TEACHING PROFESSION

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 74, Issue 140, 16 June 1931, Page 8

TEACHING PROFESSION

MARRIED WOMEN EMPLOYEES. THE CANTERBURY INQUIRIES. Replies already received from among the 74 married women teachers in the Canterbury Education District who have been asked to show cause why they should not be dismissed, reveal the impossibility of making any general rule governing the termination of their service. Of tho 74 women 15 are widows; others are separated from husbands; others again are the solo supports of their children, the husbands being unemployed, disabled from war injuries or by sickness, or pensioners with a bare living. Tho board will bo forced to consider each case strictly on its merits, and even then investigation of individual circumstances will be extremely difficulty. Should there be appeals against decisions the board may make to enforce the retirement of some of these women, it is considered that the board may have difficulty in sustaining its judgment. The Education Department was asked by the boards to give an explanation of the powers given to the boards by that section of tho Finance Act of 1931, which reads: ” Provided also that except in the case of a married female teacher who has completed her course of training at a teachers’ training college, but has not completed the term of service required by the regulations the board may, with the approval of the senior inspector, refuse to employ any female married teacher.”

The Department’s reply states: “It is quite clear that the board may refuse to appoint any such teacher, since the new proviso is added to Section 71, which deals entirely with the appointment of teachers. The new provision does not in itself deal with the termination of engagement of married female touchers. If a board decides to give notice of dismissal to such teachers the provisions of Part XI. of the Education Act relative to the appeal of teachers against dismissal will apply.” From this it is considered that if a dismissed teacher were to make an application to the Court of Appeal provided for in the Act she would probably he successful in gaining reinstatement in her position. According to the Act, dismissal of a teacher will not be considered wrongful if tho hoard is able to satisfy the Court that the termination of her engagement was reasonable, having regard to any of the following circumstances: (1) Efficient and economical administration of the board’s affairs; (2) fitness of the teacher; (3) her conduct; (4) any other special circumstances irrespective of the board’s mere, legal right to determine the engagement by notice. The provision of the new Finance Act may bo included in the fourth section as “a special circumstance.”

Tn any case, however, given a married woman teacher who is efficient and well-conducted, it is possible that a board would have difficulty in proving its case. If in tho estimation of the Court the teacher had been wrongfully dismissed, tho Court could require her reinstatement together with the payment of compensation.