The issue of proposed changes to the teachers’ pension scheme has been raised in a number of recent editions of this newsletter. For over a year now we have been working towards building a challenge to the proposals. We have encouraged our national officers to campaign vigorously to prevent the proposed changes. We have written to all Derbyshire MP’s expressing our concerns and asking them to question the proposals – some have responded with standard letters, but others have given a level of qualified support.
The issue is affecting not only teachers, but all public sector employees. It will hopefully receive a much higher profile following a national rally of all public sector unions in London on June 19th. NASUWT will be represented by over 20 members from Derbyshire. We hope that we will be part of a union delegation of well over a thousand, adding our numbers to all the other unions to make it a truly significant demonstration.
What is the campaign about?
We are against the proposals to:
- impose a normal pension age of 65 on all public service pension schemes;
- require people to work longer to receive the same levels of benefit to those now payable at age 60;
- worsen the pensions entitlement of current and future employees; and
- raise the age limit for the payment of early retirement pensions in cases of redundancy or retirement in the interests of the service’s efficiency to age 55.
We believe the promises made to members on joining the scheme should be honoured. We are told that teachers who are already 50 or over will not be affected, but, there are many thousands of teachers who are not yet fifty who will find themselves affected. Teachers working side by side in schools will find themselves paying exactly the same rates of contributions but will find themselves not entitled to the same benefits.
A teacher currently in their twenties or thirties could find themselves having to contribute over £9000 extra (at current salary levels) in order to receive the same entitlement as their older colleagues. Conversely, if the same younger teacher chooses to
take their pension at 60 (the same age as older colleagues are now entitled), they will find it reduced by up to 25% per year (for ever!), despite having paid the same amount in.
We believe this is Government mismanagement on a huge scale. Whilst there were high numbers of people working and not many in retirement, the government pocketed the difference between that being paid into the scheme and that needing to be paid out (instead of investing it properly). Now the balance is changing, they tell us they cannot afford it and it cannot be sustained, so we must pay for their mismanagement. This cannot be right and it is why we will challenge it all the way. This government must treat its own workers honestly and fairly and with respect.
Derbyshire NASUWT will continue to fight these unjust proposals, alongside all our colleagues in every other public sector union.
The second phase of the “new agreement” on teachers’ conditions of service comes into effect from September 1st. This is the implementation of the cover arrangements that are designed to ultimately reduce the cover done by school-based teachers to zero.
The agreement recommends as a starting point that a 38 hour per year per teacher maximum limit applies to cover for any reason. There is also however a clause in the agreement referring to “no detriment”. This means that the new rules cannot be used to worsen the current position. It is our belief that in Derbyshire, schools currently operate more realistically at around 25 hours per year per teacher, and so should not use the agreement to go beyond this current level.
However, we have also had long-standing local agreements in Derbyshire which have improved the cover position beyond the national requirements. Lengthy discussions between the LEA and the unions have resulted in an advice document being sent to schools stating that these local agreements should still be honoured.
In essence, teachers should not be expected to cover for staff who are absent:
- From the fourth day of an unexpected absence
- From the first day of an absence of more than three days if known more than two days in advance
- Any absence for “professional reasons”, e.g. INSET, pastoral work, review meetings, management responsibilities
- In the case of multiple absences, i.e. when more than two staff are absent
It is the responsibility of the Head (or cover manager) to further ensure that staff covering are made aware of the reasons for the absence (generic rather than specific).
If Heads have genuinely made all possible attempts to cover such absences by seeking supply cover but have found none available, it remains part of our conditions of service that we will cover such situations as an emergency measure. The advice issued in Nov 2001 by NEOST (and backed by the LEA) remains in this case – such cover shall be undertaken but the time “banked” and repaid as Time Off In Lieu at a suitable opportunity. As the new agreement begins to take proper effect, however, this should become a rarity.
A number of alternatives are now available to Heads to cover for absent teachers, including the use of “cover supervisors” and Higher Level Teaching Assistants (HLTA’s). It remains however the responsibility of the Head to ensure adequate “teaching and learning” takes place whenever possible. We would therefore anticipate that most cover (and certainly any long-term) would be undertaken by qualified supply teachers. It has however been a long standing aim of NASUWT to reduce (and remove completely) the unnecessary burden of covering for absent colleagues, thereby improving working conditions. We believe this is finally the beginning of that process.
Please let your local secretary know if you believe that your school management is not operating the cover policy in your school in the spirit of the agreements outlined.
A reminder about the main article from the last edition – Management Time. This is now a contractual entitlement for all teachers with any management responsibility (whether recognised by allowance or not). This is in place now – not from next September. There is no agreement on how much time should be allowed – it very much depends on the nature of the responsibility – but there must be some.
Most secondary schools have this built in to their systems, but it is not yet happening in all primaries. If you have a post of responsibility and have not yet been allocated any management time this year, you are being denied your legal contractual rights. Ask your Head for that time now – even half a day before the end of term is a recognition that you are entitled to the time – then seek by agreement to build it into next year’s calendar now, whilst such things are being decided.
