Easing heavy burden on teachers

A young elementary-school teacher holding a concurrent administrative post in Kaohsiung was recently found dead in a storage room at school. Although the cause of death is still under investigation, the death of an unsupported education worker is a devastating reflection of the high-pressure environment in today’s education sector.

With it occurring just as the Ministry of Education releases its Guidelines for the Prevention of Workplace Illegal Harassment in Schools and Childcare Service Institutions (各級學校及教保服務機構職場不法侵害預防指引), the teacher’s death underscores the weakness of safeguards for school staff.

The guidelines include teachers’ “right to disconnect” during non-working hours and legal protections covering their handling of student discipline. They are a step forward in acknowledging that teachers, when facing conflicts with parents, should also be recognized as subject to workplace safety risks.

That said, the guidelines lack concrete employer accountability mechanisms and fail to put in place adequate institutional barriers against external risks. They lack legal clarity and are filled with ambiguous terms such as “depending on the type and severity of the case,” “where necessary” and “appropriate handling.” When parents exert pressure on teachers, without concrete mechanisms to impose substantive responsibilities on schools as employers, flexible language might become an excuse for the school not to act.

Upon receiving complaints from parents, many schools demand that teachers provide explanations or apologize for disciplining students. The guidelines lack clear means to avoid unreasonable lawsuits that amount to little more than malicious harassment. As a result, teachers’ complaint channels are often manipulated.

Preventing unlawful infringements in the workplace is a core labor-employer issue, yet the ministry’s finalized version overlooks teachers’ participation rights. Unlike the clear guidelines from the Ministry of Labor, which explicitly require the participation of representatives of workers, the Ministry of Education fails to stipulate that faculty representatives must engage in risk assessments or effectiveness reviews.

The Ministry of Education must ensure that its guidelines do not turn into yet another administrative burden that bogs schools down in paperwork and endless meetings.

When teachers face infringements from outside the school, education authorities should allocate professional resources such as police, social workers and legal representation. The authorities should not expect already overworked school administrators to deal with every aspect of complaint investigation.

The government should develop substantive complementary measures alongside the rules for monitoring teachers’ associations. The construction of a friendly educational workplace should not become a mere bureaucratic formality, leaving grassroots educators to bear the risks alone.