PART 8 -
EDUCATION TRADE UNIONSINTRODUCTION
The education trade unions play an important part in the affairs of a school much of
which goes unrecognised by many analysts of the education system. In the first
section of this part of my autobiography I shall establish the nature of the education
trade unions, how they primarily function as professional associations, and then
determine in detail important roles that these trade unions fulfil.
The second section is short but very important:- Educational Advance - The
Importance of Teacher's Welfare and the part Trade Unions play in ensuring that
Welfare. I shall be examining this in light of the three overarching themes:- Quality,
Equal Opportunities and Motivation.
Finally there will be a section on the New Right from my trade union perspective.
Trade Unionists love buzz words, they like to quote abbreviations with an air of
authority; these abbreviations are at the end of Section 8C before the appendices.
SECTION 8A - THE NATURE OF TRADE UNIONS AND THEIR ROLE
Before I describe the different roles the trade union offered in schools, as background
in appendix 8A I have drawn up a personal history of my involvement in the broad
trade union movement; I will refer to it as the need arises. In appendix 8B there is a
description of the NUT structure so if terms/job titles are confusing please refer to this
appendix.
Throughout this section I am going to make reference to the NUT because for the
most part and for my greater participation that was the union I belonged to and held
positions. For various reasons I think the NUT, or a teaching union with a similar
structure, has to be the future for teacher collectivisation but I do not wish to decry
the work of the other unions. I made brief reference to union divisions in appendix 8B
but at the chalkface there is little difference in the work of the unions. Sadly,
throughout the country the NUT and the NAS/UWT are usually more purposeful
depending on the characteristics of the representative and her/his dynamism and not
on fundamental differences of union policy; this makes the division even more crazy!!
What is a Trade Union - a Dilemma?
The right for a trade union to exist is enshrined in the Charter of the International
labour Organisation which most world governments sign an agreement to - even if
they don't follow it. These rights are article 84 which gives people in the same
workplace the right to collectivise and article 99 which gives representatives of those
collectives the right to represent their members in wage bargaining. In fact the British
government did not negotiate with the teacher unions evn though they signed the ILO
charter.
To fully understand the roles of a trade union we must be realistic about the primary
reason for the establishment of trade unions, and that is as a working-class
organisation fighting the capitalists. I am not simply sloganising here. Capital and
labour are intertwined(I often think of them in terms of the yin-yang symbol). Capital
invests in a business and they need the labour to work in the business in order to
make the commodities to produce the profits. The less wages and the more
productivity the more the capitalist makes(the surplus value) and vice versa. In
industry workers uniting in trade unions and demanding more wages and a greater
share of the profits from increased productivity hits capital at its heart - its profits.
Fundamentally capital is at the mercy of an organised workforce who might withdraw
their labour but equally the workforce needs capital to pay them so they can feed
their families. The struggle between capital and labour is the basis of politics in the
contemporary world so a trade union is a political organisation. Trade unions have
fought for/been given the right to exist (UN charter above), and are classified as
non-political organisations so there is a dilemma.
In the industrial sector the trade union weapon of withdrawal of labour is a direct
threat to the basis of the capitalist system - its profits, but what about the NUT in the
education sector? The teaching situation in the state sector is not an immediate
profit-making sector despite the efforts of the monetarists, however the withdrawal of
labour is a very serious threat to social stability. What does society do with thousands
of discontented adolescents on the streets? How many families can trust teenagers
at home on their own day in day out? How many shops could risk the increased theft
with these adolescents let loose if teachers withdrew labour? So although at first sight
teaching unions might not have a place in the class struggle scenario, indirectly they
do have a great deal of power, and that is before we start considering the affect on
society of the withdrawal of education. And to consider that we only have to look at
South Africa where a justifiable policy of disruption of apartheid education, where
children were encouraged by the ANC to withdraw from the enemy's education
system, has now left a generation of unemployable youth whose lack of education
also prevents them from supporting their own government.
So despite the powerful weapon that teacher trade unionists possess in terms of the
havoc their strike would cause, in the UK it is very rarely used especially when you
consider that since 1979 there have been fewer jobs, their pay structure has been
eroded and the teacher workload has increased significantly. Of course this inaction
is based on the nature of the membership who are primarily middle-class, mortgaged
up to the hilt, and in general not noted for their aggression within the class struggle;
there have been notable historical exceptions.
So in practice what the NUT(and the other teacher unions) has become is a
professional association advising members and representing them in legal situations.
The stereotypical "cloth-cap" union, such as the miners, does not apply to the
practice of the NUT, however certain political forces like to portray the NUT in this
way such as when there is industrial action in support of a wage claim. Also though
nowhere near as powerful there are elements within the NUT who would like to see
their union taking a radical position of grass roots action, but they are counter to the
general flow of opinion within the NUT.
Despite, in my view, the NUT offering better professional services than the other
unions, they are not seen by a significant proportion of teachers as being professional
for one simple reason - they will not reject the strike weapon. Although, in practice, it
takes a great deal for the NUT Executive to use that weapon, they see it as essential
to their negotiation process. Unions, such as AMMA, who offer less professional
services in my view, are able to poach some members simply by saying they will not
strike. Because AMMA do not strike they call themselves a professional association
yet if you were to compare the professional services offered the NUT demonstrably
offers more, simply examine the informed literature the NUT produces for example.
The term, professional association, is a media term designed to divide the profession.
Is it not professional to fight for better quality education even if that means striking? I
think so, but in practice strikes are only for money although that would not be the
case if the more radical had their way.
THE ROLES OF THE TRADE UNIONS IN EDUCATION
Education trade unions have moved away from the class struggle nineteenth century
roots, and the importance of the union is now in the diversity of roles that it fulfils, I
will try to describe these with reference to my own involvement.
