Olaf Stepnowski

Introduction

Olaf Stepnowski is a former teacher at the Lawnswood Campus Braybrook Centre, a pupil referral unit, who was banned from teaching in November 2024 after a Teaching Regulation Agency panel found he used unnecessary and inappropriate physical restraint on a young person on 20 April 2021, in breach of repeated management instructions about physical intervention. Stepnowski did not attend the hearing and was not represented; the panel drew an adverse inference from his absence. Decision maker Marc Cavey prohibited him from teaching indefinitely with a two-year review period.

Background Information

Stepnowski taught at the Lawnswood Campus Braybrook Centre, a setting for pupils excluded from mainstream school. He had received formal management advice about physical intervention on at least three occasions before the incident: in March 2019, telling him he “must use the Team Teach approach where 90% is de-escalation” and not to lay hands on pupils; in April 2019, recording his admission that he had pushed a pupil and held a pupil by the neck; and in February 2020, warning that taking a child to the floor using a technique outside his Team Teach training would trigger disciplinary process. On 20 April 2021, on the unit’s football field, an incident occurred with Person A — a young person with a history of physical aggression toward staff — that ended with Stepnowski sweeping Person A’s legs from underneath them and moving them to the floor.

The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation

Findings vs. facts. Stepnowski did not dispute that he restrained Person A; the contested question was whether the restraint was necessary. The panel found it was not, on the balance of probabilities; no criminal proceedings appear in the published record.

A colleague standing two to three metres away gave live evidence that Stepnowski had not requested assistance from nearby staff and had not attempted verbal de-escalation, corroborated by CCTV images and Person A’s contemporaneous handwritten statement; the same colleague saw Person A trying to push Stepnowski over. Stepnowski’s written account claimed he had attempted to de-escalate verbally, but the panel gave it less weight — he had chosen not to attend and be questioned, and his incident report described only asking Person A to “stop it”. Drawing an adverse inference from his absence, the panel found he had ample opportunity to de-escalate: the incident was outdoors on a football field where he could have withdrawn, other staff were a short distance away, and his verbal-attempt account was unsupported. It found allegation 1 proved, and allegation 2(a) — breach of management instructions — proved, while finding 2(b) not proven, since the restraint itself did not breach the specific Team Teach techniques as alleged. The panel found him guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and conduct likely to bring the profession into disrepute.

Public Reaction and Consequences

No press coverage attaches to the case; the published decision is the public record. Stepnowski had acknowledged correspondence from the TRA’s solicitors confirming his identity and email address, then chose not to participate; the panel treated that as a voluntary waiver of his right to appear, with a warned consequence. The panel found his disregard for professional standards was deliberate, noting he had not developed his understanding of safeguarding in restraint, had not shown improved control, and had demonstrated no insight or remorse. It recommended a two-year review period, and Cavey adopted that, finding the period proportionate given the serious misconduct found and the lack of insight or remorse, which created a risk of repetition and harm to pupils’ wellbeing.

Current Status

Stepnowski is prohibited from teaching indefinitely and cannot teach in any school, sixth form college, relevant youth accommodation or children’s home in England. He may apply for the prohibition order to be set aside, but not until 20 November 2026 — two years from the date of the order — at the earliest. That is not an automatic right: if he applies, a panel will consider whether the order should be set aside, and without a successful application he remains prohibited indefinitely. The determination is dated 12 November 2024, with the order dated 15 November 2024, effective from service. He retains a right of appeal to the King’s Bench Division of the High Court within 28 days of notice; the published record shows none was filed.

Impact on Their Career/Life

Stepnowski’s case is the escalated-consequence pattern in restraint cases: no single incident ended his career, but the accumulated written warnings of 2019 and 2020 converted the 2021 restraint into a breach of management instructions and, ultimately, a prohibition. The panel’s adverse-inference reasoning shows the cost of non-engagement — his written defence was discounted precisely because he declined the chance to be questioned on it. Pupil referral units concentrate the tension the case exposes: staff face genuinely aggressive behaviour, yet the regulator requires de-escalation first and treats floor restraint as a last resort even there. The two-year review gate marks the case as serious but recoverable in principle. For PRU staff the case underlines that repeated informal warnings become the evidential spine of a lifetime ban.

Sources

• Dept for Education, “Teacher misconduct panel outcome: Mr Olaf Stepnowski” — source