The bulk of stakeholders providing feedback on a draft of a Halton District School Board professional policy, seeking clarification on a dress code, were left with a “positive impression,” according to researchers.
The policy, created not long after a transgender teacher showed up to Oakville Trafalgar High wearing tight shirts over large prosthetic breasts, was to appease many concerned about existing guidelines on dress and decorum.
Close to 8,600 parents and guardians, staff, and students between Grades 9 and 12 participated in the recent consultation stage which ran between Feb. 24 and March 10.
In a board meeting Wednesday night, attendees learned the most effective elements in the draft surrounded the respect of employment without discrimination, the right to be free of harassment and demonstrating a safe, inclusive environment to learn.
However, respondents felt there was some confusion in defining professionalism and at times wondered if the policy was even communicating a dress code standard.
Get daily National news
“There was some level of misunderstanding with respondents in terms of that they were receiving a policy and not a dress code,” research manager Rossana Bisceglia said.
Participants also had concerns that language used in the framework could potentially discriminate against certain members of the community.
Revisions based on the feedback received were few, according to an executive on the board.
Some language and the optical layout, to match the look of other Halton District School Board policies, were essentially the only changes enacted via the survey.
The board has been suppressed from making more far-reaching alterations due to unfinished collective bargaining agreements that have yet to be negotiated and signed by teacher and education worker federations.
Superintendent of human resources Sari Taha explained to board members that provincial labour rules don’t allow the board to change working and employment conditions while contracts are being hammered out with the unions.
“That is the reality that we find ourselves, in terms of implementing new work rules in the workplace,” Taha said.
“This policy development process is the policy development cycle working within those parameters.”
As it stands, the policy defines “professional misconduct” as an act or omission that would be “reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional” or “conduct unbecoming to a member,” as per code in the Ontario College of Teachers Act.
Taha has previously characterized the process as “complicated,” suggesting the board could only use “existing mechanics” available to draft an edict.
More fulsome discussions of the survey and the professionalism policy are expected in a future committee of the whole meeting.
Comments