A) THE ROLE OF THE UNION REPRESENTATIVE
B) NUT - PROTECTING TEACHERS' INTERESTS
C) NUT AS AGENTS OF CHANGE
D) NUT AS ESCAPE VALVES
E) NUT AS AN EXPRESSION OF TEACHERS' OPINIONS
F) NUT AS LEGAL PROTECTION
G) NUT AS TEACHERS' WATCHDOG
A) THE ROLE OF THE UNION REPRESENTATIVE
The union representative in a school is the most essential aspect of NUT work. How
the representative relates to the management structure is the key to the effectiveness
of many of the positive aspects of trade union work. Unfortunately in the two cases I
have been involved in, some aspects of the NUT's work did not happen because
there was no effective relationship between the representative and the management.
The Brixton Comprehensive NUT adopted a stereotypical trotskyist position of
confrontation, and at Hove Comprehensive the stereotypical weak headmaster could
only control through bullying and not through personnel skills; both of these positions
created distrust and a lack of meaningful dialogue.
From my personal experience many trade union reps are disillusioned with their own
career positions. It is not clear to me which comes first the lack of career
advancement or the position of union representative, but apart from the
politically-driven element within the trade union movement many representatives are
caring teachers first. Although the disillusionment can lead to aggression on
occasions, because the position of representative is so tenuous (s)he must adopt a
conciliatory stance at all times (unless you have the situation that you had at Brixton
Comprehensive where the representative could call the school out on action because
of the unusual constitution of the school branch). This conciliatory approach develops
negotiating skills but at the same time to develop an effective climate for members
the representative must find aspects of the work which benefit the management.
Even in my impossible situation this was true. The headmaster would be trying to
intimidate a member through disciplinary procedures. As part of this procedure the
NUT representative would be invited to be present. The common sense of the
representative prevented the justifiable anger of the member being vented on the
headmaster.
Information is always a key commodity in employment relations. Seething resentment
about management's actions and responses can explode, one role of the
representative is to inform management in a tactful manner the results of their
actions. This can defuse the situation if management's intentions had been
misconstrued.
In the reflective mode of a professional autobiography I shall try to analyse my own
failings at Hove Comprehensive. It was my first position as representative and at the
same time I had moved back into the dark ages of East Sussex from Brixton.
Combining my ignorance with the level of ascendancy I had seen at the Brixton
Comprehensive NUT I approached the role of representative from a stance of
righteousness and true negotiation. The righteous position I took was to assume that
the headmaster would follow the employer's code of practice as set out by the local
authority(known as the Burgundy Book in East Sussex), and the true negotiation
misapprehension I had was that when the headmaster held representatives' meetings
with the union reps he actually wanted to discuss with them the issues. My
assessment of the reality of both situations was that this headmaster did not want to
follow proper codes of practice and that reps' meetings were there as with other
committees for him to issue dictums to the unions, and the reps were there to carry
these out.
In both matters retrospectively I made mistakes. Firstly I would quote the Burgundy
book at him and he would resent this. When I was finally forced to meet with the
personnel officer for East Sussex he had already been informed of this by my
headmaster as some form of grievance. The local authority by then had no teeth
other than conciliation but to my mind certain ground rules ought to be followed in
employment relations, and I know my headmaster didn't want to do this as it
restricted his control.
With regards to the negotiation my inexperience showed more in my understanding of
the process. At Brixton Comprehensive the NUT were negotiating from a position of
strength because the union branch (with its deficit model see appendix 8A) were
willing to strike. Although it never happened I am sure the Brixton Comprehensive
management would have been aware of the possibilities. At Hove Comprehensive
there were no such possibilities so to have entered the reps meetings with the
consideration that they were negotiation was a mistake. As a consequence my
expectations of the negotiations were too high and this led to frustration. When I was
in the communist party one of my comrades told me that my members were using me
and that if they weren't prepared to support the rep with more than words I should
resign; in the end I did.
Again in retrospect I wanted to be the rep, I knew that the way the headmaster was,
and the NUT was the only way he could have been brought under control. But I made
a fundamental mistake as a member of a mass movement (even a small one as a
school branch) I did not properly evaluate the weakness of the members, their lack of
willingness to fully support me, so although on a number of occasions they were
individually prepared to sign letters concerning the conduct of the headmaster in
running the school, in relation to the union the headmaster's confrontational
brinkmanship worked; they were not prepared to go beyond letter signing even when
they saw my job was threatened by the headmaster. In retrospect this reticence was
evidently true, I should have been aware of this and acted on it. I got carried away by
the fact that the NUT is a large body and ought to have had strength to combat the
poor practices of this headmaster but in my situation that strength meant nothing
because it was not the strength of branch membership ie the school staff.
However in my own defence all the teachers up to and including the senior deputy
headmaster were all supportive of me where they could be without being in conflict
with the headmaster, and I take that as a compliment to my reasonableness and their
recognition of the headmaster's blind spot.
In conclusion the representative has an important role in conveying information from
members to the administration, and supporting members in their dealing with the
administration, In education there are two processes - teaching and learning. A happy
and motivated group of teachers provides positive teaching, and a representative can
help with this because they can develop the trust of the teachers, and smooth away
unnecessary problems in employment relations.
B) NUT PROTECTING THE INTERESTS OF TEACHERS
In appendix 8B I looked at the union structure, and I want to note an important part of
that structure which is the policy created at conference. Although this is policy and
not practice it demonstrates a position that the union would like to adopt. From this
policy lay and full-time officials at all levels of the union negotiate with different strata
of the education service, and through this they protect the interests of members as
much as possible.