We have been contacted by a small number of school reps about “excessive observation”. There appear to be a number of reasons why this may be happening. We have already raised the issue with the LEA and are seeking to remedy the problem. It may be more widespread than we believe (people are just putting up with it), so please let us know if you are affected.
It is our belief that observations for whatever reason (including Performance Management) should be limited to no more than 3 hours per school year. The only exceptions to this should be OfSTED and being under Special Measures, or an individual teacher being subject to competency procedures.
There currently seem to be two main generators of excessive observation: the Advisory Service QDD process and school “self review” systems. We are discussing the situation with representatives of the Advisory Service to see what can be achieved, and local union officers have been into schools attempting to introduce excessive monitoring schemes to try to minimise their effects. Excessive monitoring and observation have been shown to be a key contributor to work related stress, which managements should be seeking to reduce, not increase.
We will be discussing the situation in depth at our June Federation meeting, and determining our response to the situation. If you feel members in your school are being subject to such excessive observations but have not let us know about it, please do so as soon as possible, so that we can fully gauge the extent of the problem.
A large cohort of the profession will be eligible for progression to UPS3 from this September. The process has been established and advice documents issued both locally and nationally on how the progression should happen.
Recommendations made by the last Pay Review Body, after consultation with unions, outlined the proposal to cut the Upper Pay Scale from 5 to 3 points. Points 4 and 5 would be replaced by an “Excellent Teacher” scale. The pay-off for accepting this proposal was that the quota system of funding support for UPS3 would disappear. It is quite clear therefore that all teachers who meet the standards should progress. Schools have no financial restrictions in progressing all eligible candidates.
Progression to the old UPS4 (now Excellence1 – or whatever it becomes known as) in two year’s time will be voluntary and by application. It is expected there will be a quota of around 20-25% at this level.
The Review Body also recommended the freezing of management allowances. The effect of this measure is to leave more funding available to meet the progression of the majority to UPS3. There should clearly therefore be no school which uses a funding argument to prevent pay progression for the majority of the staff.
Local advice issued by the LEA, following consultation with unions, is also quite clear. The process for progression should be exactly the same as happened for UPS1 to UPS2. It is not an application process. It is not necessary for staff to submit portfolios of evidence. There should be no new criteria. Teachers should progress if they continue to meet (or have made a significant attempt to meet) Performance Management targets; have addressed developmental issues from their last review and continue to perform at a substantial and sustained level.
Although the UPS3 point is payable from September 1st, the cycle adopted by most schools will mean payment will be delayed but backdated. Heads should be making their decisions during October and recommending their adoption by the Governors as soon as possible after that. The LEA will then be informed and payroll will adjust the details. The expectation is that pay should be received by or in December.
National Conference in Llandudno during the Easter holidays was a successful and enjoyable one for delegates from Derbyshire. The major motions passed have been detailed in the recent edition of “Teaching Today” – our national magazine – so I won’t duplicate that here. However, significant contributions to many of the debates were made by delegates from all Derbyshire branches.
John Crofts proposed a motion on the national agreement which clearly reiterated our commitment to a policy of only attending one meeting per week.
Susan Kambalu spoke clearly about the effects of the proposed pension changes to the younger teachers (and was later given the honour of seconding the vote of thanks to the President at the end of conference).
Ian Brown spoke about the links between Performance Management and Pay Progression in the light of the decision to cut the Upper Pay Spine from 5 to 3 points. National executive agreed they would need to think carefully about a policy on this issue.
Alison Sloan spoke passionately about management bullying and the effect this had on teachers. Parts of her speech were quoted in the report on the debate in the TES.
Errol Butcher, Tom Pullan and John Slater spoke in support of amendments to motions on pensions and the 35 hour week.
Dave Wilkinson (our National Exec member) spoke forcefully on the issue of racism and the BNP, swinging what until that point appeared to be a fairly close debate.
National Conference is a significant expense for local branches, but we feel that in Derbyshire we give good value for money in the duty of representing members’ views. It is not easy to stand up and speak coherently to a hall full of a thousand people. Even if you can’t commit to such an amount of time, your views can still be heard and then represented, by attending your local branch meetings, which are always well advertised in schools.
As a footnote, I ought to mention that John Slater (South Derbyshire branch) won the national Recruiter of the Year award. John works in a non-LEA school and has worked hard to get conditions of service which the majority of us take for granted established in his school. As a result he has seen NASUWT membership grow significantly in the school. Congratulations.
Contact details for local secretaries are as follows:
South Derbyshire Secretary:
John Crofts 07977 004820
North East Derbyshire Secretary:
Peter Baranek 01629 581878
Peak Association Secretary:
Alison Sloan 01457 864123
CountySecretary:
Ian Brown07966 210248
(please note, this has recently changed, so you may have my old number written or stored somewhere.)
Further information about the union locally can be found on the Derbyshire Federation website at