5
LEADERSHIP PAY - NUT GUIDANCE FOR 2014/15
SCHOOL TEACHERS’ PAY
NUT GUIDANCE ON LEADERSHIP
PAY FOR 2014/15
This NUT guidance gives advice on the statutory provisions on pay for leadership teachers and on NUT policy and guidance on setting leadership pay.
The leadership pay framework changes from September 2014 as a result of the Secretary of State's acceptance of recommendations made by the STRB in its 23rd Report (February 2014). Under the new framework, the fixed 43-point leadership pay spine has been abolished in favour of greater "flexibility" in setting individual pay ranges. The new provisions on setting pay ranges apply when new appointments are made and when existing post holders' responsibilities change; otherwise, existing pay scales can remain in place. The new provisions on pay progression will apply to pay progression decisions taken for September 2014.
The NUT does not wish any restructuring of school leadership groups to take place simply because these new pay arrangements have been put in place. In order to avoid further disruption to school staffing structures, the NUT advises that governing bodies should only re-assess the pay of existing school leaders in cases of significant changes to responsibilities.
LEADERSHIP GROUP POSTS AND PAY RANGES
Statutory Provisions
The governing body determines the size of the school’s leadership group.
The previous provisions in the 2013 STPCD provided for a 43 point leadership pay spine; schools placed into one of seven school groups according to the age and number of pupils; head teachers paid on a seven point Individual School Range (ISR) determined by the governing body, within a broad range of spine points for the relevant school group; and deputy and assistant head teachers paid on a five point individual pay range determined by the governing body.
From 1 September 2014, however, the 43 point leadership pay spine has been removed from the STPCD and has been replaced by a "leadership pay range" (the minimum and maximum of the range coincide with the minimum and maximum of the previous spine, uprated in line with any September 2014 pay increase). Individual pay ranges for head teachers and for deputy and assistant head teachers are determined by the governing body and may be of whatever length the governing body deems appropriate and may or may not include fixed scale points.
As noted above, these new provisions for determining individual pay ranges only apply automatically to new appointments or to existing posts following restructuring or changes to responsibilities. There is no requirement to re-assess the pay of existing head teachers or other school leaders in September 2014.
DfE advice for schools sets out a three-stage process for governing bodies to follow in setting the pay for head teachers and other leadership group teachers.
The new provisions relating to the determination of individual pay ranges from 1 September 2014 are as follows:
· Schools will continue to be placed into one of seven school groups according to the age and number of pupils.
· The individual pay range for head teachers should be set within the overall leadership pay range and within one of seven broad pay ranges for each of the seven school groups. The individual pay range for deputy and assistant head teachers may be located anywhere within the overall leadership pay range (subject to certain provisions on differentials - see below). (2014 STPCD, Section 2, para’s 9.1 to 9.4 & para 8 of Section 3 Statutory Guidance).
· Individual pay ranges for head teachers and for deputy and assistant head teachers may be of whatever length the governing body deems appropriate and may or may not include fixed scale points. The previous provisions requiring seven and five point pay scales respectively has been removed. (2014 STPCD, Section 2, para’s 9.1 to 9.4).
· When determining an individual pay range, the governing body should take into account “all of the permanent responsibilities of the role, any challenges specific to the role and all other relevant considerations” (para 9.2). For that reason, the provision for additional discretionary payments to head teachers has been restricted (see below). The governing body should also allow appropriate scope within the individual pay range for performance based pay progression.
· Governing bodies continue to be able to decide to set the head teacher's pay range up to 25 per cent above the maximum of the pay range for that school group and, in exceptional circumstances and where supported by a business case, beyond that figure. (The former power to pay head teachers “up to two groups higher” than the school’s group size was abolished in 2009.). (2014 STPCD, Section 2, para 9.3 & para’s 12 to 14 of Section 3 Statutory Guidance).
· There continues to be additional statutory guidance on determining the school group size and consequential pay range where a head teacher is permanently responsible and accountable for more than one school (see below) and on determining the pay of a head teacher temporarily accountable for more than one school. (2014 STPCD, Section 2, para’s 10 to 11 & 15 to 22 of Section 3 Statutory Guidance).
· Discretionary payments to head teachers continue to be permitted for "clearly temporary [additional] responsibilities or duties" which have not been previously taken into account when setting the individual pay range. These payments are limited to 25 per cent of pay other than in "wholly exceptional circumstances" (excluding payments for residential duties or for relocation purposes). Head teachers already in receipt of discretionary payments which do not meet the new criteria should continue to receive them until their individual pay range is reassessed (ie they move post or their role changes significantly). (Para’s 12 to 14 of Section 3).
· The previous provisions prohibiting an overlap between the pay ranges for head teachers and other leadership teachers have been removed. Governing bodies are entitled to determine appropriate pay differentials between leadership posts and with classroom teacher posts. The pay ranges of deputy and assistant head teachers should only overlap the pay range of the head teacher in "exceptional circumstances”. (2014 STPCD, Section 2, para 9.4).
The provisions relating to the implementation of the new provisions are as follows:
· As noted above, there is no automatic requirement to review the pay of existing leadership teachers on implementation of the new framework. (2014 STPCD, Section 2, para’s 4.1 to 4.2).
· Where a leadership post vacancy arises, the governing body should use the new provisions to determine the pay range for the post and consider whether it is appropriate to re-assess the pay of others in the team. Similarly, pay ranges for existing post holders should be reviewed whenever a significant change in responsibilities occurs. (2014 STPCD, Section 2, para 4.1).
