English Translation:

Torino, 26-03-2019

Report on the meeting for Ms [Purple]’s reply to dispute the disciplinary letter of 12 March 2019 based on Article 66 of the current CCNL ANINSEI (national contract, link).

All in participation:

  • Ms [Purple], assisted by Mr [Light Blue] (CISL Scuola Piemonte) and Ms [Green] (FLC CGIL Piemonte).
  • Ms [Orange] and Mr [Brown] for [Black]

With regard to the dispute, Ms [Purple]’s answers are:

  1. In the meeting of 25 February 2019, [Dark Blue] was not present as it was stated in the letter.
  2. Regarding lesson plans: Ms [Purple] says that she will continue to develop her own daily plans, but she is open to collaborating on teaching units and developing schemes of work with Ms [Orange].
  3. It would have been important to have had collaborative intervention, but the disciplinary letter already appears to be a provision regarding educational organisation.
  4. Timing of Communication: This problem should have been reported to Ms [Purple] prior (to this letter) in order to allow for previous monitoring prior to the letter. However, she was not notified of this situation prior to 25 February 2019.
  5. Ms. [Purple] states that she made it known during staff meetings when she had to organise or replace units that were to be taught in her class; she also believes that the five-year plans (IB requirement) would allow for this flexibility. She says that she made these changes and received no response regarding them.
  6. About feedback: Ms [Purple] said that there were no previous requirements that all feedback should be presented through [Managebac]. Regarding her educational strategies and methodologies, she states that after the quizzes, she discusses the answers with the whole class; she also works with individuals and groups in order to verify that the students’ work on their projects and assessments is adequate and helps them in their progress. She says that she has done editing/correction sessions both in class and during study hall.
  7. Regarding additional tasks, she states that the time needed for preparation, planning, and completing other administrative are no longer sufficient when asked to substitute [for absent teachers].
  8. This letter has decreased trust within the working relationship. The criticisms [present in the disciplinary letter] reflect the style of teaching rather than any specific breaches of contractual rules.

With best regards,

[All signatures]