ALL Truancy Officers nz.
Please send me your contact points so that you can be reached in regard to the Truancy Officer's nz planned interventions to the New Attendance Service.
You can use the 'contact author' tab or send me details to ctdts@xtra.co.nz.
Currently this site is getting 80+ hits a day.
The MoE seem to be NOT answering the questions given to them.
As a 'collective' they will have to listen, unless of course they are as some have said 'dictatorial' in their approach.
Here are a few questions unanswered.
*Why are the current DTS and NETS employee's NOT guaranteed a position in the New Service when they are the experts in their field?
*Will the New Service be working under Section 31 Education Act 1989?
If so
*Will there be a Law change with Section 20. ALL nz citizens 6 - 16 must attend school?
*Do the DTS's have to provide the MoE with the 'Environmental Scan'?
This document appears to be a totally unethical document.
The MoE has stated clearly that they are NOT the employer of the DTS employee's.
The information to be provided (Environmental Scan) is the property of the DTS.
Please send me your contact points so that you can be reached in regard to the Truancy Officer's nz planned interventions to the New Attendance Service.
You can use the 'contact author' tab or send me details to ctdts@xtra.co.nz.
Currently this site is getting 80+ hits a day.
The MoE seem to be NOT answering the questions given to them.
As a 'collective' they will have to listen, unless of course they are as some have said 'dictatorial' in their approach.
Here are a few questions unanswered.
*Why are the current DTS and NETS employee's NOT guaranteed a position in the New Service when they are the experts in their field?
*Will the New Service be working under Section 31 Education Act 1989?
If so
*Will there be a Law change with Section 20. ALL nz citizens 6 - 16 must attend school?
*Do the DTS's have to provide the MoE with the 'Environmental Scan'?
This document appears to be a totally unethical document.
The MoE has stated clearly that they are NOT the employer of the DTS employee's.
The information to be provided (Environmental Scan) is the property of the DTS.
NOTE
If the MoE were the employer of the DTS' and their Officers this would NOT be 'unethical' as the MoE would be the designers of the DTS system.
BUT
In this case the MoE are NOT the designers of the DTS's Operations/Systems within their allotted communities.
The MoE are the funders of the DTS's.
eg.
eg.
after 'sub contracting' a Telecommunications organisation to work for you then after 18 years changing how you operate and asking that business for an environmental scan, what do you think they will say?
RSS Feed