Many school representatives recognise that the most inefficient part of the education
service is the under-utilisation of the teachers' motivation. Creative or innovative
teaching often demands great amounts of time (as does being a union
representative), and it is teacher motivation which provides this time as such work is
usually considered extra-curricular. Unfortunately, especially in recent years (since
the ERA in 1988), there have become greater and greater demands on teacher time,
and although the education service has managed to increase the output of teachers
this has been because of teachers' professionalism and not from teachers'
motivation. In my view management application has increased on the negative aspect
of management skills such as pressurising ill teachers to attend school - again by
appealing to their professionalism, and reducing the support work such as supply
teaching thus applying peer pressure from colleagues who lose cover lessons, but
there has still been a great increase in stress illnesses and early retirement. The
motivation of the teaching profession has increasingly become a factor. Between
1988 and 1992 my enforced workload increased by between 10 and 20 hours a
week, yet willingly I did extra work on the anti-racism when in London for no pay,
simply out of motivation. In the late 70's and early 80's such motivated extra work
was not unusual among colleagues, but now the only extra work I see is from the
occasional teacher who has spotted a niche in the government-inspired "innovation"
field where the purpose of these teachers appears to be to work hard to get out of the
classroom.
This erosion into the teachers' time is clearly a traditional union issue ie the yin-yang
balance between capital and labour and the upper hand designating the direction of
the surplus value or "profit". From the above description if teachers were not
overcome with unnecessary bureaucracy and government-directed political change
then greater and more creative innovations could be brought into the curriculum. In
practice the NUT policies exist for the control of this time but they are not able to be
enforced for the usual reason:- The only practical way in which NUT policies can be
enforced is ultimately if the school branch are prepared to take industrial action to
enforce their implementation. I use the word ultimately - I am not advocating political
control by a trade union along the lines of Brixton Comprehensive (especially as it
was not majority politics ie democratic), a weapon need only be demonstrated once
and it doesn't have to happen again. Implementing policies need only be enforced
once.
This sounds radical politics for a thesis but what we are talking about are policies that
teachers want for the improvement of teaching and education. Sadly in practice
industrial action usually only occurs when directed by the Executive, and that is for
pay so although the union has policies which would clearly improve the education of
children they are never directly implemented. Yet as described in the beginning of B)
they are implemented indirectly by being part of the agenda of representatives
whenever they are in discussion with the education service.
The limiting factor for the improvement of education, as in many other state sectors is
money. Being public sector, education does not aim to make a profit although
according to monetarist theory prevalent in 1979 the public sector should be
abolished and all activity should be profit-motivated. Opting out, LMS and other
changes clearly point to this so the educational advances proposed by the union will
continue to take a back seat because the greatest expenditure in education is
teachers' salaries and that is where the attacks will be coming.
In conclusion the union adopts policies which reflect teachers' attitudes on all aspects
of education not simply the media image of unions wanting more money for less
hours. Sadly these policies are not directly implemented because the fundamental
union structure of the school branch is not strong-minded enough so that the
educational advances proposed in such policies can only make strides by being an
integral part of the agenda of union workers at all level of negotiation. These
educational policies protect the interests of the teachers, and these interests
simplistically are:- To provide an income for their family and to provide better
education for their students.
C) NUT AS AGENTS OF CHANGE
By the clinical/theoretical Marxist position a trade union is the organisation of the
working-class, and therefore from a revolutionary analysis a trade union by nature is
an agent of change - revolutionary change. In practice this revolutionary theory is
very far from the day-to-day working situation of the NUT in the staff room. However
there is no doubt that in many sensibly-run schools the working relations and
employment conditions, and hence education, are enhanced by meetings with union
reps putting forward helpful criticisms contributing to positive change.
But to understand more fully the impact of the NUT as an agent for change we need
to consider two factors:-
1) NUT resource material
2) Factors of education change pertaining to the NUT
One important role of the representative that I did not refer to above is as a resource
base for members. Usually these resource matters refer to pensions, maternity leave
and other such traditional union areas but the NUT also provides many pamphlets
and even training courses on contemporary educational issues. At one time working
with Brighton I was a facilitator for a workshop on the implications of the ERA for the
classroom teacher. But it is mainly the pamphlets I want to refer to. Since 1979 the
government seems to have adopted a policy of ongoing disruption in state
education(not the private sector!!). Government legislation is not the most palatable
reading for the average teacher who has had a hard day at school, then has to come
home to the jobs of parenting and marking books. If they want to learn about what is
happening many teachers simply look at the union literature, and this is literature they
trust as informing them about matters in their own interest. In fact the NUT literature
has reached such a high standard that they now produce their own educational
journal which, I believe, is considered in academic circles. So the union has a role in
which its analytical services, in the form of literature impact on the grass roots
teachers.
2) Factors of education change pertaining to the NUT
Skilbeck[pp3&4 in MMR - Policies for the Curriculum edited by Moon, Murphy and
Raynor] - describes various metaphors for change such as the "teacher experiencing
the shunting locomotive" and "pendulums, swings and roundabouts" he considers
"are in favour". He reflects that "education reforms in fact often stop short of the point
where fundamental changes occur". But his point concerning the introduction of the
micro is most interesting - "the revolutionary potential for transforming pedagogy is
mediated through teacher values, skills and attitudes, resource constraints, and the
technical imbalance between hardware and software ". In the UK the micro has not
been as educationally successful as it should have been because not enough extra
money was provided for the hardware but perhaps more importantly no real
consideration was given for the expertise of the teachers. Basically they neither
trained the teachers nor paid them for organising the computer system. Paid
positions like Network Manager don't exist in education yet are commonplace, senior
and well rewarded in industry.
