School Ordered to Reinstate Deputy Principal Amid Misconduct Investigation

Key Takeaways

• A deputy principal was dismissed from her role due to allegations of misusing school funds for a school camp.
• The Employment Relations Authority (ERA) ordered her reinstatement while a full investigation is carried out.
• The ERA found that the school’s board did not follow a fair process for dismissal, including a lack of transparency and conflicts of interest.
• The deputy principal acknowledged mistakes, including using school funds for her family to attend the camp, but claimed she had a wide-ranging mandate to organize the camp.
• The ERA member found that reinstatement is both practicable and reasonable, despite potential difficulties in the relationship between the deputy principal and the school.

Introduction to the Case
The case involves a deputy principal who was dismissed from her role at a school due to allegations of misusing school funds for a school camp. The woman, whose name was suppressed, had organized an annual camp for Year 8 students to Wellington, which included visiting Te Papa and attending the World of Wearable Arts (WOW). However, in 2024, the school received a complaint from a parent that funds associated with the camp had been misused. The school investigated and found a lack of transparency regarding the funds associated with the camp, and limited evidence of proper accounting.

The School’s Investigation
The school’s board commenced a disciplinary process after finding inconsistencies in the documentation and narrative regarding the allocation of funds raised for the trips. The board was concerned about the woman organizing leavers’ dinners, with money being paid into her account each year without any receipts or reasons for the expenditure. The woman raised several issues with the board’s subcommittee, including conflicts of interest in its makeup, and that it appeared to be relying on Google searches for information rather than legal advice. The parties exchanged correspondence and met in March as part of the process.

The Deputy Principal’s Position
The deputy principal’s position was that she had a wide-ranging mandate to organize the camp, and the school had previously paid expenses for non-student attendees such as parents and helpers, which had never been questioned. She accepted that she had forgotten to repay the cost of her husband and daughter’s WOW tickets, but said she had not sought reimbursement for things she had paid for with her own money. She said she now realized this was wrong and was happy to pay the cost of the tickets. However, in August, the board said it would be terminating her employment, citing concerns that she appeared to hold a view that community fundraising money for the Wellington trip was hers to spend as she saw fit.

The Employment Relations Authority’s Ruling
The deputy principal then turned to the Employment Relations Authority (ERA), seeking an order for her to be reinstated to her former role. The ERA member, Peter van Keulen, found that, on the evidence, it seemed unlikely that the board had adopted a fair process for dismissal. This was because the board did not have a set policy for handling school funds, the board chair had a conflict of interest, and there were key people who were not interviewed as part of the investigation. Van Keulen also found that the subcommittee did not record its meetings, as it was required to do under the Public Works Act.

Reinstatement Ordered
The ERA ordered the deputy principal’s reinstatement, pending a proper investigation and a separate ruling from the authority for a personal grievance she had raised against the school. Van Keulen found that reinstatement is both practicable and reasonable, despite potential difficulties in the relationship between the deputy principal and the school. The woman would return to her role, and the school would be required to undertake a proper investigation into the allegations against her.

Conclusion
The case highlights the importance of fair process and transparency in employment relationships. The ERA’s ruling emphasizes the need for employers to follow a fair and proper process when investigating allegations of misconduct, and to ensure that conflicts of interest are managed. The deputy principal’s reinstatement is a significant outcome, and it will be important to monitor the progress of the investigation and the separate ruling on the personal grievance. The case also raises questions about the management of school funds and the need for clear policies and procedures to ensure transparency and accountability.