|
REJECT THE PROPOSED McCRONE DEAL
Early in January EIS members are likely to face a ballot on
the outcome of the McCrone negotiations. Our leadership want to push this
through with great haste. Debate over McCrone was suppressed at the June AGM,
at the September SGM and at Executive Council. When ballot papers arrive at
your home it will be to the accompaniment of a carefully orchestrated
press campaign, trumpeting '20%+ pay increases for teachers and less time in
front of pupils’. EIS officials are currently organising a phoney
debate, with local meetings to be held after the ballot papers have been sent
out. Only the usual, 'reliable' speakers permitted - yes, those who ignored the
87% call for a Higher Still boycott. Here is an outline of what the McCrone
negotiations really mean for teachers and why you shouldn't be taken in by the
likely spin. Remember your conditions of work, your health and the future of
Scottish education are at stake.
The proposals include the following:
An extension of the contractual working week from 29.5 to 35
hours (an extra 18.6%). This will take effect from 1.4.2001. It will bring
greatly increased stress at a time when more teachers are near breaking point.
Many teachers' own children will face longer hours away from home. They also
face additional payments for childcare.
Initially there will be a personal allowance of time based
on one third of class contact. However, by the year 2006 there will no longer
be any nationally agreed contractual entitlement to a personal allowance of
time. Instead of the firm contractual guarantees we have at present, the
allocation of non-class contact time will be left to a combination of local,
school and individual negotiations. This is the method by which our workload is
supposed to be managed at present! Many schools have no reps; some school
staffs face continuous management harassment; whilst in today's climate even
the best-organised schools still need nationally agreed contractual guarantees.
Yet if the agreement goes ahead school managements will have even more control.
They will have compulsory monitored CPD and possibly the powers to determine
who becomes a chartered teacher, as well who fills other possible new temporary
promoted posts.
On top of all this there are to be a further 35 hours a year
for CPD (another extra 2.6%). This will surely be the final straw for many
teachers struggling under the current workload burden. Originally proposed as
an extra 5 days work per year, our negotiators think this alternative formula,
'gently' phased in by 2003, would be more acceptable! Even at present much of
the in-service, often delivered by out-of-school, out-of-touch 'high-fliers' is
widely resented.
EIS negotiators seem prepared to accept management's
proposal to scrap the right of temporary teachers to permanent employment if
local agreements are made on their use a much weaker protection.
The much vaunted proposed winding-down scheme for long
serving teachers (which could permit teachers to drop to 0.5 of a working week
without pension loss) does not guarantee that the teacher will stay in their
present school or be able to go to a school of their choice. They will be on
completely new contracts facing the prospect of spending their last year's
'trouble-shooting' from school to school. It sounds more like a winding-up
exercise!
So what are the attempted sweeteners to try and persuade
teachers to accept the worsened conditions--we have already rejected by 98% in
the Millennium Review ballot. Two moves are indeed welcome but they are not so
generous as they first appear.
It is intended to reduce class contact to 22.5 hours per
week. However, this is dependent on finding more teaching staff. Furthermore,
the extra time released isn't likely to be allotted t vital preparation and
correction, but to a whole raft of managerial initiatives, many of dubious
educational worth. In effect this could mean that much of the average 12.5
hours overtime, McCrone recognised teachers do at present, could still have to
be done at the end of a lengthened school day and week!
There is to be a substantial increase in the starting-
salary for new entrants into the profession. However, this isn't so much- a
generous gesture, as a simple necessity if Scottish education is to continue.
For years successive governments (and EIS negotiators) have allowedteachers'
starting pay to fall behind most other graduate jobs, whilst the lack of job
security and often appalling working conditions for young entrants is a
national scandal. A new enhanced starting point is the minimum necessary if
there is to be any hope of attracting new teachers in significant numbers.
It is proposed to off er all teachers a 10% increase on
1.4.2001, with those on the top of the basic scale receiving a further 10% on
1.4. 2002. APTs and senior teachers will receive a slightly larger second
increase. However, PTs face the additional prospect of a job evaluation
exercise' ('job sizing') to be completed by 1.4.2003. It is obviously
management's intention to make considerable savings in secondary schools
(probably by stepping up their attack on the department structure they see as
an obstacle to their counter-educational reforms), since they are resisting
adequate salaries conservation measures.
Remembering that the minimum proposed increase in working
hours is 22%, it is quite clear that the suggested pay increase amounts to a
compulsory overtime scheme at less than the going rate. Add to that the
fact that over a 2 year period inflation can be expected to rise between 6 -
7%; and that the original EIS McCrone submission stated that we needed 8% to
catch up with others and you can see that even in financial terms it leaves an
awful lot to be desired. However, the pay rises will be eroded from the
moment we receive them, whilst the deterioration in conditions will increase
with each successive phase and would remain permanently.
The proposals ditch the longstanding EIS policies of
refusing to sell our conditions and upholding the promotion of sound
learning. Most of us came into teaching because we believe it is a worthy
job. We want the conditions where we can educate successfully. This can only be
done if we are not overworked; if we have time to prepare and correct; and if
we have a real say in determining educational priorities. Many of the problems
we face stem from the arrogance of governments and managements far removed from
the chalkface. These have been exacerbated by an EIS leadership which ignores
members' wishes. It was the Scottish Executive/COSLA/EIS leadership alliance
which brought us the SQA/Higher Still debacle and which failed to address the
bureaucratic nightmare of 5-14. This 'deal' soon would further undermine
Scottish education.
DEMAND A REAL DEBATE ON OUR FUTURE*
*FOR A MINIMUM 21 DAYS DISCUSSION
BEFORE THE BALLOT PAPERS ARE CIRCULATED*
LOCAL MEETINGS MUST HEAR SPEAKERS WHO OPPOSE THE DEAL*
· DEFEND THE CONTRACT - REFUSE TO SELL YOUR
CONDITIONS*
*FOR A SUBSTANTIAL PAY INCREASE WITHOUT STRINGS*
· NO MORE MANAGEMENT DIRECTED EDUCATIONAL DISASTERS
-CLASS TEACHERS MUST HAVE A SAY ON ALL NEW EDUCATIONAL
DEVELOPMENTS*
Keep in touch with our website (as featured
in TESS 1.12.00!)
www.mcrone.net
Scottish Federationof Socialist Teachers, c/o
Allan Armstrong, 11., Viewforth Terrace, Edinburgh, EH1 0 4LH
e-mail -
allan.armstrong@virgin.net
|
