My website

I've been planning on creating a website to assist my students in learning French, for some time. Mike, Emma's partner, has arranged for me to have my site on the server his friend has bought space on, in the U.S. Today Emma and I did some brainstorming and came up with the domain name which will be 'speakeasy.org.uk'. Now comes the hard part. We have to decide everything else: graphics, colours, organization, content and lots more, I'm sure! I'll let you all know when it's up and ready to go.

The other meeting with 'she who must be obeyed' took place this afternoon. I'll have to wait till tomorrow to find out what happened since I don't know anyone on the committee.

Yesterday's meeting

I didn't go in the end. I was so tired I had to go to bed instead. However, it seems that the meeting went well. The head is having a hard time getting to grips with the idea that she intimidates people, but she may (and I only say 'may') be getting the hint!

Apparently, when the lower school teachers got to the statement in the grievance about the intimidation, the head warned everyone in no uncertain terms that they had better reconsider the word 'intimidate'. She thought that it was rather strong. Then she asked for examples of intimidation. The teachers were all so intimidated by her statement, that for a few moments no one spoke. Then someone had the courage to point out the the staff felt so intimidated that no one had wanted to act as spokesperson. That was why everyone had come instead of just a few. Furthermore, at that very moment they were all feeling intimidated and for that reason no one had spoken initially. That opened the floodgates.

There's another meeting next Tuesday after she has had time to consider the matter. Frankly, I don't trust her and I don't think that the lower school should let down their guard.

Now tomorrow there is another meeting. When the management committee realized how bad the results of the staff survey were last year, they suggested (in an intimidating manner probably) that we set up committees to discuss three of the most serious areas - work and life balance/appreciation by those above of what we do/pay and benefits. This was reduced to first two since admin decided that really only they could deal with pay and benefits. So we met (after school of course - which really helped with our work/life balance!!) and decided to only have one committee. We surveyed the staff, had lots of discussions and finally came up with a list of suggestions to deal with work/life balance and appreciation issues. At a now infamous meeting, all of our suggestions were deemed impossible. So this Thursday, we get to discuss the situation all over again. Nothing has changed. All the things that need to change are still unchanged. However, no one in admin can see that they need to compromise for us all to move forward. It could be funny. Someone has suggested a sit-com but no one would believe it.

Tomorrow

I forgot to mention in the previous post that I've been asked to go to a meeting tomorrow to support one of the teachers in the lower school. The entire lower school has made a formal complaint against the head of school. Tomorrow all of the lower school teachers are attending a meeting with the head and a member of human resources. Each of the lower school teachers has decided to invite someone to support them. That is why I'm going. Should be interesting. Should be a lot of people present. Somehow I don't think the head is expecting this.

The French election

Anyone following the French election. The following is an editorial from the Guardian. An interesting view point. Sorry if you don't understand some of the British references to politicians.

Whether Sarko or Ségo wins the French election, let's give the Anglo-Saxon condescension a miss

Peter Preston
Monday April 23, 2007
The Guardian

The myth of democracy, ritually parroted from left and right, takes progress as a given. There's always nirvana on offer just over the next valley, if only you'll vote for me one more time. In fact, once such rhetoric stops, the magic of the ballot box usually provides something different. Duck, weave, stutter, squeeze: a lifetime of making course corrections along a winding road that may not end in progress at all.

So, after neocon Bush, the new centrists gather in America: Barack Obama, decking midwest Blairism in soothing adjectives; Rudy Giuliani, espousing a woman's right to choose from inside the Republican den. So, after Margaret Thatcher, there is David Cameron, at last a wet that Willie Whitelaw might have embraced. So Angela Merkel shows Christian Democrats reverting to emollient, coalescent type in Germany. So Romano Prodi succeeds Silvio Berlusconi. And then there is France, poised now (on the exit polls) for its essential choice: Nicolas Sarkozy or Ségolène Royal?

The worst trap for British commentators, when French elections come around, lies in peddling Anglo-Saxon condescension. Our economy is booming; theirs is an arthritic shambles. Our model brings prosperity, flexibility, jobs; theirs inflicts only waste, disillusion and despair. We are sons of honest toil; they are irredeemably duplicitous.

