IN A ‘Protect Teachers and Defend Education’ campaign update, the National Union of Teachers (NUT) said strike action is set to go ahead in February.
In a message to members, the NUT said: ‘In meetings called by Michael Gove on 13 and 16 December, the NUT and NASUWT explained that further talks would have to be about the direction of policy as well as its implementation to properly deal with the depth of teacher concern.
‘Mr Gove refused the call, by the other teacher unions present at the meetings, to meet directly with the unions in dispute, leading the TUC to write directly to him seeking a change of heart.
‘The meetings themselves did not reach substantive discussions, over and above the provocative and inappropriate presence of an insurance company who style themselves as the alternative to trade unions.
‘Please do contact your MP to ask them to demand that Michael Gove meets directly with the NUT and NASUWT to discuss the substance of teacher concerns.
‘Email your MP to contact Michael Gove about the talks.’
The NUT added: ‘If he passes up this opportunity, a joint national strike will be called no later than 13 February 2014.
‘Any further strike action will be entirely his fault.
‘Meanwhile we need to pursue Action Short of Strike Action and spread awareness of the campaign.’
Commenting on this year’s strikes, the union explained: ‘Why we took action: Pay – no to dismantling the national pay system.
‘Conditions – no to attacks on conditions – Michael Gove wants a longer school day and year.
‘Pensions – no to working longer, paying more and getting less.’
The NUT stressed: ‘We are continuing our action short of strike action which began in the autumn term 2012.
‘We are sending a clear message to the Government that its attacks on our conditions of employment and our professionalism are unacceptable.’
It goes on to warn that Gove’s latest submission to the School Teachers’ Review Body (STRB) highlights his move to deregulate education.
Warning he ‘is after your holidays and your weekends’ the union says: ‘Michael Gove’s STRB submission is strongly opposed by the NUT.
‘In it he says that he wants to “liberalise” the School Teachers’ Pay and Conditions Document (STPCD).
‘Teachers will not be fooled. This isn’t about improving education.
‘It is about deregulating the system so that costs can be driven down – and ultimately private companies allowed to profit from it.
‘He says that your conditions of service are over prescriptive, in particular the limits of 1,265 hours and 195 days on overall working time and the rights to PPA (planning, preparation and assessment) time, headship time and leadership and management time.’
The NUT quotes Gove’s submission: ‘47. The provisions which are particularly overly-prescriptive and limiting are those that cover working time and professional duties.’
The union continues: ‘He says that the limits on teachers’ working time limits the scope they have to demonstrate their “professionalism”.
‘Clearly he has no regard for the excessive hours teachers already work – including during their holidays and at weekends – and it follows (Ofsted chief) Sir Michael Wilshaw’s comment last week that teachers in his last school “enjoyed” coming to work on Saturdays.’
The NUT goes on to warn: ‘Michael Gove tells the STRB the sorts of outcomes he would like – the longer hours that he has seen in the Far East and now in academies and free schools in this country.
‘He wants teachers’ overall hours to be limited only by the Working Time Directive protections – though David Cameron wants to weaken even those.
‘The NUT’s submission, on the other hand, lists some of the many countries in Europe, the Americas and the Far East, which have longer summer holidays than here but still perform better in international league tables.
‘There are so many other better ideas for improving standards to explore than this one.
The NUT quotes Gove again: ‘53. Children in the Far East are also often learning for many more hours than their peers in England, giving them a critical edge when they leave school.
‘We want schools in this country to learn from these examples, and some of them already do.
‘The David Young Community Academy in Leeds operates a seven-term year starting in June, with a maximum of six weeks at school followed by a maximum of four weeks’ holiday.
‘All ARK schools operate a longer school day: at secondary level, ARK schools are open from 8.30am-4.30pm Monday to Thursday, and 8.30am-3.00pm on Fridays, providing 31 hours of teaching per week.
‘The Free School Norwich is open 51 weeks a year.’
The NUT comments: ‘Michael Gove has more ideas on pay as well – such as introducing “non-consolidated performance payments” which wouldn’t be counted towards your pension.’
It quotes from Gove’s submission: ‘22. The STPCD specifically prevents the payment of non-consolidated performance payments.
‘Such payments are used elsewhere in the public sector, and some consultees suggested in their evidence towards the 21st Report of the STRB that they should be allowed for teachers.
‘A full review of allowances should consider this issue. Any proposals should be considered with reference to the likely effect on teachers’ pensions.’
l In an academy schools representatives bulletin, the NASUWT informs: ‘The NASUWT has rejected the independent academy sponsor E-ACT’s new Performance Management, Pay and Capability policies. The reasons are detailed below.
‘E-ACT Performance Management Policy incorporates most of the features of the Department for Education (DfE) Model Teacher Appraisal Policy, which is a subject of the trade dispute between the NASUWT and the Secretary of State for Education.
‘There are several key features of the E-ACT Performance Management Policy which make it unacceptable:
‘l there is no limit to the number of objectives which can be imposed on teachers;
‘l there is no limit to the number of lesson observations to which teachers can be subjected. In addition to unlimited observations, there is no limit to additional “drop-ins”;
‘l the policy includes an “informal support” programme which managers can implement in the event of “perceived performance difficulties”. This can result in even more observations and lead to formal capability procedures.
Capability Policy
‘The E-ACT Capability Policy is little more than a ‘fast track to the sack’. Once a teacher becomes subject to it, it is very unlikely that the outcome will be anything other than dismissal on grounds of capability.
‘Key unacceptable features of the policy include:
‘l a low trigger point for the exercise of formal capability procedures – all a manager needs to be is “not satisfied with progress” for formal capability procedures to be implemented;
‘l the capability procedure has two review periods, involving the observation and assessment of teachers. These can be as short as six weeks and can be imposed. Short review periods are insufficient to enable a teacher to demonstrate progress;
‘l a disciplinary warning is imposed at the end of each review stage, culminating in dismissal;
‘l in circumstances where the capability procedure is used and a teacher lodges a grievance, the capability procedure is not automatically halted whilst the grievance is heard.
Teachers’ Pay Policy
‘The E-ACT Pay Policy has a number of unacceptable features, including:
‘l full pay portability is not maintained;
‘l pupils and parents contribute to the teachers’ pay progression decision-making process;
‘l pay progression is not determined solely by the meeting of performance management objectives. Additional hurdles can be set within the pay progression process.
‘The NASUWT has therefore rejected the capability, teacher appraisal and pay policies. . .
‘The NASUWT has confirmed to E-ACT that the implementation of the new policies could give rise to industrial and legal action.’
