A disciplinary case that hopefully taught a school a valuable lesson.

For anyone working in a school an allegation of assaulting a child whether true or false can be the start of a drawn-out, career threatening nightmare.

Sky, a teacher, discovered this when she broke up a fight between two teenage male students, and she was alleged to have assaulted and injured one of the boys.

At a disciplinary hearing she faced allegations, which in summary amounted to breaching the school safeguarding policy by behaving in a way that has harmed a child or may have harmed a child.

Sky, who had worked at the secondary school for four years, was devastated by the allegations.

When she contacted our Employee Support Centre for help with her disciplinary case, she discussed it with our representative and provided him with a copy of the evidence pack supplied by the school. It included witness statements from two colleagues and students.

Sky insisted her actions were reasonable and necessary in the circumstances and after reviewing the case, our representative agreed with her.

She broke up a playground fight between the students by pulling them apart while they were grappling on the floor.

When one got to his feet, he kicked the other student, who was still on the floor, in the head. He was about to do it for a second time when Sky pushed him, causing him to fall backwards.

He quickly got back to his feet and attempted to carry on the attack despite Sky shouting at him to stop and having to push him away. Two male teachers came to help.

Sky was suspended from work when the boy’s parents complained he had suffered a cut to his head and injuries to his neck and back.

As part of the subsequent disciplinary investigation, Sky attended a fact-finding meeting which took place a couple of weeks later.

At the meeting, Sky insisted she acted to prevent a child from suffering serious injury.

She was assured the investigation would be fair and completed as soon as possible and in line with the guidance in the ACAS Code of Practice.

Sky was provided with the investigation outcome, which recommended she face formal disciplinary action, four months later.

At the disciplinary hearing our representative acted on Sky’s behalf to question the disciplinary investigation manager and two male teachers who attended the hearing as witnesses.

This provided information that supported Sky’s case. That information included, there was no evidence of harm to the student and that he was extremely aggressive, threatening and intimidating at the time of the incident.

Our representative emphasised to the school’s disciplinary panel hearing the case, the violent and dynamic nature of the incident and Sky’s duty of care to protect the students involved.

He explained how Sky’s concern was to prevent further harm to the vulnerable student on the floor having witnessed him take a forceful kick to the head. Witness statements provided from other students present at the time described the kick to the head and Sky’s reaction.

Our representative said due to the urgency of the situation and what Sky had witnessed, she acted quickly to prevent an immediate threat of violence and second dangerous and potentially damaging kick to the head. He assured the hearing that Sky acted to prevent harm, not cause it.

The school’s Physical Intervention Policy was in the disciplinary evidence pack, along with other policies.

He referred to the policy and highlighted parts of it permitting the use of reasonable force. Our representative used the policy to argue that in the situation Sky’s actions were reasonable, proportionate and in line with procedure that stated:  This policy in no way limits or removes an employee’s right to use reasonable force to protect themselves or others from the threat of harm. 

At the conclusion of the hearing, the school said it would write to Sky with an outcome within five days.

So, our representative was surprised to get a call from Sky later the same day to inform him the school had called her to say she had been cleared of the allegation.