This week's report, which exonerates the Marino college authorities of bullying , is unbelievable, writes Cora O'Farrell.
I trained as a primary school teacher in Coláiste Mhuire, Marino, Dublin, in the 1980s. Although the college was a "well-kept secret" I was always proud to say I had studied there because, despite its relative anonymity, it was held in very high esteem in the education world.
In September 2000, when I returned to my alma mater as an employee, I learned things had changed. New arrangements had been put in place. The Marino Institute of Education (MIE) had been formed, encompassing Coláiste Mhuire, the Centre for Education Services and a conference centre. But the millennium year marked a watershed in the history of the college because Caoimhe Máirtín, a highly renowned educationalist, was appointed as the first lay president of the Christian Brothers-run college.
During the years 2000-2003 it was a wonderful place to work. Relations between staff were excellent and morale was high. Our goal was to turn Coláiste Mhuire into a "college of choice" for school leavers. This aspiration soon turned to reality. Additional finance was obtained from the Department of Education and the future of the college looked excellent. The staff worked tirelessly to improve the proud tradition of the college in keeping with the ethos of Edmund Rice.
THE GROWTH OF the college was rapid but it coincided with the appearance of cracks in the organisation of MIE. A meeting of all staff was called in January 2004 and everybody was given permission to speak openly and frankly without fear of repercussions. At that meeting, serious reservations about working conditions, lack of contracts, salary structures and general poor relations emerged.
One member of the college staff raised concerns about funding - in particular, about how public funds of €5 million were coming in for the education of 500 student teachers but yet only 15 full-time lecturing staff were employed. Most of these were on secondment from schools with a paltry salary enhancement. Something didn't add up. That person was subsequently threatened with dismissal for daring to question the regime. The fall-out from that meeting was that a can of worms had been opened. What followed made the situation worse.
An internal organisational review was ushered in, the results of which were announced by the non-executive members of the board of governors. The "solution" in effect resulted in the removal of executive and administrative powers from Máirtín, giving her no role in financial matters. Practically speaking, it meant she was stripped of the capacity to do her job. Instead of lauding her achievements, her contract was dismantled.
Predictably, there was great discontent. In the proposed "solution", as in the recent Farrell Grant Sparks (FGS) report, the voices of college staff were not to be found. Appeals were made to the board to restore Máirtín's proper functions. The response from one governor at a staff meeting was to remind us that we were sitting on many acres of prime development land and that we should "get back to work". In effect we were told to put up or shut up! We outlined our concerns to the trustees but our appeals fell on deaf ears.
The business model was taking precedence; education was becoming less important. The renting of rooms to outside bodies appeared to be more important than using the rooms for lectures. Curriculum specialists were asked to curb their activities in their lectures in order not to interfere with outside groups hiring rooms.
The board's term of office ended in September 2004 and a new board was appointed. We were hopeful of a new beginning. The election of three members of staff, including myself, to the board gave grounds for optimism. That hope was misplaced and short lived.
MY EXPERIENCE AS a member of the board was that the contribution of staff members was not valued. We were there only to make up numbers. Little attempt was made to take our views on board. At the first sign of disagreement, rather than seeking to reach a consensus, a vote would be called and, playing the numbers game, it was easy to see that we would be outvoted all the time. Information was withheld; we were excluded from various planning meetings and several pieces of correspondence were never brought to our attention. It was totally demoralising.
As a board member I witnessed at first hand the bullying of Máirtín. She was verbally attacked consistently. Every effort was made to discredit and trap her. I never failed to marvel at how she maintained her dignity throughout those difficult times. When she was left with no option but to seek justice through the courts, the board was assured that the claims of bullying would be robustly defended and that we would come out of "this one" in a more financially secure position. I knew that this would never be the case because I had seen the bullying with my own eyes. (The Christian Brothers later decided to settle the case, with €500,000 going to Máirtín.)
Those who supported Máirtíwere also victimised. The middle management group at Coláiste Mhuire was discredited and came to be known by the board as a "self-appointed group" despite the fact that their positions had been ratified by the board. It seems that, like Máirtín, they were a competent group and a threat to the agenda to get rid of her. Numerous letters were written to the trustees without meaningful response.
Caoimhe Máirtín departed last May. The college staff continued to seek to defend the educational interests of Coláiste Mhuire. We foolishly continued to look for the ear of the trustees in the hope that they would recognise the damage being done. We hoped the FGS review would allow us to help the staff members who were being singled out for bullying treatment. But anyone on this side was a target, even a senior Christian Brother and member of the board.
DURING THE SUMMER of 2005 I decided I could no longer work in Marino. I had loved my job. I was always energised by my work with the students and had met so many fine quality student teachers during my time working there. But I was no longer willing to work under a regime which undervalued our work and placed obstacles in our path to producing high quality teachers. Having been a permanent member of staff, I had no job. Fortunately I was able to secure a teaching post in a school nearby and I am grateful to have found sanctuary there.
The publication of the FGS report is like a kick in the teeth to those who have suffered. Instead of acknowledging the pain and hurt, it denies it. Instead of seeking the sanctioning those who perpetrated bullying, it seeks their exoneration. It is, in one word, unbelievable.