Am I alone in thinking that there must be more to this story? If the facts are as reported, it seems to me to be a truly bizarre decision in the first place.
Briefly, a six year old boy refused to enter the school building at the end of break. A sex pest was known to have been operating in the area. Two teachers decided that it was not safe to leave the child alone in the playground, so picked him up under the arms and returned him to his class. The boy's mother had no complaints with this. This was picked up on CCTV, and the teachers were suspended.
Maybe I have missed the point, but I can't see what else the teachers could have done. Irrespective of the potential sex pest, I don't think a six year old should be left alone, unsupervised, in a playground. If one of the teachers stayed with him, then the rest of her class would be without a teacher during this period. If persuasion wasn't working, I can't see what other option they had.
And, presumably, the school has been paying for the services of these teachers during the period of suspension (and rightly so, imo), whilst at the same time being two teachers down. It just doesn't make sense to me.