Bad News Day Suffolk NUT School Reps Training

1
Bad News Day Suffolk NUTSchool Reps Training

• No payments safe, nearly all members affected
• not an assimilation exercise
• linked to remodelling and based on cutting the
  teachers paybill
• restructuring could remove any payments
• three year cash safeguarding only
• cuts in pay and pensions for many teachers
• fewer career prospects for others

2
WHAT IS THE RIG?

• Rewards Incentives Group
• DfES
• National Employers Organisation
• ATL, NASUWT, PAT, SHA and formerly NAHT
• joint proposals to STRB, accepted by STRB and by
  Secretary of State
• NUT excluded from RIG

3
THE NUTS STANCE

• Continued opposition to TLR system - Its not
  broke, so dont fix it
• Opposition to reduction in number of posts of
  responsibility
• Protection for members against any loss of pay
  resulting from introduction of TLRs

4
NUT card or e-mail to Secretary of State
These changes have far reaching
consequences. They should not be rushed. The time
allowed should be extended accordingly.Thousands
of teachers face pay cuts and many of them will
have reduced pensions.
I
call on you to allow more time to consider these
changes and to guarantee that no teacher will
face a cut in pay or pension. There should be
proper and permanent safeguarding of all
teachers existing pay scales and allowances.
5
SUMMARY OF THE TLR SYSTEM (1)

• No nationally prescribed levels or values for TLR
  payments
• Schools to decide
• number of posts of responsibility (if any!)
• number of different levels of TLR payments
• actual values of TLR payments

6
But there must be savings

• we would expect the overall cost of TLR payments
  to be less than the current total paid on
  management allowances, given that a proportion of
  management allowances is currently awarded for
  responsibilities that would not meet the new
  criterion (RIG).

7
SUMMARY OF THE TLR SYSTEM (2)

• Two TLR bands
• Prescribed minima and maxima
• TLR1 minimum 6,500 maximum 11,000
• TLR2 minimum 2,250 maximum 5,500
• more than 1 level of payment possible within
  these limits

8
CRITERIA FOR TLR PAYMENTS (1)

• To qualify for any TLR payment
• significant responsibility not required of all
  classroom teachers
• focused on teaching and learning
• requiring teachers professional skills and
  judgement

9
CRITERIA FOR TLR PAYMENTS (2)

• To qualify for any TLR payment (contd)
• leading, managing developing a subject or
  curriculum area
• OR leading, managing developing pupil
  development across the curriculum
• impact on educational progress beyond the
  teachers assigned pupils
• leading, developing and enhancing the teaching
  practice of others

10
CRITERIA FOR TLR PAYMENTS (3)

• To qualify for TLR1 payments
• having line management responsibility for a
  significant number of people
• Responsibility for which a TLR is awarded should
  be clearly defined in the job description

11
NUT News 16 Could this mean the end of pastoral
education?

• Student Welfare Year Leader APTC Scale points
  33-38 (27,036 - 30,606)
• The Year Leader will work with both teaching
  staff and other support agencies in supporting,
  guiding and managing the welfare of the young
  people in their charge, so that their individual
  needs are met and their learning thrives.

12
LEVEL OF PAYMENTS (1)

• Schools determine their values
• Decisions on payment levels must
• have a clear rationale
• be made against clear published criteria with
  differences between posts attracting different
  levels clearly delineated
• take into account differential job weight and
  meet the provisions of equal pay, equality and
  other relevant legislation (RIG proposals)

13
LEVEL OF PAYMENTS (2)

• Spot values not scales
• More than 1 level possible in each band
• Minimum differentials of 1,500
• Up to 3 levels possible at TLR2
• Up to 4 levels possible at TLR1

14
New Opportunities?

• In devising the structure, headteachers will need
  to take into account all previously-held
  responsibilities, paid or unpaid, and consider
  those for which there is a continuing need. A
  structure should not be based on the assumption
  that teachers who have previously had additional
  unremunerated responsibilities focused on
  teaching and learning will continue to carry them
  out. (RIG)

15
3 into 2 wont go

• RIG Where a post is a combination of a number
  of existing responsibilities held by current
  staff then the post should be advertised to those
  post holders only and appointed from that group
  following interview.
• NUT Although ring-fenced, this is unfair and
  will involve teachers applying for their own
  jobs. Reps need to be aware and seek to
  influence the new structure to avoid reducing
  existing number of promoted posts. 

16
Apply for your own post?

• RIG Where a post is identified as a new post
  it should be subject to normal recruitment
  procedures. 
• NUT Reps would be advised to ensure that all
  new posts are identifiably similar to existing
  posts. Even RIG advises against redundancies!

