the essential
After the dismissal of the director of the Lalbenque school and a teacher, support was mobilized again, with banners in front of the school and a petition. But some parents do not view these actions favorably. The academic director in the Lot maintains her decision.
They are clearly not about to forget. Last June, the director of the Lalbenque school and a teacher were laid off by the academy inspectorate in the Lot. The teacher is accused of having maintained relations with the mother of a student on the premises of the establishment, the director is incriminated for not having reported all the facts to the national education services. At the start of the school year, neither returned to their class: a disciplinary commission led by academic services decided on their transfer and removed the director from his position. Several supporters then showed themselves by placing banners in front of the school on Wednesday October 16. Then, on Wednesday the 23rd, around thirty sympathizers gathered in front of the school to demand the reinstatement of the principal. On Thursday, October 24, they put a petition online which has reached 492 signatures out of a goal of 500, to date.
Also read:
“It’s a real injustice”… The director of a school in Lot dismissed: angry, parents of students demand his reinstatement
This Monday, November 4, back to school day, in the early morning, do it again. Around ten local residents hang new banners in front of the school: “Give us back our director”, “Angry parents” or even “Defamation and mistreatment, the weapons of the incompetent academic inspectors”. A message hanging in particular from a bridge in Cahors, route de Toulouse. “We mobilized before school time so as not to disturb the children and parents. We hope that the academy inspectorate will reverse its decision. That he does not return to Lalbenque is one thing, but making the director look like a thug is no. The punishment has lasted long enough, we are asking for his reinstatement at least as director,” explains one of his supporters.
But this mobilization is far from unanimous in Lalbenque. Starting with the parents of the students. “It is an administrative matter which is internal to national education. Today, due to a lack of communication from national education on the administrative investigation and the suspension procedure, no parent really knows what is happening. Besides, we have not received an invitation to a public meeting to mobilize ourselves either,” begins by observing a mother of students who prefers to remain anonymous. “For me, there is no subject. The school works well, the management does what is necessary, the teachers too and as a parent, that is what I remember. There is a sanction which does not have to be contested. The reality is that in Lalbenque, the majority of residents do not want to take a position. It does not concern us,” she adds. “We were deeply shocked by the messages on the banners which said School in mourning or I am Domichildren thought that someone was dead or had committed suicide,” she regrets.
According to our information, the director has been assigned since November 1 to the replacement brigade of national education services, in the Lot.
“One-upmanship leads to no solution”
Sophie Sarraute, the academic director of national education services in Lot has not changed her mind. “My wish is always appeasement. I can only say my disagreement with these methods, in particular putting padlocks on the school gate. It is a form of violence. The teachers had a peaceful return to school.” , she maintains. The head of national education in the department would like to point out: “The disciplinary commission lasted six hours, the director was able to present contradictory documents and he was able to count on five witnesses to defend him. The commission resulted in a unanimous vote, including by staff representatives. I led the committee with respect for the debates, I received the director to support the decision and I made myself available to him. Following the new messages displayed on the banners and targeting in particular the academy inspection services, it is not refraining from any action. “The overbidding does not lead to any solution. I will not get into it. On the other hand, I am not forbidding myself from any action: filing a complaint, reporting or not following up”, specifies the one who assures to have “no contact” among the support from the director. Sophie Sarraute continues to think “that they are harming the cause defended and demonstrating that there was indeed a dysfunction”.
