/her parents forcibly split up might not be too fair. The same would apply, say, to a teacher who populated blogs with bloodcurdling threats about stringing up bankers.
@Matthew I don't think it matters whether it's membership of the BNP, or being religious, or indeed an atheiest, or any one of a number of attributes that could be ascribed to what makes someone who they are. It is risible to suggest that membership, or belief, affects someone's ability to act professionally.
There's also the rather obvious issue of someone being a racist / bigot and not a BNP member.
Matthew:'there is a difference between being a member of the BNP and being a religious scientist or a socialist historian '?
True; perhaps a better analogy might be a teacher who is anti-blood sports - like the one who, in my hearing, ordered a child to remove a pro-hunting badge pinned to her schoolbag because she found it 'offensive'.
The vast majority of teachers leave their own beliefs outside the classroom (and it's insulting to suggest they do not); the few who do allow personal prejudice to interfere with their teaching should be dealt with individually and by the school.
I think if I was interviewing a candidate for a teacher role, and he said "I hate all Jews and want them to be deported, at gunpoint if necessary, and we mustn't save the children", I would count it against him.
Matthew- I take the point, but if their hatred of particular groups manifests itself in how they behave then that can be dealt with without using the membership of a group in itself.
"There's also the rather obvious issue of someone being a racist / bigot and not a BNP member."
TCO- Indeed, support for the BNP in the last election was around 60 times their membership, and there are many other non BNP organisations with unpleasant views as well.
Macheath- Yes that is a better analogy.
"I think if I was interviewing a candidate for a teacher role, and he said "I hate all Jews and want them to be deported, at gunpoint if necessary, and we mustn't save the children", I would count it against him."
It wouldn't be the best interview strategy by the applicant.
I suppose a different question is do we think membership of the BNP is reason enough not to give someone a public sector role?
Post a Comment