Permitted for family or personal reasons: the teacher can be absent even if the manager denies it

Brunella writes

What happens if a teacher who has made a regular application for 7 days of leave, 2 arts 13 and 5 art. 15, who are denied by the DS, decides to be absent and leave the same? All the legislation read, says clearly that the days are not subject to the discretion of the DS and that for personal and family reasons, are also understood situations that relate to the welfare of the person and that need not necessarily be days used for serious needs. thanks

Permits for personal and family reasons

Article. 15, paragraph 2, of the CCNL / 2007 provides that the teacher has the right, upon application, in the school year, to three days of paid leave for personal or family reasons documented also by self-certification.

6 days of leave to enjoy "as" permits

The second period of the same paragraph allows the teaching staff – with the same modality (request) and for the same title (personal or family reasons) – the use of the six days of vacation during the didactic activity independently from the conditions foreseen by the art. 13, paragraph 9 (holidays).

Pursuant to art. 13, paragraph 9, the holidays requested by the teaching staff during the teaching activity are granted in the alternative "to the possibility of replacing the personnel using it with other staff in service in the same office and, in any case, on the condition that they do not come to be determined additional charges also for the possible payment of compensation for excess hours ".

Conclusions

From the disposition of the two norms (art. 15/2 second period and art. 13/9) it can be seen that if the 6 days of vacation are requested by the teaching staff as "personal and family reasons", then producing the necessary documentation also by self-certification (as it happens for the first 3 days), such days must not only be attributed, therefore they are subtracted from the manager's discretion, but the personnel requesting the permit does not have the obligation to accept that for its replacement "no additional charges will be determined for the possible payment of compensation for excess hours".

Therefore, if the teacher completes the first 3 days of the permit pursuant to art. 15/2 first period, he has the right, with the same modality (request) and with the same title (personal or family reasons) to enjoy further 6 days.

Having said this and referring to the relevant legislation, I can tell Brunella to be absent in the same way, despite the refusal, and then to appeal to a possible disciplinary sanction imposed by the DS that, being in error the first time will reiterate the error for the second time going to meet to a sure sentence from the judge.

In fact one thing has changed over the years and that is that (finally) the teachers, once they are denied the permits, do not limit themselves to challenging the refusal but they are absent equally believing (rightly) that the right is potestative and therefore not declined going then meeting with a possible sanction of the Manager for "alleged" unjustified absence.

Well the two very recent sentences, both in favor of the professors, Velletri first and then Milan, go exactly in this direction: the teachers ask for permission, the manager denies them, the teachers absent themselves anyway, the manager imposes the sanction on them and “naturally "The judges condemn the executive obviously canceling the sanction, recognizing the right of the worker to permanent indefinitely removed from the discretion of the Headmaster for whom the permit does not need a concession.

In conclusion, you are also absent and then we will wait for the umpteenth sentence to be published and commented.