As a teacher under the recent political changes in education since 1979 I have felt
disempowered in my job after having been in a position early in my career where
self-empowerment was a practical reality. In line with Skilbeck's quote above
concerning the micro, if the teachers' skills and attitudes are not positively accounted
for then a reform cannot be complete. When I was in Hove I felt squeezed from all
sides, government legislation I disagreed with, a headmaster applying the worst form
of managerial tactics to impose on me, and sadly a change of approach of many
teachers to a disheartened acceptance of these worst aspects because the mortgage
depended on it. I saw this demotivated climate as an impossible place for positive
education reform yet change was happening. "Noteworthy in this context is the
increased trend toward community political-bureaucratic control of major educational
decisions and consequent uncertainty and ambiguity in the role of the specialist
professional educator" [Skilbeck in MMR p7] even if there are "occasional coalitions
on specific issues" [idem]. I claim you ignore the teacher and their organisations at
the peril of educational progress.
"What is most noticeable in the discussions on" policies for schooling "is the
realisation that an integrated, cross-sectoral approach is for educators, economists,
social planners, business people and unionists to get together" [Skilbeck MMR p12].
He was writing about trends for the OECD, let us hope his analysis is correct.
In this context what appears clear to me is that teachers need to be involved in what
they are implementing. Education theory suggests that students should be
encouraged to own what they are doing yet the increasing trend of government is to
move away from teacher ownership. The National Curriculum was introduced without
the involvement of classroom teachers, and is still having major problems - not the
theory of a nationally-agreed curriculum but the attempt to impose by think-tanks
irrelevant classroom practice. As far as I'm aware that one is still being fought.
Within this cauldron of laws, hierarchical pressure and teacher participation or
rejection is one process of change in education. In C1) I demonstrated the manner in
which union literature can influence grass roots teacher opinion so we have a clear
avenue of how the union is in some way an agent of change. Union representatives,
working in cooperation with the headteacher can help the staff cope with the change
and help avoid any unnecessary friction - in a situation of good relationships.
One further example of this is that I believe that ex-union Executive members are
asked to be on public platforms; it is common practice that senior union officials are
recognised as experts in their field.
I have only looked here at the specific issue of how the union rep can represent and
help inform on matters relating to change, part 3 gives a more complete analysis of
change philosophy and practice whilst in part 9 I examine how teachers receive
change and consider a blueprint for a particular aspect of change.
D) NUT AS ESCAPE VALVE
A union meeting has a powerful atmosphere. If you walk into one you know that
people are discussing matters that are of import to them. Sometimes as school rep I
have called meetings because the hierarchy is asking me to convey information,
sometimes it is a matter of course(not had one for 6 weeks?), but mostly they are
meetings called because an issue is causing great concern.
Let's consider what happens in these "issue" meetings. Various people arrive angry,
they shout about their anger and try to convince union colleagues that they want their
support. This cannot be done simply by shouting and cajoling, reasoned argument
must enter into the fray somewhere. Gradually a structure appears in which argument
and not emotion prevails until finally a motion for action happens. Following this the
representative must present this motion for action to the headmaster, let us suppose
it is a letter describing injustices signed by all members of the union. By the time this
whole procedure has been completed the anger and aggression has been diffused,
and the representative, hopefully a skilled negotiator with a working relationship with
headmaster, is using her/his skills to gently convey the point that initially was
producing anger and, on occasions, potential for violence. The support group nature
of such meetings is also an important factor of a good working union.
The other important example is one referred to above where a member comes into
conflict with the headmaster. Written into all good conditions of service is the right of
the member to take in a friend or representative, and as also explained above the
headmasters usually prefer this because of the protection afforded by the
representatives. An experienced representative because (s)he works for the best
interests of the member will usually act as a calming influence even though on a
number of occasions with my own headmaster I often felt that physical violence was
the best solution (joke??).
E) NUT AS AN EXPRESSION OF TEACHERS' OPINIONS
The NUT has national committees made up of voted members eg the Equal
Opportunities Committee etc. As such these committees have informed members
who can express the views of general members. The nature of representation is
accountability so reporting back is an integral part of the process, and discussions on
report backs allow for information/opinion to cross all levels of union hierarchy for a
representative view.
Experienced conference watchers can judge by changes in opinion, from platform
speeches and other yardsticks the mood of the members.
The main reason however that I can say that the NUT expresses teachers' opinion is
because I have been involved in the union process and see the way the levels of
accountability can work. Sometimes however the union does formulate the opinion.
F) NUT AS LEGAL PROTECTION
Sadly I feel that this is the main reason that teachers join the NUT, to get legal
representation if something goes wrong. In my view this aspect of the union's work
has increased drastically in recent years. Although not involved in the casework side
at Brixton Comprehensive I cannot remember the level of casework activity that was
occurring at Hove Comprehensive. Clearly one unusual aspect at Hove
Comprehensive was the misuse of his powers by the headmaster but the other was
the climate. Children's rights had become a much stronger issue than it was in the
late 70's. Back at Brixton Comprehensive I knew of teachers who stepped over the
line and used slight physical violence against students. Because Afro-Caribbean
students come from homes where physical violence is an accepted norm in the
culture this violence at school was often respected. Now those same teachers would
lose their jobs. Teenage girl students living out fantasies have created tissues of lies,
and although they may have recanted later the impact on the private lives of the
teacher concerned has been drastic. The hardship caused to professionals at some
stage must be measured against the small number of sex crimes that occurred in our
schools. The limitation placed on day-to-day human contact by the claims and
counter-claims freezes the trust between teacher and student. Here at Botswana
Secondary School we have a joke as I pass and jokingly clip a student gently "That's
the sixth time today you would have lost your job in the UK." My relationship with the
students is not hurt here by the physical contact in fact they think I'm soft for not
using the stick - but soft only up to a point.
