Letters to governors "private and confidential"

Discussion of the children's schools in the UK.
daska
Posts: 270
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 8:29 pm
Location: UK

Postby daska » Fri Apr 21, 2006 7:09 am

I discovered this morning that the list of people who signed the Open Letter has been passed to Donald Lambie who, it appears, is now contacting any SES members on the list to invite them to 1-to-1 meetings.

User avatar
bonsai
Posts: 322
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 12:08 am
Location: London

Postby bonsai » Fri Apr 21, 2006 9:46 am

daska wrote:I discovered this morning that the list of people who signed the Open Letter has been passed to Donald Lambie who, it appears, is now contacting any SES members on the list to invite them to 1-to-1 meetings.


Well I would be very interested to know what is happening in such meetings. Whether this is an attempt to undermine the support for the letter or a genuine attempt by the SES to understand the issues.

Personally, my own interpretation of the open letter leads me to believe that the people that have to act are those in executive control and with governance responsibilities over St James schools. The letter itself has little to do with the SES.

From this perspective I do not think it is for Donald Lambie to respond or act. In fact I think it is important that the two organisations start to show some boundaries between each other and start to behave like the two separate organisations they claim to be.

I'll be interested to see also whether he attempts to contact ex-members also or uses family ties to try to get to other signatories.

Bonsai

daska
Posts: 270
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 8:29 pm
Location: UK

Postby daska » Fri Apr 21, 2006 7:53 pm

I believe my father was a little surprised to receive the 'invitation'.

Anyone care to comment on whether he should accept?

User avatar
Stanton
Posts: 189
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 12:23 am

Postby Stanton » Fri Apr 21, 2006 9:12 pm

But of course he should - how better to say what he has to say.

Alban
Posts: 271
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 11:23 am
Location: London

Postby Alban » Fri Apr 21, 2006 9:30 pm

Hi Daska,

Actually, I fail to see what this has to do with your father, or the SES to be honest. Yes the former sent you to the school and the latter represents the body that ran the school, but the letter was signed by you and was sent to the current governors of the school.

Is this an admission that the governors can't deal with things themselves, or are too scared to interact with the body of ex-pupils that are making the complaints - or is it simply just another damage limitation exercise by the organisation that under-pins all the schools (although they'd rather not admit it).

I think your father should tell Lambie to piss off to tell him to instruct the governors that if they have anything to say, they should say it to the group of people that signed the letter. Where better to do that than here.

Good luck

Alban

sugarloaf
Posts: 98
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2004 11:40 am

Postby sugarloaf » Sat Apr 22, 2006 12:04 am

I think your father should tell Lambie to piss off to tell him to instruct the governors that if they have anything to say, they should say it to the group of people that signed the letter. Where better to do that than here.


i agree.

The open letter was addressed to Roger Pincham, chair or the board of Governors. Whats it got to do with lambie - unless that is - the SES does have direct control over the school?

Which is clearly the case. These people cant even lie well.

Its up to Roger Pincham to make a response - which as a highly experienced (31 years in the job) professional, I'm sure he will, and no doubt with his wealth of hands-on experience in school governance, his response will be measured, considered, and not only fully address all the points in the open letter - but also tackle the issues behind them. At a time of crisis whats needed is strong, pro-active and progressive governance. I'm eagerly awaiting his reply.

Scotsman
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 5:42 pm

Postby Scotsman » Sat Apr 22, 2006 7:08 pm

I think it is fair to assume that Donald Lambie is kept appraised of EVERYTHING that is going on. The Governors of the Day Schools all have a long and close association with SES and would quite naturally want to consult "The Senior Tutor", as he used to be known, and probably still is, and ask his opinion. I can't see the Reconcilliation Process being any exception to that.

One of the characteristics of a hierarchical organisation like the SES is that more senior people are assumed to be more "awake" or more "conscious" than less senior people, and if you ask your Tutor's advice about anything, you are bound to follow whatever advice he gives on whatever subject it may be. You can be sure that whatever "advice" Don Lambie offered to anyone in SES, of whatever seniority, it would be followed. While not listed as a Governor of the Day Schools, he is in effect "the invisible Governor" because if any of the officially listed Governors have asked his opinion or advice, you can be sure it will have been followed.

This is why the SES may protest that the Day Schools are completely separate, but while you have the Governors and vast majority of the teachers as members of SES then the links may not be visible but they are extremely strong.

Free
Posts: 127
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 9:30 pm

Postby Free » Sat Apr 22, 2006 7:18 pm

<delete>
Last edited by Free on Wed Oct 05, 2011 10:18 pm, edited 2 times in total.

daska
Posts: 270
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 8:29 pm
Location: UK

Postby daska » Sat Apr 22, 2006 10:53 pm

just to clarify...

my father did sign the letter but only family members knew this

therefore, as I understand the letter was addressed to the governors and marked private and confidential (Matthew please correct me if I'm wrong about this), how is Lambie aware that he signed it?