It's self-serving rubbish, of course. Try to build an equivalent list the other way round. They have a transport infrastructure to be proud of, a health service to goggle over, an appetite for technology that makes them European leaders in broad and many other bands, a bureaucracy of professionals fit for modern purpose, a sense of history and continuing nationhood. They play great national football, eat healthily, run a unique film industry, still mass manufacture cars and possess a pretty independent deterrent. Plus they were right about Iraq. And we?

Of course France has its stagnations and disappointments. Of course, in disappointment, there are always angry questions to be asked. But the choice that defined itself yesterday is no party in a last-chance saloon. Here is a country evolving inside an evolving Europe. It has its problems - and a political system that initially tends to highlight extremes. But the next generation is taking charge now in terms that the previous generation understands.

Sarkozy is not some new kid on the block. He is Mr Continuity from the Chirac years, an abrasive interior minister going up in the world (rather as though John Reid were Blair's successor). He may hint at profound change on immigration when he talks tough on Jean-Marie Le Pen's southern flank and seem to offer even tougher action when he talks to public-service unions, but in reality the name of his game is more transition than revolution, just as it has been for Royal throughout her own wavering campaign - full of style yet curiously traditional in substance, old socialism in designer clothing.

Here, in part, is the myth of "progress" again. France since De Gaulle has mostly been led from the centre-right but embraced the centre-left beneficences Mitterrand bestowed on it. Royal may berate Sarkozy's "politics of brutality", just as he may jeer at her soft-centred blankness on hard-edged issues, but neither of them in power will be able to make huge course corrections. Some problems, like youth unemployment, will have to be addressed. Some questions, like France's place in Europe, will have to be answered afresh. But, at the end of the next presidential term, there will still be a recognisable France following well-trodden French routes.

Of course politicians jeer at the mush in the middle. Nico and Ségo have battered François Bayrou as some kind of Gallic Roy Jenkins, proffering harmony for the sake of harmony. But the fact of Bayrou's candidacy has been a powerful hint to both of them. This isn't (to use David Miliband's formulation of non leadership interest) part of some essential, everlasting battle between Labour and Tory. This is a matter of what happens after the electioneering is over.

Put away your pat Brit handbooks, then. Can a socialist without much of a programme provide change and success? Absolutely. That's why José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, the symbol of such success, rode over the Spanish border to stand side by side with Royal. Can French society cope in a globalised world? That's the next question. But, locked into Europe as well as its history, the results, whatever they are, won't win much Westminster applause. We're all victims of our own enduring myths.

· peter.preston@guardian.co.uk

And now for something completely different!

Yes, I have finished my treatments! I still have consultant visits and scans but at least I don't have the daily trek to Guildford. To celebrate, here is a picture from the gardens at school.

Yesterday's rant!

I really did go on yesterday. Well you may be happy to hear that only two people turned up at the head's meeting this morning. We are hoping for a 100% boycott next time. To add to all our merriment, there was a cartoon circulated that I think you will appreciate. There is also a fairy tale making the rounds and here it is:

Winnie the Pooh and the lost plot.

The animals were gathered together again by the Meeting Tree in the middle of the Hundred ACS-wood. They were a patient group, and had waited for the results of the new SIRVAY since the last Haycorn Season, but for reasons which were not clear, even to wise old Owl, delay and followed delay. "I'm so excited," squeaked Piglet, "that my tail has uncurled." Tigger agreed that it had. Little Roo jumped up and down, desperate to hear the news. Eeyore grumbled that if nothing happened soon, he would be too senile to benefit from any changes. "At least I've got my long service bonus to look forward to," he muttered, "they can't take that away from me."

Winnie the Pooh introduced a speaker from the Forest Committee, and the animals heard how the meeting would go. First, a long talk, then a short break when they were encouraged to leave, then another talk, and finally, at the very end of the day as darkness fell, a chance to ask a question. A special MAGIC LANTERN show had been set up by Christopher Robin to show the animals the numbers. They gasped as the results were explained, but none understood what was going on. Even Christopher Robein, who had some PRIVAT EDUKASHUN, and knew a little about SUMS, was baffled. Large numbers had become smaller, and they were told this was "A GOOD THING'. Low numbers changed to high ones before their eyes - another "GOOD THING". Other results had just disappeared, and nothing was said about them. "That's why it's called a MAGIC LANTERN", hooted Owl. "It changes numbers around, like magic."

The speaker then told the animals that their opinions were so important they could do another SIRVAY next Haycorn season. The animals gasped in amazement at this. "We value your opinions, and we are listening", continued the speaker. The younger animals clapped and applauded. The Forest Committee really cared about them.

"What a load of BOLLOX", muttered Eeyore, grateful that he had his personal index-linked private medical insurance, guaranteed against inflation.

Finally the speaker stopped. A polite ripple of applause came from the older animals, hoping to leave early, but then another one started to talk. This one mumbled something, but none of them could hear, so a MIKE ROWFONE was used to make the voice louder.

"Hrrmhgyyyy....thergdswill....smorfer..." it said. "Hmmphhh oplot." What strange language was this? Even wise Owl, who knew some LATIN, was confused. "What is he saying?", asked Tigger.

He says 'thank you for coming, as he knows you are busy", said Owl.

"Yes, I am", said Tigger, "Very busy", and he bounced off to assess his work-life balance and smoke some Haycorns.

All this time, Winnie the Pooh was pondering, and a little song began to form in his tiny bear brain: "I know what I know and I don't know a lot, but someone round here has lost the plot...tiddly pom", and he waddled off into the forest.

The Vortex of Unspeakable Evil

I suppose you might be wondering what I'm talking about. What is a vortex of unspeakable evil? Anyone who works with me or has known me for a while realizes that it probably has something to do with the place I work and the woman (aka 'she who must be obeyed') who runs the place. Yes, you are right. It's the new name for the place she dwells while on campus.

Yesterday afternoon, there was a meeting attended by the head of school, the superintendent (head of all three schools), the head of the management committee (former managing director of a brewery) and the head of HR. We were all there as well, every member of the faculty and non-teaching staff. Why had we all gathered, you may wonder. It was to be the unveiling of the results of the staff survey (taken last October) and a presentation on the pay and benefits for non-teaching staff. Were we excited? I'm afraid not. We've become too cynical over the years to believe there was much point being there. In fact 45 percent of the staff couldn't even bring themselves to fill out the survey in the first place.

We weren't given a copy of the results of the survey before the meeting. We were given it the morning after the meeting. The management group decided what elements of the survey they would discuss with us. Admittedly they did turn out to be some of the ones with the worst response percentages:

I feel the school appreciates the need for a good work/life balance. (13% agreed)
I feel that my contribution to the school is valued and recognized. (34% agreed)
I believe the school recognises hard work and commitment. (27%)

Amazingly, despite the fact that those figures were down from last year, the head of school managed to take a positive view of them. However, she did say that she was disappointed ('with you' was left hanging in the air) that only 13% felt that ACS appreciated the need for a good work life balance. She had done so much for us this year to make things better. She had put more whiteboards in classrooms. There was more computer training. There were going to be more whiteboards this year and more computer training. No one was entirely sure how the whiteboards and computer training would improve our work/life balance. Someone since has suggested that we should ask her for her definition of work/life balance. Hers doesn't seem to match ours.

We were talked down to, insulted, told that we could find another job if we didn't like our pay or terms of employment and lied to. And I truly believe that they thought they had gotten away with it.

The Insurrection/revolution started that day at 5:00 with the end of the meeting.
How many of us felt that action would be taken as a result of the survey - only 25%. How many of us would let it rest there. I can't say yet but there is a boycott of the head's Friday get-together meeting. We may know better after that!

And as to the 'vortex of unspeakable evil'? It's where 'she who has hurt so many people' hangs out.

And what about the pay and benefits for the non-teaching staff, you may also ask. Well, nothing will happen till 2008-9. In the meanwhile, 'they' will decide if each person is paid above, below or at market rate. And who will get an increase? Only those below market rate. After years without a pay increase, the majority still won't get one.

Yes, and why do we stay? The head of HR said we should leave if we weren't happy. It's a shame that it isn't as simple as that!