Because of this unbalanced investigation of professionals the legal protection, both
from full-time officials and the representatives at school level, is now an essential part
of union work.
G) NUT AS TEACHERS' WATCHDOG
This has now become an important part of the union's work, watching what is
happening next through the legislative or ancillary pipelines and advising teachers
how best to cope. Union literature and memoranda have been on a massive increase
since the ERA and ensuing legislation and practice. But I did note that many teachers
abdicated responsibility to the NUT for these matters, this trust was a good and bad
thing.
CAVEAT
I realise that I have painted a rosy picture of union practices. There is one major
problem in the union which allows for bad practices - most of the members are not
active.
The consequence of this is that a few members gain more power simply through
persistent activity. Political activists are able to control certain of the Associations
because they are the only ones willing to attend - because of their political
commitment. Out of an association of over 200 members we struggled to make a
quorum of 15. In some ways when we did our job well - association newsletters and
reports - even less attended. There was no doubt that increased pressure of work
(post-ERA) was a major factor in this.
Therefore the democracy and accountability I described above has limited foundation
but I still maintain that, in general, aspects of the union such as expressing teachers'
opinions they do have correct.
BOTSWANA & TRADE UNIONS
To conclude this section I want to examine briefly the situation of trade unions here in
Botswana. Seeing what is happening here makes me realise the many advantages of
a union that I gravely criticised when a member, and probably would again if I
rejoined and became active again.
Botswana has two unions, one associated with the secondary sector and one
associated with the primary. Following my experiences at Hove Comprehensive I am
wary of union involvement, and although in an inspection meeting all staff were
encouraged to join a union by a senior education officer the word around was don't
as union members were targets. With my contract being dependent on a stroke of a
pen in Gaborone I have not followed my interest.
However categorically I would say this country needs a union for many things which
are automatically assumed in the UK. My relations with my headmaster are now on
an excellent footing if I am any judge. My contract states that I can be transferred to
any part of the country but I am settled here in Francistown. With a supporting letter
from my headmaster I wrote to Gaborone asking if they wouldn't transfer me. They
sent me back a letter which said they couldn't promise this, but that they would try not
to transfer. The tone was good and it was a worthwhile exercise all round.
I quote this story because I want to talk about a serious problem I had with the
headmaster earlier, and I don't want you to think I'm always in trouble with
headmasters. Flu is a problem out here as elsewhere but your body becomes
immune to the native varieties of flu that go around so there might have been some
grounds for talking about Asian flu the other year other than racism. In my second
year here I had been asked to do the timetable (I had let slip that I wasn't leaving
Francistown for a holiday - the usual English ex-patriate practice). As a result 2-3
weeks of my holiday were lost doing this timetable, and at the start of the new year I
wasn't fully rested. I had a run-in with the boss because I was doing too much extra
work so after an acrimonious meeting - short and terse - I dropped the timetable
work; this did not inconvenience the school any because there was a committee who
were capable and proved so. But bosses here do not like this approach of teachers
making the decisions. Within two weeks I had caught the flu, and was off work for
three days. I had been absent the previous year but the then headmaster didn't care
so I didn't follow the conditions of service. The correct procedure is that you are
allowed one day's absence and then you must have a doctor's note for any remaining
days. Not knowing this I had written to the headmaster, after a colleague had told me
that the headmaster was angry, explaining that I was ill, and on the third day of illness
I went to the doctor who gave me a backdated note. When I showed the headmaster
the backdated note he accused me of unprofessional practice because of the
backdating, in fact the doctor had done it without thinking. As I previously said my
system was not immune to the flu here, and within a few weeks I became ill again
with the flu. I followed the correct procedures to the letter but this was the worst
attack of flu I have ever had. The result was that I had taken the offered day, gone to
the doctor and got a standard 3 day sick note from him and it came to Thursday and
I was still not fit to return to work on the Friday. I phoned my doctor who told me that
what I should do was to go back to work report to the headmaster that I was ill and
then come back to the doctor to get a sick note. The doctor also told me that the
headmaster had been phoning him asking him about the veracity of the note and
whether I was really ill. In the end I went to school on the Friday couldn't face going to
the headmaster and tried to teach. By 11.00am the students were refusing to ask me
questions because I was clearly so ill, and they told me to go home. I did and nothing
more was said. For a further two weeks I only half attended school getting through
the lessons but not able to contribute much more, and everyone including the
headmaster could see that I was not shirking - something he had accused me of in
this period. As I have said my relations are now good because I have worked through
it and proven myself.
I consider the headmaster contacting my doctor as being very unprofessional. This
unprofessionalism is further exacerbated by the fact that the doctor was private and a
husband of one of the teachers, and as such gained much business from teachers at
the school. It would hit his pocket if the headmaster caused problems for all his
patients. I changed doctors! At this stage I was insecure about my position. I had a
year to run on my contract yet I had decided I would like to remain in Botswana. Now
I accepted that if the headmaster didn't want me I should change schools but I was
frightened that he would have words behind the scenes and my contract would be
terminated. But who should I speak to? In England the answer is obvious - the union
rep, here not. If I wrote to Teaching Service Management (TSM) - my employers -
they would have links with the headmaster and this would make matters worse. In the
end I wrote to the British Council, as they had been agents for my employment in the
UK. I received a reassuring letter back from them, sufficiently so that I thought that if I
continued to work well here at Botswana Secondary School and yet the headmaster
still put in a bad recommendation, the British Council would be in my corner and I
might be able to get another contract elsewhere. As it turned out all this was
unnecessary but ..........
