|
MEMORANDUM submitted by GMB, UNISON SCHOOL SUPPORT STAFF IN TODAY'S SCHOOLS
There are
322,400
The role of school support staff has changed beyond all recognition in the last ten years with a rapid growth in the range and depth of their skills and responsibilities.. Support staff have been crucial in delivering the remodelling agenda in schools which has allowed teachers to focus on teaching rather than administration; support staff have been key in providing the extended services for schools; and for professionalising the running of schools. In the classroom, support staff are directly delivering education under teachers' supervision and will be instrumental in carrying out the personalised learning agenda.
Why We Need A School Support Staff Negotiating Body (SSSNB)
School Support Staff are currently part of the National Joint Council (NJC) for Local Government Services - which covers 1.7 million local authority workers. The parties to this Council and signatories to pay and conditions agreements are the Local Government Employers body (LGE) and the three recognised TUs (GMB, UNISON and UNITE). National conditions are supplemented by local authority agreements, all of which are contractual.
It has been recognised for some time that these arrangements are suitable for staff providing 'town hall' services but not necessarily for those based in schools. Job evaluation and pay structures do not always meet the needs of school staff or schools. Job descriptions have to be in standard formats, often unsuitable for schools. There are increasing anomalies such as multiple term-time pay formulas and multi/split contracts. Heads and governing bodies of schools often find the local authority processes unwieldy and time consuming. The position is neatly summarised by Price, Waterhouse, Cooper in a report of March 2008.
"Our conclusion from all of the discussions carried out during this study is that there is a lack of strategic direction in the management of support staff pay, and (except in the foundation/VA schools) a lack of accountability as to who is responsible for the pay and other terms and conditions of school support staff. The consequence of this is a feeling of nobody being in control and a lack of accountability for decision making. For example, where new roles are established the process for deciding on the appropriate salary varies hugely between schools; sometimes the process is over-complicated and time consuming, whereas in other instances no paper process is followed."
The SSSNB
The SSSNB will be a
Negotiating Body and a Non Departmental Public Body and its agreements will
apply to all support staff in all maintained schools in
The SSSNB will negotiate a national framework of pay which will create national consistency and local flexibility. We believe the current confusion and inconsistency around contracts and the deployment of support staff is one of the main reasons the remodelling agenda will not be sustainable in the long run. Nationally defined and evaluated responsibility levels linked to competencies and a national framework of pay will create that consistency and help secure standards in maintained schools.
The ACSL Bill
Both Employers and Unions support the establishment of the SSSNB but have concerns about several clauses in the Bill related to its establishment which we feel could undermine its operation as an effective negotiating body.
Under Clause 216, matters may be referred to the SSSNB by the Secretary of State for consideration It is proposed that when an agreement is reached, it will be submitted to the SoS with a recommendation to ratify it or to issue an order for schools to have due regard to it. We believe the distinction should be that agreements will be ratified and there should be due regard to joint advice and guidance. This would not undermine the ability of the SSSNB to make agreements that incorporate discretion and flexibility for employers.
In clause 215 the Bill does allow the SSSNB to consider matters not referred to it but in 215 (3) it must first seek the consent of the Secretary of State to do this. We feel this is overly bureaucratic.
Moreover, we have misgivings about the Secretary of State's powers to substitute his own agreement in 220 which we believe will need further clarification. . We hope that where decisions are made by agreement between employers and unions the powers of the Secretary of State will be exercised only in exceptional circumstances.
In addition, the Trade Unions are concerned that there is no express "recognition" of them. GMB, UNISON and UNITE are currently recognised to represent school support staff in the NJC and if this cannot be replicated in the Bill then it needs to be ensured through other areas and we are in discussion with the DCSF about this.
March 2009 |