The STRB was asked to consider the case for introducing specific provisions into the pay framework for school leaders who take up challenging posts on a fixed term contract basis. No such provisions have been introduced although the DfE advice to schools offers guidance to governing bodies which employ school leaders on fixed-term contracts.
The STRB also recommended that governing bodies should seek advice and use benchmarking data to assist them in taking decisions. No DfE guidance on this area has yet been published.
NUT Policy and Guidance
The NUT continues to advise governing bodies that school leadership groups should not be excessively large, in particular where this would lead to some teachers losing the protection of classroom teachers’ working time limits. The DfE has previously advised that it would be exceptional to have leadership groups of more than seven in large secondary schools and more than three in primary schools.
The NUT also continues to advise that decisions on the number of leadership group posts and on pay levels and pay ranges for leadership teachers should be subject to a “whole school” approach to pay policy which does not treat one group of school staff in isolation or take decisions on their pay without considering the overall position and the impact on others.
The 3-stage process for setting school leaders’ pay set out in the DfE advice to schools is otherwise helpful in procedural terms. Subject to the advice set out below, the NUT encourages governing bodies to follow that process.
The NUT’s submission to the STRB stated that the existing pay framework should be retained. For that reason, the NUT advises governing bodies to continue to use seven point individual pay scales for head teachers and five point scales for other leadership teachers; and to continue to locate such scales on the updated version of the former 43 point leadership pay spine which is included as an appendix to this guidance.
The NUT’s submission also stated that fixed differentials between head teachers and other leadership teachers should be retained. For that reason, the NUT advises that the pay range for the head teacher should not overlap with the pay range for any other leadership teacher. Other differentials should appropriately reflect relative responsibilities within the school.
The NUT’s submission also called for a review of whether the school group system properly rewarded primary head teachers in comparison to secondary head teachers. The new provisions do not alter the school group system. Primary school governing bodies are unlikely to be able to take advantage of the “flexibility” offered to pay more to head teachers due to the absence of any additional funding to do so.
The NUT rejects the concept of using fixed term contracts for those leading challenging schools and advises governing bodies against this approach.
The NUT supports the STRB’s view that governing bodies should take advice and have benchmarking information available to assist them when taking decisions on school leaders’ pay. Advice should cover the procedural matters involved in pay setting and appropriate levels of pay. The NUT continues to believe that a wider review of school leadership is still necessary and that the leadership pay system should be further reviewed under such a wider review.
PAY PROGRESSION FOR LEADERSHIP GROUP TEACHERS
The new provisions for pay progression for leadership teachers apply to pay decisions for all leadership teachers for September 2014, even though they were in not in place when appraisal objectives were set for the 2013-14 appraisal year.
Statutory Provisions
The STPCD continues to require governing bodies to undertake pay assessments each year for all qualified teachers, including leadership teachers. (2014 STPCD, Section 2, para 3.1). As with other teachers, there is no requirement for leadership teachers to apply for progression within their pay ranges. Assessments should be carried out as at 1 September each year and progression is a permanent entitlement while the teacher remains in the same post.
Previous STPCDs required that, before any decision on pay progression for leadership teachers is taken, there must first be a review of the teacher’s performance. Prescribed criteria for progression required that the teacher’s achievements and contribution to the current school or schools at which the teacher has previously worked must have been of ‘sustained high quality’ taking account of the performance objectives. The governing body was required to ‘have regard’ to the appraisal reviewer’s pay recommendation and the provisions of the STPCD, statutory guidance and pay policy.
The 2014 STPCD, however, provides that governing bodies determine the criteria for pay progression. While decisions must be related to performance, the former statutory criteria no longer apply. Instead, the school pay policy should set out the precise criteria for pay progression for leadership teachers, subject to an expectation that “sustained high quality of performance … should give the individual an expectation of progression”. The governing body remains required to “have regard” to the appraisal reviewer’s pay recommendation and the provisions of the STPCD, statutory guidance and pay policy. In the case of the head teacher, the governors responsible for her/his performance review continue to provide the pay recommendation (Section 2, para’s 11.1 to 11.2).
The governing body also determines the level of any pay increase. Depending on the pay policy adopted by the governing body, progression within the pay range might be made by moving to higher specified pay points or moving to a higher pay level within the range as determined by the governing body on each occasion.
NUT Policy and Guidance
Decisions on pay progression for leadership group teachers should again be subject to a whole school approach to pay policy. This means that, while decisions on leadership teachers' pay progression should of course be taken according to progression criteria and should not be restricted on the basis of funding, pay progression decisions for other teachers should not be affected by decisions taken in respect of leadership teachers.
The NUT’s advice on pay progression for September 2014 and the application of the new provisions is as follows:
· The NUT model pay policy provides that appraisal reviews should be deemed to be successful unless significant concerns about standards of performance have been raised in writing with the teacher during the annual appraisal cycle and have not been sufficiently addressed through support provided by the school by the conclusion of that process.
· Pay progression for leadership teachers should therefore be agreed where teachers have met or made significant progress towards meeting their objectives - it is not necessary for all performance targets to be met in full. (For further information, see the joint NUT-NASUWT school pay policy checklist and the performance management/appraisal checklist).
· Decisions not to award pay progression should not preclude pay increases for other reasons, such as additional responsibilities or an increase in the size of the school.
· Pay increases should be equivalent in value to the expected incremental point. Ranges should not be automatically extended where teachers were at the top of their existing range. The new provisions should not, however, be used in such a way as to extend the period of time over which teachers who are not on the maximum of their pay range can progress to the maximum.
DISCRETIONARY PAYMENTS FOR HEAD TEACHERS
Statutory Provisions