There has recently been an increase in the number of students reaching secondary
school standard - this is politically motivated. The Batswana want their children to
reach senior secondary school (see appendix 8C for an explanation of the school
system here), and they put pressure on the M.P.s. As a result this year more students
have qualified for senior secondary school but there is not the capacity. The
headmaster was informed that 70 extra students would come to Botswana Secondary
School in this year's form 3 and they sent two extra classrooms. We are not really
equipped to handle these students and provide them with the equivalent education of
previous years but there is no union to fight this decision. If they wish to alter the
standards to allow for more JC qualifiers more schools should have been built. We
have created one extra class and the other 36 students have been spread across the
board and we have 4 extra students in each class. Not an impossible situation but a
lowering of standards especially as the new 70 are probably of a lower standard than
the others. In a staff meeting discussion one teacher spoke up about the dangers of
more than 20 students in a workshop. His tact was lacking but his point was correct;
his stance was not liked by the headmaster, and there were difficult moments in the
meeting - and a bad situation for the teacher concerned.
This issue of numbers on role is a clear union issue but the question of the union
wasn't even raised; everyone accepted that if the government wanted to do this the
school would have to make it work whatever the consequences. In some ways this
resigned acceptance is good, it saves arguments, but educationally it is weak and a
union might have helped here.
The professionalism of teachers is brought into question by two aspects of
unprofessional behaviour on the part of teachers - sexual relations with the students
and drunkenness. The status of employment conditions of service is very unclear, I
believe there is a code of practice in place yet it doesn't seem to be used as both
these aspects of misconduct happen relatively regularly. The headmaster put up a
notice about a code of practice, and I was able to get hold of the East Sussex code of
practice and conditions of service for him so perhaps these aspects of unprofessional
conduct will disappear.
In Botswana there seems to be a greater misuse of power, and there is a need for the
limited controls of long-established employment relations in the UK. However the
political environment of Southern Africa is likely to prevent this. Mass action, such as
trade unions, is associated with violence as in South Africa. Throughout all the
independence struggles in this region Botswana has not been at war, and therefore
there is a great fear of violence as well as pride in this fact. Trade unions are seen
warily by the authorities as a possible source of violence, and the positive aspects of
their roles focussed on above don't happen; sad, really.
Conclusion to Part 8A
I have highlighted 7 roles that the NUT fulfils in schools, these are:-
A) THE ROLE OF THE UNION REPRESENTATIVE
B) NUT - PROTECTING TEACHERS' INTERESTS
C) NUT AS AGENTS OF CHANGE
D) NUT AS ESCAPE VALVES
E) NUT AS AN EXPRESSION OF TEACHERS' OPINIONS
F) NUT AS LEGAL PROTECTION
G) NUT AS TEACHERS' WATCHDOG
I shall be using these 7 roles to develop my arguments in section 8B and 8C, as well
as in part 9.
SECTION 8B - EDUCATIONAL ADVANCE - THE IMPORTANCE OF TEACHER'S
WELFARE AND THE PART TRADE UNIONS PLAY IN ENSURING THAT
WELFARE
In this section I want to talk about educational advance, I want to talk about the
improvement of work in the classroom. In the classroom there are students and
teachers who have clearly defined educational roles within that environment, the
students learn from the teachers. Because English education is so confused by
issues and problems this basic context is often forgotten - students learn from
teachers. If we are going to advance education then we have to improve the way
students learn from teachers, and there are two basic factors which can be improved
to help with this process. We can examine ways in which students can try to learn
more, and we can examine ways in which teachers can improve their teaching.
Before I move on I want to state categorically that these two factors are not, in my
view, of equal weight; it is my contention that English education is sliding downhill fast
because of the poor motivation of the students and without improving that motivation
there is little that can be done for the state of English education. Sadly most of the
students' motivation is outside the control of the teacher, factors such as employment
prospects, education dynamics in the home, peer group and media pressure are all
beyond the control of the teacher, and the teacher then faces varying degrees of
motivation and is told to teach. A very unfair situation.
But the teacher is in a situation to have some impact on this poor motivation, and this
is where the aspect of welfare comes in. In theory education concerns "leading out"
or some form of self-realisation, and again in theory this self-realisation process
should occur within all students ie equal opportunities. In practice we fight with the
badly-motivated but we also fight with unreasonable odds that are placed against the
teacher and it is these unreasonable odds which welfare affects.
Let us examine some of these unreasonable odds. If we want to give equal access to
learning to all students then the number of students in a class is clearly a factor so we
have the issue of class size. If the teacher is to prepare lessons for all the students
then preparation time(non-contact time) is an issue. If a teacher is continually
compromised within the work situation by misguided students making complaints
then this is an issue. Generally what's known as conditions of service all impinge on a
teacher's lesson. All of these are covered in the roles I described in section 8A.
And next we talk about the quality of the lesson. If the lesson is not prepared the
quality is less. If a teacher has no time to keep up-to-date with educational journals
then the quality suffers. If a teacher is attending meetings every night of the week and
is going home and having trouble making ends meet because there are fewer
allowances available then the quality of her teaching suffers.
The basic point of this section is this, if you are going to deliver an education service
with high quality and equal access for all students then the welfare of the teacher is of
secondary importance only to the motivation of the student. If you cannot provide that
welfare then your quality and opportunities must suffer.
