Callistemon I'm not sure what you mean re the teacher.
I followed up the case and there are more details in Schoolsweek.
The headteacher had already handed in her resignation in January and was concerned that her reputation would be "tainted", so she hit back.
The school has over 200 pupils, but the school's Facebook page shows that only five pupils out of Years R, 1 and 6 returned on 8 June, so only a handful of teachers were needed in the building.
The woman complained that some of her own staff wouldn't work in school for three days (rather than the two days they were already there) because they had childcare issues. She didn't say who they were, but they could easily be identified because most of the staff work part-time and a third of the staff is leaving at the end of the year anyway.
Crucially, these staff weren't required to be in school to teach children, but to prepare for their appraisal, which could easily be done at home and/or via Zoom.
When the interviewer on the radio programme pointed out that she, as manager, was accountable, she went off on a rant about HR rules and the unions.
She behaved totally unprofessionally and the governors were absolutely right to suspend her. If she had issues with individual staff, this should have been dealt with internally. Quite obviously, she had a political point she wanted to make.
She has now "tainted" the reputation of the staff involved, without going through any procedures. They can't respond because they are behaving professionally.
Without knowing the full details, this headteacher sounds like a control freak and a bully. The staff didn't need to be in school and did seem to have genuine reasons for not being able to return to physical working at short notice. It was up to the headteacher to give them tasks which could be done at home. It's obvious from the school's Facebook page that staff have been working hard to provide pupils with home learning packs and trying to keep in touch with their pupils.