School leaders have been told by a union to demand a full risk assessment from their employer over the 鈥渧ery real dangers to staff wellbeing鈥 of new Ofsted inspections. Leaders鈥 union NAHT has called for members to write to their employers 鈥 which include local authorities, academy trusts, and governing bodies 鈥 asking 鈥渨hat they will do to protect and support” teachers and leaders. It marks a step change in the union鈥檚 opposition to Ofsted. NAHT has lambasted Ofsted’s renewed inspection framework, which is being rolled out on November 10. Using new “report cards”, inspectors will grade schools across seven core evaluation areas using a five-point scale. NAHT accuses Ofsted of failing to heed an independent wellbeing impact assessment commissioned by the inspectorate, which found the new report cards will increase stress and workload for school staff. Paul Whiteman NAHT “We are now asking our members to write to their employer, requesting that they explain what they will do to protect and support school leaders and their teams,” says NAHT. The union has written for school leaders, which urges employers to “recognise the very real dangers to staff wellbeing” and “take all necessary steps to protect us”. “This is not simply about workload or stress management,” it says. “It is about preventing avoidable harm 鈥 including the most serious outcomes 鈥 arising from a flawed inspection system. “We expect you to stand with us in demanding that staff wellbeing is not sacrificed to Ofsted鈥檚 high-stakes agenda.” Steve Rollett Schools Week understands at least two local authorities have already received letters from leaders. Steve Rollet, deputy chief executive of the Confederation of School Trusts (CST), the employer body for academy school trusts, said it is “seeking expert HR and employment advice” in response to NAHT’s guidance to members. “Our view is that the trust is a protective structure; trust leaders can and do support school leaders through Ofsted inspections,” he said. Calls for risk assessment The NAHT letter calls on employers to 鈥渦ndertake a full risk assessment鈥 of the impact the new Ofsted inspections will have on school staff. It also urges them to create and share 鈥渁 clear plan to mitigate the risks to staff wellbeing鈥 and 鈥渕aintain open dialogue with staff鈥 about how it will 鈥減rotect鈥 their welfare during inspections. The letter highlights 鈥渟tark鈥 findings made by the Ofsted-commissioned led by Sin茅ad Mc Brearty, CEO of mental health and wellbeing charity Education Support. The NAHT letter template Staff wellbeing is key to the Ofsted reforms 鈥 which were triggered by the death of headteacher Ruth Perry. McBrearty’s report warned the 鈥渂aseline stress level” of school leaders is “concerningly high鈥, and the revised framework 鈥渄oes not reduce the pressure…to achieve a desirable outcome鈥. It warned that under new report card inspections, 鈥渢he consequence of not meeting the expected standards鈥ill remain high stakes in nature鈥. It laid out a string of recommendations, some of which have since been addressed by Ofsted. The NAHT letter says it is “deeply troubling that Ofsted has pressed ahead with these reforms despite clear evidence of the damage inspections already cause”. It says Ofsted’s approach “prioritises high-stakes accountability over staff well-being, ignoring repeated warnings from the profession, trade unions and [the report]”. Union considering ballot The call to action by NAHT marks a ramping-up of its concerns about the Ofsted reforms. The union is currently mulling whether to ballot its members for industrial action. At an online meeting on September 16 attended by almost 2,000 NAHT members, 89 per cent of those present at the meeting said they would support exploring industrial options. The NAHT鈥檚 ruling executive committee was due to consider whether to formally ballot members. General secretary Paul Whiteman, NAHT鈥檚 general secretary, said at the time: 鈥淲e heard loud and clear that these plans simply do not have the support of the profession and should not go ahead in their current state. 鈥淩olling them out would pose clear risks to the health and wellbeing of school leaders and teachers.鈥 There are concerns this could lead to a repeat of scenes from 2023, when a headteacher said she planned to refuse Ofsted inspectors entry to her school, following the suicide of headteacher Ruth Perry. Flora Cooper, executive headteacher at John Ranking Infant and Nursery School in Berkshire, also called on other heads to join her protest. She later backed down and the DfE issued a statement reminding schools of the legal requirement to be inspected. A silent protest was instead held outside the school gates. Under the Education Act, it is a criminal offence to intentionally obstruct inspectors from carrying out their duties, and doing so can carry a fine of up to 拢2,500. Ofsted declined to comment.