Sadly for financial and political reasons a teacher has become less and less publicly
valued. A body in front of the class is all that management requires, the cheaper the
better (ie less experienced). Although education is making demands through TQM
they are not significantly addressing the issue of the resource which is delivering that
quality by providing the proper welfare and conditions of service for teachers. And
who is left to attempt to provide the proper welfare and working environment for
teachers - the unions. Unions provide an integral function in the quality of education
and yet they are paid for by the teachers and not the employers, whilst they are
continually attacked for not having the interest of the students at heart.
The BSI "define the output of an educational or training establishment as either the
programme, or the value added, or enhancement of competence, knowledge and
understanding gained by the person who undergoes the training"[BSI 1.2 p4]. This
dry bureaucratic definition of the output of an education system, totally in line with the
overall dehumanising approach of the BSI recommendations for education, still points
to quality through value addition and enhancement. Although not focussing to the
same extent as I do concerning the way of delivering quality ie through teachers, it
does state that a "key 'service' purchased is the academic and technical staff", and
states that "selection procedures ..... should form part of the quality system" [BSI
4.6.1 p10]. But apart from this there is little reference to encouraging this vital
resource. How can you expect to provide quality education by increasing paperwork
and devaluing the importance of teacher expertise - quality teaching?
The TUC have summed up their response to this Quality Challenge in the public
sector, "Workers who are underpaid, undervalued, overworked and alienated from
the organisation are unlikely to respond enthusiastically to the rhetoric of
'commitment culture' and 'quality first' whether it comes from the management or
unions" [TUC 2 p20]. "The solution lies partly in better pay and conditions, better
training, appropriate staffing and appreciation for the job done. These are all
longstanding union demands. However, if service quality is to be significantly
improved on a sustainable basis, it also requires direct and meaningful local
involvement of employees in decisions about the way services are managed. It also
requires the development of new and innovative alliances between unions and user
groups. This participation and empowerment feature of the drive for quality is
distinctive because it is often the management themselves who espouse it loudest"
[TUC 3 p20].
In this Quality debate the TUC have made clear the important union issues of welfare
which are essential for the advancing education but when the BSI standard is being
considered for education how can we possibly advance education when "it is
recognised that there are philosophical and practical differences between education
and training" yet "these real differences do not impact on quality systems to any
degree" [BSI 1.1 p4]. I think Pirsig has just dropped dead!
To conclude this section in terms of learning outcomes the trade union work has
shown me that the greatest asset in teaching is the classroom teacher. But not only
this I came to realise just how little that asset is valued. If education is to advance by
providing quality learning and equal opportunities then the system must find ways of
developing teachers so that they can use their abilities to promote that quality. This
will not overcome the malaise in English society's youth concerning the lack of
motivation but if we want quality then teachers are the only way to achieve. Paper
systems as specified by BSI might make improvements in certain areas that are
lacking because of not being defined but they will never provide the professionalism
and the high qualities such professionalism can deliver. The technical rationality of
quality assurance can never match the reflective professional. Unfortunately the
system has not made sufficient attempt to develop the reflective professional, and
trade union organisations are left to struggle for minimal welfare such as described in
b) protecting teachers' interests, providing escape valves(d), giving legal protection(f),
acting as a watchdog(g), expressing opinions in suitable representative forums(e),
and in general attempting to provide conditions of service to allow the true reflective
potential to flourish.
SECTION 8C - APPLICATION OF CHANGE
A TRADE UNION PERSPECTIVE ON THE NEW RIGHT
Much of my professional autobiography has been concerning change in one way or
another. In part 6 I was considering innovation with the anti-racist maths, in part 5 I
was looking at awareness training - changing consciousness about race issues, and
then with trade unions examining the effects of change on members and helping
them deal with those changes. And these changes were occurring as innovation
overload as a consequence of government legislation.
I see the race work as trying to start a change, and I see the trade union work more in
the lines of implementing change but preferably policy implementation and practice. I
draw this distinction because a trade union, despite the revolutionary zeal of some of
its members, does not instigate change, it is a traditional organisation of policy
implementation and practice. It is however part of the process of change because it is
usually involved at all levels as an adviser on the position of teachers. Usually, the
italics are important because the government has not particularly been consulting
with the unions despite the existing structures in place, and in my case at Hove
Comprehensive the headmaster was not consulting with the union meetings but
attempting to direct another way. So within this application of change we have the
role of the union representative(a), the union as an agent of change through its policy
c), and the union expressing the teachers' opinions through various committees and
consultative bodies(e).
Also I have looked at change in different ways. With the anti-racist maths we were
trying to start change from outside the institutions, with the awareness training and
other INSET work on EOPS I was trying to change from within, and with the union my
intention was to apply change in cooperation with the institution whilst at the same
time representing the interests of the members - I say intention because it was quite
clear that that never happened at Hove Comprehensive(see 8A and other
references). Having worked on change at these different levels in part 9 I shall
examine how teachers have received change and then consider a project and
blueprint for implementation but first I would like to examine the impact of the New
Right on change.
THE NEW RIGHT & CHANGE
Since 1979 the New Right, through its educational journal The Sun, has had a great
deal of impact on education I want to try to examine how they have effected their
impact ie examine the processes of the New Right - politically know your enemy.
When considering the political direction of education policy since 1979 always start
by considering the platform this current government was voted on - monetarism. One
essential plaque of this money first mentality is that you must pay for what you get - in
other words the public sector must continually be under attack by any exponents of
this policy because the rich are being asked to pay for the poor through taxes.
Education is particularly galling for this breed of "economist" because they already
pay for their education privately yet they also have to subsidise the working-class
children through taxes. The health service also galls these people but they realise
that if you take all the money from the health service, private health plans such as
BUPA would be unable to afford expensive equipment such as dialysis machines. So
education is a prime target for the "pay for what you get" mentality.