Mary, John - which of you passed on the information? or was it the mysterious 3rd governor...?

do we get an apology for this?

my personal opinion is that my father going to see Lambie would be to satisfy his own desires. With regards to the day-schools, if they are correct in claiming that they are no longer controlled by SES then what Lambie has to say is irrelevant and this would therefore be a case of simple self-indulgence.

Free
Posts: 127
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 9:30 pm

Postby Free » Sun Apr 23, 2006 1:20 am

<delete>
Last edited by Free on Wed Oct 05, 2011 10:18 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Stanton
Posts: 189
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 12:23 am

Postby Stanton » Sun Apr 23, 2006 8:32 am

It would be totally unrealistic for the School to wave goodbye to St James since it was School parents who set up the School in the first place and have continued to support it. They did so in order to provide a better education for their children. They really cared about you and, in many cases, made huge sacrifices to further your education. I know of many parents who denied themselves holidays, cars and much else for you. And it was not only parents. All School members were brought in to help the day schools - decorating, scrubbing your ink stains off the wood floors in Queensgate on Saturdays (yes, me, too) and in countless other ways.

So please add that to the equation.

As to the open letter - I've said it before and will do so again - an open letter is an open letter anhd may be seen by anyone. To suggest that it is 'private and confidential' is to muddy the waters. It can't be both 'open' and 'private' at the same time.

anti_ses
Posts: 86
Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2004 5:31 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Postby anti_ses » Sun Apr 23, 2006 9:13 am

open letter
n.
A published letter on a subject of general interest, addressed to a person but intended for general readership.
Dictionary.com


open letter
noun a letter addressed to a particular person but intended for publication in a newspaper or journal.
OED

User avatar
ET
Posts: 194
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 10:49 am
Location: Gloucestershire
Contact:

Postby ET » Sun Apr 23, 2006 9:27 am

Stanton wrote: All School members were brought in to help the day schools - decorating, scrubbing your ink stains off the wood floors in Queensgate on Saturdays (yes, me, too) and in countless other ways.


That may well have been the case, but us pupils were also made to clean the schools - I remember a whole afternoon being given over to scrubbing the grafitti and ink stains off school desks, with the most foul smelling soap you can imagine. I also remember lunchtimes and after school times when we girls were made to clean the school buildings from top to bottom, the most difficult job being brushing all the carpeted stairs at Nos. 90,91 and 92 Queensgate (tall buildings with a lot of stairs) on hands and knees with a stiff brush (vaccuum cleaners being far too modern, it seems). Cleaning (and clearing after lunch - a disgusting job) were also used as a punishment for lateness.

Out of interest, do any of the male ex-pupils remember being asked to do this, or was it just the girls?
Pupil at St James Girl's School from 1979-1989, from age 4-14. Parents ex-members of SES.

Matthew
Posts: 212
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 6:57 pm
Location: London

Postby Matthew » Sun Apr 23, 2006 11:41 am

daska wrote:as I understand the letter was addressed to the governors and marked private and confidential (Matthew please correct me if I'm wrong about this), how is Lambie aware that he signed it?

As I said on page 1 of this thread:

Matthew wrote:The open letter was sent to the St James Chair of the Governors. As the letter directly concerns and involves St James and the SES it was also Cc?d to the four heads i.e. DB, PM, LH, and DL. I do stress that all the letters to these individuals were marked in bold ?Private & Confidential'.

leon
Posts: 80
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 10:13 pm

Postby leon » Sun Apr 23, 2006 1:37 pm

ET wrote:
Stanton wrote: All School members were brought in to help the day schools - decorating, scrubbing your ink stains off the wood floors in Queensgate on Saturdays (yes, me, too) and in countless other ways.



Out of interest, do any of the male ex-pupils remember being asked to do this, or was it just the girls?


At Chepstow we had to clean the school every day for half an hour. Personally I don't have a big issue with that, but I do have a problem with the fact we were not allowed to use modern cleaning tools, vacuum's etc. More thick SES stupidity. As for Stantons post, members of SES who had kids set St James up with a view to teaching SES material, therefore SES set the schools up, it's that way round. All cults love to create schools for obvious reasons. Furthermore Stanton you should look deeper and ask yourself were you scrubbing for the kids or SES? If you cared so much and were so involved how come you were blind to all the violence? Of course people went without and believed their kids were getting a special education. They were duped, and will have to accept the wasted years time and money, as you have to accept your efforts aided an organisation that abused kids as young as 4. Your going to have to live with that, or in SES speak accept the "truth".


Return to “St James and St Vedast”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests