Memorandum submitted by NATFHE
NATFHE—The University & College Lecturers'
Union represents 69,000 academic staff working throughout higher,
further, adult and prison education. NATFHE has 43,000 members
working in further education colleges, and adult and community
learning services.
NATFHE welcomes the Education and Skills Committee's
inquiry into further education and the chance to give oral evidence.
This submission will concentrate on NATFHE's
concerns about workforce development, pay and conditions and the
overall funding of the sector.
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
STRATEGY
There is general consensus around the need for
a national workforce development strategy in the sector. The Foster
Report highlighted the need for such a strategy developed by the
DfES and Association of Colleges over a 12-month period.
NATFHE would like to see
— The national workforce development
strategy become a reality in the forthcoming White Paper.
— Ring fenced funding for workforce
development.
— Trade unions representing the workforce
in colleges playing a full part in developing the strategy. The
strategy will require partnership to establish minimum standards.
— The DfES leading on the strategy
to give it credibility and high status in the sector. The FE Teacher
Pay Initiative and Workload Monitoring Agreement Group in schools
are good examples of where government involvement has secured
a consensus amongst all stakeholders and the initiatives have
been successful.
WORKLOAD
Lecturers regularly report that they could do
a better job if they had time to teach—currently they experience
excessive workloads, too much bureaucracy and stress. Recent figures
from the Trades Union Congress (TUC) revealed that lecturers do
an average of more than nine hours unpaid work every week. If
lecturers were paid for the unpaid overtime they put in they would
earn an extra £10,216 a year.
NATFHE would like to see issues around workload
in colleges tackled with direct government input. NATFHE is pursuing
with the AoC the possibility of a workload agreement for FE.
WORKFORCE DATA
In order to draw up a workforce development
strategy, reliable data about the FE workforce are needed.
Colleges have to fill out an individual staff
information record (SIR) for the LSC but neither the LSC nor many
colleges take this seriously. As a result it is difficult to know
with any certainty the true numbers and characteristics of staff
in colleges. This directly impacts on monitoring for equality
practices.
The LSC has stated that it will only collect
the SIR for another year and the responsibility for workforce
data collection should pass to the lifelong learning sector skills
council, Lifelong Learning UK. This body states that it has neither
the resources nor the powers to ensure robust workforce data collection.
NATFHE would like to see a solution to
the current absence of robust and reliable workforce data in the
sector by making its collection an obligation for any organisation
in receipt of public funding.
PAY
The workforce development strategy must take
pay into account. NATFHE believe that quality in colleges is linked
at least in part to pay. Pay for teaching and support staff in
colleges lags well behind that for comparable groups, most notably
in schools. In recent years there has been much lip service to
the importance of developing a well-motivated, adequately rewarded
workforce but a lack of leverage to ensure that this happens.
A career in FE is characterised by low pay, and high workloads.
In 2003, a two-year pay deal (2003-05) was agreed
between the Association of Colleges and NATFHE. That pay modernisation
deal was hailed by both as a significant step in reducing the
gap between schools and colleges and NATFHE has closely monitored
its implementation At the time of writing, 57% of colleges had
not awarded it in full. Some colleges claim they don't have the
resources to honour the deal which was recommended by the AoC.
There is a real sense of betrayal over the non-realisation of
the 2001government promise to close the pay and funding gap between
colleges and schools.
Further education must be the only profession
in which staff are driven to industrial action virtually every
year to persuade their employers to offer decent pay rises and
implement pay and conditions agreements.
NATFHE would like to see
— The Government taking a lead and
abandoning its reluctance to become involved in pay in the sector.
The AoC does not have the power to enforce implementation.
— A coherent national pay structure
introduced. The Government should break the longstanding impasse
by earmarking funds for pay, as has been done in Wales, and monitor
the use to which such funds are put.
CASUALISATION
Colleges are employing increasing numbers of
temporary, agency and casual staff. Not only, as attested by a
number of Chief Inspector's Reports, has this meant a lowering
of quality in the provision delivered by part time staff, and
a general lowering of morale among all college staff, but it could
also be unlawful. High profile cases such as the "Birch case"
in higher education should be a stark warning to the rest of the
sector.
Foster stated that over 17% of FE staff do not
have permanent full-time or part-time contracts. It has been estimated
that nearly 70% of staff in FE colleges and adult and community
learning work part time. And what statistics we do have show that
casual and part-time staff are overwhelmingly women, or from a
black and minority ethnic background.
Part-time hourly paid staff have poorer terms
and conditions than full-time and fractional contract staff and
a high level of insecurity. Poor access to facilities, little
professional development, poor management, and exclusion from
decision-making are commonplace. These staff do not in the main
have the paid hours, or indeed sense of involvement in colleges,
to facilitate proper support for students. Often this responsibility
with its heavy administrative burden, which isn't factored in
to casual staff hours, is added to the workload of full-time staff.
