| Summary |
DISPUTE - Respondent's school operated unit for special needs children - Children spent part of day in mainstream classroom - Teacher aides employed to assist teachers with special needs children in unit and mainstream classrooms - Collective agreement provided for teacher aide grades of A, B, and C - Grade A described as closely supervised - Grade B required advanced knowledge, skills and experience, and involved periods without supervision - All teacher aides at school designated Grade A - Applicant alleged special needs teacher aides were in reality Grade B - Respondent declined to change grading - Respondent alleged work rather than worker supervised and accordingly supervision" meant planning work and monitoring results rather than overseeing execution - Teacher aides themselves were supervised rather than work - Special needs teacher aides alone with students in variety of situations - Not closely supervised - Provided with training specific to role which was neither required nor available to all teacher aides - Required an advanced level of knowledge, skills and experience - All special needs teacher aides in unit incorrectly graded and were working at Grade B level - All special needs teacher aides on fixed term agreements of one year - Genuine reason for fixed term was that funding for unit attached to individual children - However this ground not reasonable as roll stable and there was a waiting list - Permanent employees - UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE - Respondent unable to justify decision to place aides on Grade A - Remuneration tied to grading so action disadvantaged teacher aides - Over to applicant to decide what further action to take on unjustified disadvantage issue - Teacher aides for special needs children" |