17
Assimilation Model
18
SAFEGUARDING

• Cash safeguarding is for 3 years only
• only the difference between existing MA and any
  TLR awarded will be safeguarded
• may be lost earlier due to promotion or
  incremental progression
• does not apply at all to teachers with post-April
  2004 temporary MAs
• Additional responsibility or work may be required
  to retain safeguarding

19
Only the difference the original proposal
from RIG
20
Only the difference (2) the original accepted
by RIG
This teacher has had a pay rise of 1454, but the
threshold is worth 3,000. Safeguarding has
deprived him/her of half of the value of all that
work going over the threshold.
21
DfES concedes whole cash value of allowance
safeguarded but not for temporary MAs!
22
- and still limited to 3 years, then stops
23
- or only until basic pay catches up with
safeguard
24
Safeguarding does not apply at all to teachers
with post-April 2004 temporary MAs

• Since April 2004 heads have not been able to
  appoint to new permanent Management Allowances,
  even when filling vacancies.
• So, when teachers accepted these they accepted
  that their post was not safeguarded and could
  disappear, with any allowance, from January 2001,
  unless they get a TLR in the new structure.

25
Additional responsibility or work may be required
to retain safeguarding

• Teachers in receipt of safeguarding can be
  required to carry out additional responsibilities
  commensurate with the safeguarded sum, even if
  they are still carrying out the full
  responsibilities of their posts. Any teacher who
  unreasonably refuses to carry out such additional
  duties can be given one months notice of the
  withdrawal of safeguarding.

26
What about existing safeguarded allowances?

• RIG had not thought about that
• Would not be fair for those already given
  permanent safeguarding to lose it
• Would not be fair to let previous safe-guarding
  to continue while new safe- guarding is curtailed
• In short a right mess!

27
TIMETABLE for IMPLEMENTATION

• TLRs to be introduced from 1 January 2006
• MAs to be abolished after 31 December 2005
• Staffing structures to be reviewed and revised by
  31 December 2005
• Three year transition to new structures

28
PHASE 1 REVIEWING STAFFING STRUCTURES (1)

• Schools are required to
• review the structure in consultation with union
  representatives staff
• determine proposals for implementing TLRs and any
  other changes, plus plan for implementation, by
  31 December 2005
• Schools are not required to alter the structure
  only to determine how to implement TLRs in place
  of MAs

29
Suffolk LEAs letterto Heads

• Suffolk has written to all heads to explain
• Review should be announced now
• Letter to be sent to staff and Unions
• Draft review should be starting now
• Review to be completed by October
• Consultation to be completed by Dec
• Whole scheme to be ready by 31/12/05

30
PHASE 1 REVIEWING STAFFING STRUCTURES (2)

• NUT position
• No detriment and minimum changes
• Reorganise the structure?
• alter or reduce responsibility payments
• alter or reduce teaching posts
• extensive consultation, disruption and
  disaffection
• not required by law - is it needed?

31
PHASE 1 REVIEWING STAFFING STRUCTURES (3)

• Mismatch between MAs and TLRs
• minimum TLR2 (2250) gt MA1 (1638)
• next level of TLR2 (3750) gt MA2 (3312)
• keeping the same number of responsibility
  payments will cost more
• MA3 (5688) is between the TLR bands
• should MA3s become TLR2 (with lower pay) or TLR1
  (with higher pay)?

32
PHASE 1 REVIEWING STAFFING STRUCTURES (4)

• The case for retaining the existing staffing
  structure
• the existing structure is already based on the
  needs of the school
• teachers pay is protected
• pastoral posts are protected
• increases in workload are avoided
• pitfalls of discriminatory outcomes are avoided

33
PHASE 2 - IMPLEMENTING CHANGES (1)

• Decide how to implement any changes
• minimum changes allow an assimilation process
• if not, decide how to appoint, when to
  ring-fence, how to deal with grievances, etc
• 3 year cash safeguarding for those who lose out

34
PHASE 2 - IMPLEMENTING CHANGES (2)

• Decide when to implement changes
• Three year transition period
• starting 1 January 2006, ending 31 December 2008

35
PHASE 2 - IMPLEMENTING CHANGES (3)

• Immediate implementation?
• NUT believes schools should where possible
  implement immediately, if no detriment
• Delayed or phased/staged implementation?
• problems with new appointees leapfrogging

36
IN SUMMARY

• The Choices
• Retain, as far as possible, the existing
  structure
• manageable cost, no reason to change
• Reorganise the structure
• unnecessary workload, disruption, disaffection
  and oppositio

37
Other Ways SEN, Leadership Spine, AST, Excellent
Teacher (ET?)

• Criterion for SEN 1 where the relevant body
  consider that the classroom teacher makes a
  particular contribution to the teaching of pupils
  with SEN in the school which is significantly
  greater than that which would normally be
  expected of a classroom teacher.

38
NUT Websites

• www.teachers.org.uk
• www.suffolknut.org.uk