NATFHE would like to see
— No more than 15% of teaching work
undertaken by hourly paid or agency staff.
— Part-time staff employed on fractional
contracts. This should be monitored through inspection and provider
performance reviews.
— Care taken to ensure the recruitment
of "vocational tutors" from industry does not increase
the level of casualisation in FE, as Foster's advice recommended.
RECRUITMENT
Inevitably the poor pay and conditions in further
education mean it is becoming increasingly difficult for colleges
to recruit and retain staff. This will reach crisis point in the
next decade when around 50% of the existing college workforce
will retire.
NATFHE would like to see
— A national campaign initiated for
new staff like the one successfully undertaken for school teaching
by the Teacher Training Agency. Such a campaign would need to
be differentiated to reflect the significantly different roles
of lecturers working in various parts of the learning and skills
sector.
— New initiatives and policies to attract
staff to work in the sector. There may be some scope for examining
the possibility of colleges "growing their own" staff.
For example, vocational students could be encouraged to take teaching
qualifications and divide their working lives between industry
and education. This would involve a partnership between employers
and colleges and could solve recruitment difficulties for both.
FUNDING
NATFHE regrets that the Foster Report did not
comment on funding, despite making significant recommendations
about changes needed in the sector where funding is clearly required
for successful implementation. This omission from the report is
significant. Whilst we agree that a focus on the FE System is
required, NATFHE doubts whether you can simply "manage"
yourself out of this situation. Funding will underpin any real
change.
The pattern of funding for further education
has been one of feast and famine. Funding changes have been at
or below the rate of inflation in some years, and large real terms
increases in others.
The significant increases in funding since 2003,
which NATFHE publicly welcomed, raised expectations in the sector.
Staff believed that the increases would address the longstanding
funding issues. Unfortunately these expectations proved to be
short lived—around 18 months. It became apparent that increases
in funding at a local level were dependant on the curriculum mix—some
colleges faced significant reductions in funding because of crude
implementation of national priorities. Too many demands on funding
and rigid rules lead to instability. We need to work towards steadier
funding for the sector to provide FE colleges with a more stable
and reliable financial environment to work in.
Targets: We recognise that the Government
needs priorities and welcome the Public Service Agreement targets,
including aims to increase the proportion of 17-year-olds in post
compulsory education and 18-30-year-olds in higher education.
However if the quantum for FE does not rise and the Government
keeps introducing new priorities in one area (16-19), there is
little doubt that this will be at the expense of good provision
in another (adult education. See below).
Government Initiatives: The sector's
persistent financial instability and under-funding, has led to
colleges seeking short-term financial gain by chasing government
initiatives that carry additional funding. Since 2002 most new
monies coming into colleges have been linked to distinct areas
of work for example, in the past year growth money has gone to
14-19 as this is a government priority. This has detracted from
the amount of core funding going into FE and has often been to
the detriment of core work such as adult education.
Inconsistency: Unless the inconsistent
funding between schools and FE and higher education and FE is
corrected, further education will continue to be forced to provide
education on the cheap. NATFHE was pleased to see the Government
beginning to address the 13% funding gap—by reducing it
to 8%, however it has been five years since the Government first
pledged to fully eradicate the schools/colleges funding gap, and
we are still waiting.
NATFHE is also concerned about the effect the
funding gap is having on black and minority ethnic (BME) pupils,
given that a disproportionately large number of BME pupils study
in further education (14% in 2000).
Employers' Contribution: Employers are
absorbing an increasing amount of public subsidy to train their
workers. The Government is still doing very little to encourage
them to repay public subsidy with increased investment of their
own.
NATFHE would like to see
— The level of central government expenditure
rising towards 1% of GDP over the coming decade if the sector
is to deliver the skills programme the UK needs.
— The funding gap between schools and
colleges closed.
— Transitional funding for pay modernisation
and restructuring in response to changed funding priorities.
— An investigation taking place—similar
to the work which has been recently undertaken in the higher education
sector—into the resources and capital needs of further education
in the UK to determine the level at which expenditure will need
to rise.
— A levy be placed on employers to
encourage their full participation in the funding of the sector.
— Tax credits for employers actively
contributing to the skills agenda.
— A single document that brings together
a learning model spanning schools, FE and HE setting out what
the public purse will support in full, what the public purse will
subsidise and that the Government considers individuals and employers
might pay for in the bill, as suggested in the Foster Report.
— Core funding in further education
coming from the public purse. Educating and training the workforce
benefits society and the economy.
PUBLIC SPENDING
ON ADULT
EDUCATION
The cuts that hit adult education last year
look set to deepen come September. Overall funding for adult education
in 2006-07 has been cut by 4%.
This cut results partly from an in-built legislative
bias towards young people which was written into the Learning
and Skills Act 2000 and providers being "too successful"
in the context of a finite LSC budget and exceeding their targets
both for growth in adult learners and for 16-19-year-olds.
Whist we do not disagree with the government
need to prioritise, there is now inadequate funding to meet both
the Government's priorities and the basic skills targets. This
is putting a severe strain on the system.
NATFHE is growing increasingly concerned about:
Fees: There are substantial hikes in
fees for "non-essential" courses. Adult learners are
being asked to make an increasing contribution to the cost of
education. Government policy requires colleges to offer free courses
to 16-18-year-olds and to adults who are unemployed, economically
disadvantaged or taking basic skills courses. Colleges also traditionally
reduce fees for other groups including older people. However NATFHE
is concerned about government plans to increase fees by up to
65% by 2007-08 despite having no evidence that learners or their
employers will be able or willing to pay such increases.
Diversion: Cash is being diverted from
essential courses that may be steps to Level 2 but do not meet
government priorities, such as access and ESOL course.
Course reductions: It is estimated that
the number of publicly funded places on shorted courses which
do not lead to national qualifications is likely to fall by around
500,000 by 2007-08. Not all the education and training that
adults will require over the next decade will be on a course that
leads to a national qualification. There will be a continuing
need for diverse provision of education for adults.
Already we are getting examples of where the
cuts are biting:
— At Hackney College the budget cuts
falling largely in adult education will mean that the equivalent
of 41 full-time teaching jobs are to be axed.
— At Lambeth College, budget cuts falling
largely in adult education will mean that the equivalent of 23
full-time teaching jobs are lost.
— At Hull College, A-Level programmes
look set to be axed, along with short courses of less than nine
hours including First Aid, Health & Safety, and Food Hygiene.
Other courses at Level 1 and Level 3 will be made shorter.
— Derbyshire Adult Education Service
has had its budget for further education work slashed by 16.4%
and its Personal and Community Development Learning budget cut
by 10%. It has been proposed that the equivalent of 42 full-time
posts are axed and it is believed that up to 6,000 students could
be affected.
— In Liverpool, the adult education
service faces a £1.6 million cut. A whopping 6,000 learner
places are set to vanish and approximately 120 jobs could go.
— In West Sussex, the adult education
service faces a 12.7% budget cut—equivalent to £390,000.
Three in four of FE's students are adults, the
vast majority studying part-time. As NIACE argues, a more coherent
approach to adult learning is vital and urgent, particularly in
terms of future workforce needs, with the forthcoming downturn
in 16-18s, and the needs of an ageing population. The value of
study for personal fulfilment and social wellbeing cannot be over-estimated
and should be constantly re-asserted.
NATFHE would like to see
— The Learning and Skills Act 2001
amended to equally prioritise the learning of adults and the learning
of young people. This will secure a fairer funding base for adult
learning in England.
— Re-balance targets so that 80% of
provider budgets address national priorities, leaving 20% for
responses to locally identified needs.
— A commitment by the Government to
a national entitlement to adult learning in every community, including
courses for those with poor basic skills.
— Increased take-up for Level 2 entitlement
and it extended to Level 3 for adults under 30.
— The unitised curriculum and credit
transfer system for adult learning developed fully.
— An end to the closure of FE courses
whilst there is still demand from learners and end-users. It is
far harder to start courses after they have been discontinued.
— The capping of fee increases for
adult learning and the introduction of generous remissions policies
so that lack of means is not a barrier to participation.
— A promise that the ending of European
Social Fund programmes in 2006 does not result in a reduction
in opportunities for adult learning.
— An equality impact assessment to
ensure that any negative impacts from the cuts on students are
measured carefully.
NEXT STEPS
— NATFHE and its members believe that
they have responded very well to the proliferation of demands
put on colleges since 1997. However, the degree of change fatigue
in the sector must be recognised and taken into account in any
implementation of Foster's recommendations.
— Any implementation will need ownership
throughout the sector and amongst all staff. This needs to extend
beyond the magic circle of leaders and managers, national agencies
and stakeholders.
— It will need a coordinated and coherent
communications strategy to take the messages to all in colleges
and the sector. Such a communications strategy will need to be
properly resourced so that all staff and all learners feel part
of it and believe that they can make a genuine contribution to
the process of change.
— NATFHE considers that the unions
representing staff in colleges and the sector are a vital but
underused vehicle for such communications. We would wish to play
an active role in the revitalisation of the sector so that it
can meet the challenges set for it by government. We wish to see,
and be a part of, a fully developed action plan that will bring
about these changes.
March 2006
| 
