Emmet Stagg
Question:13 Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for Education and Science the progress of negotiations with the teachers unions regarding their pay claim and allowance for supervision; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28225/01]
Other Questions. - Teachers' Remuneration.
Bernard J. Durkan
Question:64 Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Education and Science if he will enter into negotiations with the teaching unions with a view to resolving ongoing or impending difficulties which might impact negatively on students; if his atten tion has been drawn to the need for immediate action in this regard; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28245/01]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 13 and 64 together.
A final formal offer of £27 per hour for supervision and substitution has been put to the three teacher unions. The Irish National Teachers Organisation executive has recommended acceptance and their members are being balloted at present. A result of the ballot is expected tomorrow, 16 November. The Teachers Union of Ireland put the offer to ballot and it was rejected by a small majority. The Association of Secondary Teachers of Ireland Executive Committee voted not to put the offer to a ballot.
My Department's officials met representatives of the three teacher unions on Friday, 2 November. At the meeting the ASTI, supported by the TUI and the INTO, submitted a number of points for consideration and clarification. These relate to the core issues of pay, hours and pensionability and to operational arrangements. The three teacher unions have indicated that they wish to have further discussions with my Department. These discussions will be facilitated and my officials will continue to meet the teacher unions as necessary to clarify aspects of the offer. It has been made clear that there will be no improvement to the core terms of the offer.
Two of the three unions have rejected the offer as it stands and we await the result of the INTO ballot. Either way, will the Minister indicate the next step? Several union representatives have alluded to the concern that the proposed allowance of £27 per hour will not be pensionable. Does the Minister hold out any hope of a change of mind in that regard?
A number of issues are being discussed in the context of the core requirements of the PPF, which the Deputy will understand must stand. I must say that to avoid any misunderstanding. The teacher's part-time rate is £20.54 per hour and it covers one hour teaching plus preparation and correction time. The supervision and substitution covered in this agreement relates purely to time spent in direct supervision and substitution and the rate of £27 compares very favourably with the highest rates of overtime payable anywhere in the public service. This is especially the case when the maximum delivery is limited to one and a half hours per week and where teachers will not be required to work outside the normal working day or unsocial hours. Overtime of one and a half hours per week would usually attract the lowest rate, usually time plus a quarter. A teacher who volunteers for the scheme will stand to earn a minimum of £1,000 per annum, with an overall limit of £1,323 per annum where the maximum of 49 hours is worked.
As the Deputy will be aware, the question of pensionability is one of the issues that arises. A difficulty here is that since some of the unions, for example the ASTI, insist that it must be voluntary it affects pensionability, I would be happy if it was built into the system as a normal arrangement, where it could become pensionable. These are some of the issues under discussion to see if a way forward can be found.
The general rules on pensionability were summarised in the recent report of the Commission on Public Service Pensions. The report states: "The general rule under public service pension schemes is that allowances in the nature of pay are pensionable if they are of a permanent nature or are for extra or inconvenient hours of duty and if a regular and recurring feature of the job and a compulsory condition of service, for example, unsocial hours, duties and shift allowance." I expect discussion to take place within these parameters.
I welcome the fact that the three unions are in negotiation with the Minister and his Department officials. Is the Minister aware of the frustration within all three unions and among all members of the teaching profession? The detail of an allowance of £27 for supervision is important, but lying behind the claim is frustration with the Department regarding its failure to recognise the need for a substantial pay increase to the teaching profession for the work undertaken by teachers. If disruption starts on this issue arising from the stance of the various unions we will face another year of turmoil where students will be denied proper education facilities.
I ask the Minister to ensure that his representative in negotiation with the unions will go all the way and not be as dogmatic as he has indicated in terms of the offer on the £27 allowance being the end of the road. If we pursue that course we will be walking a tightrope and it ill behoves the Minister to embark on that for a further year.
The Deputy will appreciate we are dealing with public servants who are governed by the rules of the public service, as are Deputies and others involved in the public service. We must, therefore, work within those rules and anyone engaged in negotiations is aware of that. It means that anything applying in one situation must apply in most others.
Discussions are ongoing and I am anxious to have the outstanding issues resolved. Earlier in the year it was said to me that if there could be a reasonable approach to supervision and substitution that could lead to a better situation in the autumn. I worked on that basis and got the parties into negotiations. I twice went back to Government to get the rates increased and we succeeded in doing so. The logical rate for supervision was considered to be the rate applying to part-time teachers but we secured an increase on that. In general terms it was considered to be a reasonable offer by those involved in the negotiations but the terms were subsequently rejected. In the case of the ASTI, the 23 person committee accepted the offer but it was rejected by the 180 person committee and it was not put to members.
There is little more I can do in such circumstances but I want to use the resolution of this issue as a springboard for developing a much better working relationship with the teachers' unions based on goodwill. By next year teachers will have received a 21.6% increase plus a 1% once-off payment. The demand initially was for an increase of 30%. This does not take account of the benchmarking process, which will be considered next June, with a quarter of any payment made retrospectively to next month. I am not sure if people fully realise how much of what they sought in the first instance has been granted through the PPF and the potential for further increases within the benchmarking system. It is good to note that the three unions want to discuss matters further. I will be as supportive as I can in those discussions.
The Minister indicated that he would be happy to see the allowance of £27 per hour become pensionable if the voluntary nature of the work was removed. On the wider pay issue, there are issues of concern to parents such as lack of progress on home-school evaluation and the holding of staff meetings, parent-teacher meetings and inservice training during the school day. Are these issues on the table for discussion in the context of the benchmarking process? Surely if a substantial pay claim is being considered it should be used as an opportunity to deal with a number of outstanding issues which are principally of concern to parents. I would like the Minister to confirm that these issues are being addressed.
Regarding the voluntary issue, the difficulty is that especially among ASTI teachers there is a sizeable number who do not want to participate in supervision. There are others who are prepared to do it and would be happy for it to be part of their normal work. The difficulty is that it cannot just be voluntary, which is that a person does it now and then; it has to be built in as a regular part of work.
I do not want to say too much as negotiations are under way and I naturally want to see teachers getting something worthwhile from their point of view and to have the matter resolved. There could be ways of meeting their needs, and this is something that will be discussed at the talks. Teachers know I would like to see a resolution and there may not be too big a gap in that context. The view of those involved in the negotiations and of many teachers is that if that was resolved it would help a lot of other things.
The broad range of issues will be considered in the context of the benchmarking process, which I am attending. There are specific representatives attending that process from all the public service groups, and that process is well under way.