1. From MAs to TLRs TEACHERS’ PAY IN THE MELTING POT

2. OVERVIEW

3. “IN THE MELTING POT” No payments safe, all members affected not an assimilation exercise not an assimilation exercise linked to remodelling and based on cutting the teachers’ paybill linked to remodelling and based on cutting the teachers’ paybill restructuring could remove any payments restructuring could remove any payments three year cash safeguarding only three year cash safeguarding only cuts in pay and pensions for many teachers cuts in pay and pensions for many teachers fewer career prospects for others fewer career prospects for others

4. WHAT IS A “RIG”? “Rewards & Incentives Group” DfES DfES National Employers Organisation National Employers Organisation ATL, NASUWT, PAT, SHA – and formerly NAHT ATL, NASUWT, PAT, SHA – and formerly NAHT joint proposals to STRB, accepted by STRB and by Secretary of State joint proposals to STRB, accepted by STRB and by Secretary of State NUT excluded from RIG NUT excluded from RIG

5. HOW THE TLR SYSTEM EMERGED 2002 – STRB asked to consider MA system: too many MAs? not focused on teaching & learning? used for R&R or PRP purposes? too many MAs? not focused on teaching & learning? used for R&R or PRP purposes? 2003 – STRB agrees changes are needed proposes discussions between all the parties proposes discussions between all the parties 2004-5 – development of TLR system RIG discussions – NUT excluded RIG discussions – NUT excluded RIG proposals accepted by STRB and Ruth Kelly RIG proposals accepted by STRB and Ruth Kelly

6. THE NUT’S STANCE Continued opposition to TLR system Opposition to reduction in number of posts of responsibility Protection for members against any loss of pay resulting from introduction of TLRs

7. THE TLR SYSTEM EXPLAINED

8. SUMMARY OF THE TLR SYSTEM (1) No nationally prescribed levels or values for TLR payments Schools to decide: number of posts of responsibility number of posts of responsibility number of different levels of TLR payments number of different levels of TLR payments actual values of TLR payments actual values of TLR payments

9. SUMMARY OF THE TLR SYSTEM (2) Two TLR bands Prescribed minima and maxima: TLR1: minimum £6,500 maximum £11,000 TLR1: minimum £6,500 maximum £11,000 TLR2: minimum £2,250 maximum £5,500 TLR2: minimum £2,250 maximum £5,500 more than 1 level of payment possible within these limits more than 1 level of payment possible within these limits

10. CRITERIA FOR TLR PAYMENTS (1) To qualify for any TLR payment significant responsibility not required of all classroom teachers significant responsibility not required of all classroom teachers focused on teaching and learning focused on teaching and learning requiring teachers’ professional skills and judgement requiring teachers’ professional skills and judgement

11. CRITERIA FOR TLR PAYMENTS (2) To qualify for any TLR payment (contd) leading, managing & developing a subject or curriculum area leading, managing & developing a subject or curriculum area OR leading, managing & developing pupil development across the curriculum OR leading, managing & developing pupil development across the curriculum impact on educational progress beyond the teacher’s assigned pupils impact on educational progress beyond the teacher’s assigned pupils leading, developing and enhancing the teaching practice of others leading, developing and enhancing the teaching practice of others

12. CRITERIA FOR TLR PAYMENTS (3) To qualify for TLR1 payments having line management responsibility for a significant number of people having line management responsibility for a significant number of people Responsibility for which a TLR is awarded should be clearly defined in the job description

13. LEVEL OF PAYMENTS (1) Schools determine their values Decisions on payment levels must : “have a clear rationale” “have a clear rationale” “be made against clear published criteria with differences between posts attracting different levels clearly delineated” “be made against clear published criteria with differences between posts attracting different levels clearly delineated” “take into account differential job weight and meet the provisions of equal pay, equality and other relevant legislation” (RIG proposals) “take into account differential job weight and meet the provisions of equal pay, equality and other relevant legislation” (RIG proposals)

14. LEVEL OF PAYMENTS (2) Spot values not scales More than 1 level possible in each band: Minimum differentials of £1,500 Minimum differentials of £1,500 Up to 3 levels possible at TLR2 Up to 3 levels possible at TLR2 Up to 4 levels possible at TLR1 Up to 4 levels possible at TLR1

