Teachers’ Remuneration.

Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 26 January 2005

Wednesday, 26 January 2005

Questions (1015, 1016)

Michael Ring

Question:

1077 Mr. Ring asked the Minister for Education and Science the reason the qualifications of a person (details supplied) in County Mayo were deemed sufficient, then insufficient, due to a technicality; her views on whether not giving this person an increment for a full year teaching is undermining the profession; the way in which this person can check the authenticity of the payments received in view of the fact that her Department could not provide a breakdown of the amount owed for January 2002 to May 2003; the reason there was no reference to increment entitlement under the aforementioned agreement; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [1133/05]

Written answers

Minister for Education and Science (Ms Hanafin)

In accordance with standard practice, a person appointed to a publicly advertised teaching post in a community school and who does not meet the qualification requirements for that post is paid at the unqualified rate. My Department agreed with teacher union representatives a change to the standard of qualification required for appointment to special needs teaching posts. These arrangements are set out in circular letter PPT 06/04 and came into effect from 1 September 2003. They provide for preference to be given in the selection process to recognised teachers who hold a relevant postgraduate qualification in the area of special needs education. They also provide that, with effect from 1 September 2003, a recognised teacher lacking only such a specialist qualification may be appointed at the qualified rate of pay to a special needs post provided no other more suitably qualified candidate is available and that the teacher is suitable in all other respects.

The person concerned has been dealt with in accordance with the terms of that agreement which is of general application to all teachers. This agreement does not extend to service prior to 1 September 2003. The person concerned has been paid at the appropriate rate of incremental salary since 1 September 2003 in accordance with the terms of circular letter PPT 06/04 and the agreed scheme for the award of incremental credit as set out in circular letter PPT 09/02. The remuneration of the person concerned has been issued through my Department's payroll service since September 2002. I am arranging for a breakdown of the moneys issued by my Department to be forwarded to the person concerned as soon as possible.

Michael Ring

Question:

1078 Mr. Ring asked the Minister for Education and Science her views on whether it is fair that a certain minority of teachers received nothing for supervision work carried out between September 2001 and March 2003 for part-time and substitute teachers. [1134/05]

Minister for Education and Science (Ms Hanafin)

An agreement was reached between the managerial authorities of second level schools, my Department and the teachers' unions for the provision of funding for supervision and substitution duties in post-primary schools in 2002 and a circular to this effect was issued in July 2002. Permanent, temporary wholetime and eligible part-time teachers who served in a voluntary secondary or community/comprehensive school during the 2001-02 school year were eligible to claim payment for that school year and the agreed scheme for payment of supervision and substitution duties was implemented in full in the 2002-03 school year and has been in operation since then. Under the agreed scheme, schools are given an allocation of hours for substitution and supervision each year, based on the number of whole time equivalent teachers in the school. Where teachers do not take up the total hours allocated for supervision/substitution, a grant for the balance of hours is issued to the management authority. The school management may offer the balance of hours available to substitute and/or part-time staff, and pay them out of this grant.