NAHT will ballot its headteacher and deputy headteacher members on the Isle of Man on whether to take industrial action amid a dispute with the island’s education department. 

The school leaders union's senior leadership on the island backed the move to a formal ballot in an indicative electronic poll. It followed a unanimous recommendation by the union’s Isle of Man executive at an emergency meeting. 

NAHT says the step is necessary to protect its members from further misuse of disciplinary proceedings by the education department, disregard of agreed policies and procedures, and victimisation of its officials. 

Following the result of the indicative poll, the union’s national executive committee authorised the move to a formal ballot at its meeting today.  

The formal postal ballot will open on Monday 7 July, closing on Monday 11 August. 

Rob Kelsall, NAHT’s assistant general secretary, wrote to the island's interim chief executive, Mark Lewin, in May, raising a formal collective dispute with the Isle of Man education department. 

Commenting on the support for a ballot on industrial action, Mr Kelsall said: “This wasn’t a road we wanted to have to go down, but we were left with little choice due to the inaction of the Isle of Man government. 

“In these circumstances we are pleased school leaders have indicated their support for a ballot on industrial action to defend the basic employment rights of themselves and their colleagues. 

“This is about standing up for the safety, dignity, and fair treatment of our members in the face of disgraceful treatment by the education department which may well constitute unlawful conduct. 

“Of course, we remain ready to hold further talks with the Isle of Man government to resolve these issues, but it must be willing not just to listen but also to act upon our serious concerns.” 

The union’s communication to members about its indicative ballot highlighted four areas of ‘critical’ concern: 

• Victimisation of NAHT members and officials, potentially amounting to trade union detriment and breaches of protected employment rights. 

• Repeated and serious breaches of the Fairness at Work Policy, particularly the failure to uphold its core values of fairness, tolerance, understanding, and respect. 

• Misuse of the Disciplinary Procedure for Teachers, in direct contradiction to the stated principle that such procedures should support professional development, not impose punitive sanctions. 

• Breaches of the Code of Conduct for Public Servants, including a failure to model appropriate leadership behaviours and uphold expected standards of professional and ethical conduct.