15. SAFEGUARDING Cash safeguarding for 3 years only difference between existing MA and any TLR awarded will be safeguarded difference between existing MA and any TLR awarded will be safeguarded may be lost earlier due to promotion or incremental progression may be lost earlier due to promotion or incremental progression does not apply to teachers with post April 2004 “temporary” MAs does not apply to teachers with post April 2004 “temporary” MAs Additional responsibility or work may be required to retain safeguarding

16. ANYTHING ELSE? TLRs not to be used for SEN, R&R or performance Permanent payments only: “no justifiable rationale for other than permanent payments to be made for such responsibilities” “no justifiable rationale for other than permanent payments to be made for such responsibilities” except eg cover for secondments, maternity leave or vacancies pending permanent appointment except eg cover for secondments, maternity leave or vacancies pending permanent appointment MAs stay frozen pending their abolition

17. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TLR SYSTEM

18. THE TIMETABLE TLRs to be introduced from 1 January 2006 MAs to be abolished after 31 December 2005 Staffing structures to be reviewed and revised by 31 December 2005 Three year transition to new structures

19. PHASE 1 – REVIEWING STAFFING STRUCTURES (1) Schools are required to: review the structure in consultation with union representatives & staff review the structure in consultation with union representatives & staff determine proposals for implementing TLRs and any other changes, plus plan for implementation, by 31 December 2005 determine proposals for implementing TLRs and any other changes, plus plan for implementation, by 31 December 2005 Schools are not required to alter the structure – only to determine how to implement TLRs in place of MAs

20. PHASE 1 – REVIEWING STAFFING STRUCTURES (2) NUT position: “No detriment” and minimum changes Reorganise the structure? alter or reduce responsibility payments alter or reduce responsibility payments alter or reduce teaching posts alter or reduce teaching posts extensive consultation, disruption and disaffection extensive consultation, disruption and disaffection not required by law - is it needed? not required by law - is it needed?

21. PHASE 1 – REVIEWING STAFFING STRUCTURES (3) Mismatch between MAs and TLRs minimum TLR2 (£2250) > MA1 (£1638) minimum TLR2 (£2250) > MA1 (£1638) next level of TLR2 (£3750) > MA2 (£3312) next level of TLR2 (£3750) > MA2 (£3312) keeping the same number of responsibility payments will cost more keeping the same number of responsibility payments will cost more MA3 (£5688) is between the TLR bands MA3 (£5688) is between the TLR bands should MA3s become TLR2 (with lower pay) or TLR1 (with higher pay)? should MA3s become TLR2 (with lower pay) or TLR1 (with higher pay)?

22. PHASE 1 – REVIEWING STAFFING STRUCTURES (4) The case for retaining the existing staffing structure the existing structure is already based on the needs of the school the existing structure is already based on the needs of the school teachers’ pay is protected teachers’ pay is protected pastoral posts are protected pastoral posts are protected increases in workload are avoided increases in workload are avoided pitfalls of discriminatory outcomes are avoided pitfalls of discriminatory outcomes are avoided

23. PHASE 2 - IMPLEMENTING CHANGES (1) Decide how to implement any changes minimum changes allow an assimilation process minimum changes allow an assimilation process if not, decide how to appoint, when to ring-fence, how to deal with grievances, etc if not, decide how to appoint, when to ring-fence, how to deal with grievances, etc 3 year cash safeguarding for those who lose out

24. PHASE 2 - IMPLEMENTING CHANGES (2) Decide when to implement changes Three year transition period: starting 1 January 2006, ending 31 December 2008 starting 1 January 2006, ending 31 December 2008

25. PHASE 2 - IMPLEMENTING CHANGES (3) Immediate implementation? NUT believes schools should where possible implement immediately NUT believes schools should where possible implement immediately Delayed or phased/staged implementation? problems with new appointees “leapfrogging” problems with new appointees “leapfrogging”

26. IN SUMMARY The Choices Retain, as far as possible, the existing structure manageable cost, no reason to change manageable cost, no reason to change Reorganise the structure unnecessary workload, disruption, disaffection and opposition unnecessary workload, disruption, disaffection and opposition