Academy chief threatens to sue parents over 'dictator' comments on Facebook
The group of parents have accused the Gorse Academies Trust head of running Morley school like a 'jail'
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.A top academy head who earns more than the Prime Minister has threatened to sue parents over comments likening him to an “dictator” in a private Facebook group.
Solicitors working on behalf of Sir John Townsley, executive principal of Gorse Academies Trust, have issued the group of parents with letter demanding they remove the comments.
Mr Townsley is also demanding they either close the discussion or remove the seven-school trust’s name from the group, since they argue it implies an official connection to the trust.
In a private Facebook group, one parent said of Morley Academy in Leeds: “It is run like Stalag Luft” and the “school [is] run like a young offender's camp”. Another said: “They are turning the school into a jail”.
Another parent talked about the “dictatorship of the academy”, while the grandparent in the group wrote that the “academy is answerable only to one giant ego [Sir John Townsley] and no higher authority than one giant eye”.
Parents involved in the row have accused the school leader of trying to “bully” and “intimidate” them, after letters from the solicitors asked parents to issue a public apology as well as financial compensation.
The group have been told they will not have to pay the compensatory fees if they agree to remove the comments and post no similar opinions for the next two years.
Parents involved in the row say they are refusing to remove the comments, arguing that they should be able to express opinions about their children’s schooling freely.
These particular comments came about after the parents criticised a rule whereby pupils were not allowed to remove their school jumpers without permission in lessons.
Another parent criticised the school’s penalising of her son for having his hair longer on top than at the sides.
Nichole Roberts, an accountant who has two children at the school, said: “We just feel that Sir John is trying to intimidate us into being silent. But we won’t be bullied: why should we? And for him to be wanting compensation from us, when we have done nothing wrong, given what he earns and what other families around here earn is, quite frankly, shocking.”
Mr Townsley, who has been accused of bullying tactics towards staff at previous schools, was paid £193,200 salary last year along with £24,421 in employer’s pension contribution, making him a higher earner than top politicians.
Sir John’s solicitors said in a statement: “The Trust does not object to the Facebook site or the right of parents to make criticisms of the school, either on the site or at all.”
”This is not an attempt to curb freedom of speech.”
“The Academy does object to the name of the Facebook site which suggests it has a formal link to the Academy and it does object to comments made that amount to harassment and defamation of senior managers at the Academy.”
”Those are the only comments for which removal is sought.”
“The letters to the parents make very clear that this is not about financial compensation. It about the right of senior staff to do their jobs without fear of harassment.”
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments