No surprises: early signs are that performance pay is already hitting teachers hard

The NUT National Executive on December 11th received some early findings from a survey of members subject to the first year of performance-related pay on the main pay range. A major part of this government's assault on teachers' pay was the abolition of the main pay range from September 2013 and its replacement by a system which gave schools the power to pick and choose who gets to progress each year. By claiming that performance has not been good enough school leaders can now deny teachers the annual pay rise they would have had automatically. According to advice issued by the DfE as a result of lobbying by the NUT teachers at risk of failing to progress should be given plenty of prior warning and there should be 'no surprises'.

One of the major indications from the NUT survey is that this 'no surprises' principle is not worth the paper is it written on. A clear majority of those teachers who have been refused pay progression this year say that they had no warning that this decision was likely. 5000 members responded to the survey and an unexpectedly large proportion (30%) did not progress. Of these 88% were not told in advance that they were likely to be turned down for pay progression. There also appears to be higher rates of rejection in primary schools and amongst black and minority ethnic (BME) teachers.

These are alarming figures for the Union and for all teachers. There was an expectation that the real impact of PRP on teachers pay would not be seen for several years, after the system had bedded in. Heads would wait before using their new powers, it was assumed, until they had become the norm. This would avoid igniting disputes or causing unnecessary division and friction. In fact, if these figures are any kind of guide, the new pay arrangements are already holding back the pay of a huge proportion of teachers. And, as the Union's material has pointed out, the denial of pay progression for one year early in your career will cost members many thousands of pounds due to the knock on effect of preventing progression to subsequent progression in the following years.

What has also been highlighted in these figures is the folly of relying on a casework approach or even school-by-school action to deal with this assault. It is unlikely that many (or any) local NUT officers thinks that as much as 30% of their members have been denied pay progression. One reason for this may be that the people most likely to respond to the survey are those with most reason to be unhappy with the new system. Even if we allow for that factor, however, this figure suggests that the rejection rate in this first year is much higher than expected. At a recent OGM in Leeds school reps indicated that they believed many people who had been turned down had been reluctant to tell anyone including the rep out of embarrassment and feeling of failure. If members respond by feeling that denial is an individual failing (and it is understandable and predictable that many will) then the prospects of a workplace challenge of any kind is minimal.

Of course we should run appeals were we can and encourage them as a a sign that we will make it difficult for schools to hold down members pay. Even more importantly we should seek to collectivise our response so that schools where these new powers are used to prevent progression face industrial action. Neither of these strategies will protect the great majority of members, however, who continue to need a national strategy to restore national pay, abolish PRP and win collective bargaining.

We also had an update on talks with the DfE on workload. The last meeting with them is on December 17th after which there will be fortnightly meetings in January. The Secretary of State and senior civil servants continue to claim that a major initiative on workload and further advice on pay will be emerge as a result. There is no reasons to expect either of these announcements will come close to our workload and pay action demands and every reason to think we will need to use our two days of national action to remind the government of the strength of feeling in classrooms and staffrooms.