36 - Bury College: Double Standards on the Use of the Word “Retard”

Bury College has repeatedly described the word “retard” as “offensive,” “derogatory,” “inappropriate,” “bullying,” “harassing,” “alienating,” “hateful,” “unacceptable,” “not used in society,” “a hate crime,” “a disgusting word,” and “linked to a protected characteristic.” In its own assessment, the College acknowledged that the use of the word would cause damage to a student with a learning disability.

Yet despite condemning the word in the strongest possible terms, Bury College itself chose to repeat it directly to a student with a learning disability.


The contradiction is stark. On one hand, the College insists the word represents the worst kind of language, damaging, discriminatory, and wholly unacceptable in any modern educational setting. On the other, its own Designated Safeguarding Lead (DSL), Sarah Walton, repeated the very same word to a student with a learning disability, and she did so without any form of sanction or criticism.

This raises serious questions about the College’s credibility and consistency. If the word is so clearly recognised as harmful, why was it acceptable when spoken by its own safeguarding lead? Why was no disciplinary action taken in that instance, while the same conduct by another member of staff was treated as grounds for dismissal?


Most troubling of all is the College’s own logic. By automatically linking the word “retard” with disability, the College reveals its own discriminatory assumptions. That link is what amplifies the harm, and yet it was the College itself that reinforced that link by automatically associating the word with disability in the first instance.

This contradiction is not just hypocrisy, it is dangerous. How can Bury College claim to provide a safe, inclusive environment for students with learning disabilities, when the first association it makes on hearing the word “retard” is disability?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Beyond the Headlines: What the Tribunal Really Showed About Bury College’s Case

Recent local coverage of the unfair dismissal tribunal involving a Bury College lecturer painted a simplified picture: a teacher used the “R-word” in class, the College acted, and a tribunal found the dismissal unfair only because of procedural flaws. But the deeper reality is more complex and far more troubling for the College’s credibility. [original article here:  Bury Times ]   Shifting Student Accounts The central complaint was not consistent. The initial allegation from Student B was that the maths lecturer had called the entire class “retards.” Later, she changed her account to say he had called just her the word. Still later, the complaint shifted again; now alleging he had called a different student, and then two students. Such shifting accounts should have raised immediate questions about reliability. Instead, the College treated the complaint as fact. Credibility of the Complaint Serious questions also arise about the credibility of the original complaint....
Read more

38 - Bury College Principal Endorses DSL’s Use of the Word “Retard”

Bury College Principal, Charlie Deane, has openly supported the College’s Designated Safeguarding Lead (DSL), Sarah Walton, after she repeated the word “retard” directly to a student with a learning disability. This position is remarkable given the College’s own characterisation of the word. In formal proceedings, the College has described “retard” as “offensive,” “derogatory,” “inappropriate,” “bullying,” “harassing,” “alienating,” “hateful,” “unacceptable,” “not used in society,” “a hate crime,” “a disgusting word,” and “linked to a protected characteristic.” The College also acknowledged that its use would cause damage to a student. Despite this, when Walton repeated the word to a vulnerable learner, she faced no sanction, no criticism, and was instead fully supported by Deane. By contrast, another member of staff who repeated the word in a classroom context was vilified and dismissed. Deane’s backing of Walton exposes a troubling double standard. If the word is so damaging tha...
Read more

08 - Safeguarding Lead at Bury College Repeated Harmful Language to Student, Tribunal Hears

The Designated Safeguarding Lead at Bury College admitted to repeating a derogatory slur to a vulnerable student, despite knowing it could cause harm, according to evidence heard at a recent employment tribunal. Sarah Walton, the College's safeguarding lead, made the admission under cross-examination while giving evidence in a three-day hearing concerning the dismissal of a former staff member. The former employee had been dismissed for gross misconduct after allegedly using the word "retard" in a classroom context. Ms Walton told the tribunal that she repeated the slur during a phone call with Student A, a student with a recognised learning disability, so the student would "know exactly what word" she was referring to. When pressed, she accepted that her use of the word could cause the same harm as when the dismissed teacher had used it. However, unlike the Claimant, no disciplinary action was taken against Ms Walton. Her conduct was not investigated, cri...
Read more