I regret the protracted nature of the ASTI dispute. It arises from the ASTI's insistence that it should be treated differently from any other public service union, including the other teacher unions, and to have its 30% pay claim dealt with outside the terms of the programme for prosperity and fairness and independently of the public service benchmarking process. In these circumstances, the Deputy will appreciate, the Government cannot endanger the social partnership structure, which has contributed so significantly to our current prosperity, to deal exclusively with the wishes of one trade union. As the Deputy will appreciate, all teachers including ASTI members are already to receive a 22% increase in pay plus whatever may be awarded to teachers under the benchmarking process.
In an effort to find a solution to the ASTI's 30% pay claim the issues were referred in the first instance to the public service arbitration board. On the rejection of the findings of the arbitration board by the ASTI the parties agreed to refer the matter to the Labour Court. Once again, the ASTI rejected the outcome. The essence of both recommendations was that the ASTI should pursue its further claim through the public service benchmarking body. The ASTI has steadfastly refused to engage in that process. The non-participation of the ASTI in the benchmarking process, while regretful, has not hampered the benchmarking body in carrying out a full examination of the role of the teaching profession. The report of the body will issue before by the end of June 2002.
The current action by the ASTI in relation to supervision and substitution is part of its campaign to have its 30% pay claim addressed. The ASTI issued a directive to its members to withdraw from supervision and substitution with effect from 4 March 2002.
Additional Information.The directive applies to supervision at break times and before and after school and to substitution by permanent teachers for absent colleagues. On Friday, 15 February the ASTI made a new set of demands in relation to supervision and substitution which were: a minimum annual rate of €2,500, that it be pensionable and available to existing pensioners in compensation for having done this for free over a number of years and that it be within the 22 hours weekly maximum teaching time.
I met the three teacher unions on 28 February 2002. I indicated that the Government is not opposed in principle to the pensionability of supervision payments. In that regard, I offered to enter into a process at the end of the current school year to work out the details of an arrangement which would be consistent with the requirements for pensionability. I also indicated that the procedures provided by the conciliation and arbitration scheme for teachers should be used to deal with the issue of an appropriate payment rate for supervision. These procedures include independent arbitration where the parties cannot agree.
My approach was welcomed by the Irish National Teachers Organisation and the Teachers Union of Ireland but rejected by the Association of Secondary Teachers of Ireland. The ASTI central executive indicated that it will not enter into any further negotiations on this matter pending the settlement of its pay claim. At a meeting of the teachers conciliation council on 12 March the TUI and INTO requested that further discussions take place on the issue of supervision and substitution. These discussions will commence shortly with the assistance of a facilitator. The ASTI confirmed that it is precluded from dealing with this matter by the decision of its executive committee.