Another aspect of the threat from education to these people is that if all people are
educated equally then why will their children get the jobs? The public school network
still provides many jobs in the civil service and the BBC for people whose
qualifications for such positions might not be so obvious if they were competing with
more well-educated people.
So the policy of monetarism shows a clear vested interest for a certain group of
people in English society. However these people are a minority, and on their own are
not sufficiently powerful to create a monetarist society without influencing a large
number of people but in my view they are the roots of New Right movement in
education - and the power they possess is the money that they are willing to invest to
ensure their interests.
Indirectly it is the investment of this money which, to my mind, characterises the
attitude of the New Right in Education. Whatever the claims and counter-claims
concerning centralisation the finance has moved back to the centre. Consider
Margaret Archer's view on the centralisation issue [quoted in Moon's article in MMR
on p 221]. In a centralised system "it was possible to describe educational interaction
as a political story, with character, plot and outcome, which could be told chapter by
chapter ....... Second it was possible to explain educational interaction in terms of the
changing interrelationships between the political structure and the structure of
educational interest groups. When dealing with decentralised systems the nature of
both description and explanation differs considerably. On the one hand interaction
cannot be described as a story(political or otherwise) because three different kinds of
negotiations are going on simultaneously and are taking place at three different levels
(those of the school, community and nation) as opposed to being restricted to the last
of these."
What has clearly happened through the ERA is that finance is much more under
centralised control and secondly the government has appropriated ultimate control of
the curriculum through the National Curriculum.
Previously finance went to local authorities, and how they handled their budget was
at their discretion. Simplistically this meant a Labour authority can conduct work the
government disagreed with such as the anti-racist work I was involved in. But now
budgets for schools are worked out by formula based on the number of students(age
weighted pupil units -AWPU), and these AWPU have very little slack, certainly not
enough slack to finance anti-racist work at the GLC level.
The other way education might get out of government control, and material such as
the anti-racist work become common-place, is through grass roots teachers grouping
together and altering classroom practice themselves(see Antony Cotton's article on
such an attempt in appendix 6I of the anti-racist maths section). To combat this
possibility the heavy-handed introduction of detailed volumes of the National
Curriculum for each subject with excessive box-ticking was supposed to so much
overburden classroom teachers that they would be unable to find the time to get out
of government control.
Now although teacher pressure has altered the frame of reference for the National
Curriculum, by default it is now accepted that the government bodies are the ones
doing the altering yet when I started teaching in 1976 classroom teaching was an
interaction between your department and the exam papers. Also an important aspect
of controlling wayward teachers such as my earlier(and current?) self is the "moving
goalposts" of the National Curriculum frames of reference. Unfortunately since
December 1992 I have little knowledge of the frames only that I believe the same
shape-shifting is still being adopted.
By holding the reins on these two aspects of education the government has
centralised to some extent but at the same time it allows the chimera of
decentralisation so on the one hand we have a national decision-making process
whilst at the same time we have school and community decisions occurring -
specifically the vote-winning "choice" argument.
The destabilisation of state education is also very important to the New Right for the
reasons of ensuring jobs for their own. I want to compare the tones of the two
speeches by James Callaghan and Margaret Thatcher quoted in MMR Appendices 1
& 2.(Margaret Thatcher's speech is copied in appendix 8D).
Callaghan on MMR p273 "So that there should be no misunderstanding I have been
very impressed in the schools I have visited by the enthusiasm and dedication of the
teaching profession".
Thatcher on MMR p277 9 years later "Too often our children don't get the education
they need - the education they deserve. In Inner Cities ... that opportunity" given by a
good education "is all too often snatched from them by hard-left education authorities
and extremist teachers." She then followed this by several sentences of
rhetoric(invective?) which belongs more on the pages of the Sun than coming out of
the mouth of an educated person who was once a government education minister.
Callaghan continues on MMR p273 "I am concerned on my journeys to find
complaints from industry that new recruits from the schools sometimes do not have
the basic tools to do the job that is required." On the same page "there is the unease
felt by parents and others by the new informal methods of teaching which seem to
produce excellent results when they are in well-qualified hands but are much more
dubious when they are not."
Question - substantively what is the difference between the two positions presented
here? I maintain none but what about the tone? Clearly Thatcher is confronting the
teaching profession whereas Callaghan is working with it, the criticisms however are
the same.
This is a political question. Undoubtedly the market research approach of modern day
electoral politics concluded early in the Thatcher reign that the floating vote could be
attracted by attacks on the Left such as those quoted in her speech(see appendix
7D). They were clearly correct. Thatcher had a 100 seat majority in parliament in the
mid-80's with only 42% of the electorate voting Tory. Their analysis has been further
ratified by Jack Straw's attacks on teachers, the Labour party market research team
must also have concluded that teachers voting Labour are either going to remain
faithful or are not sufficient in numbers so Labour have joined the fray.
Attacking teachers in the state sector can only demotivate and destabilise, and
therefore the private sector can only benefit. And the private sector controls its
finances and the National Curriculum is not a requirement. Yet these are the two
platforms of state sector control under the ERA.
Callaghan quoted Tawney on MMR p272 "What a wise parent would want for their
children so the State must wish for all its children." Having included Thatcher's Sun
mentality speech in an appendix please allow me a little vituperative licence to say
that "What a wise monetarist parent would want for their children is fine so long as it
is paid for by the parent, if they don't pay they don't deserve the wisdom. The State
must wish for all its children."
TRADE UNION RESPONSE TO THE NEW RIGHT
I shall limit myself to the above as an analysis of the processes of the New Right
because it gives me sufficient to draw implications for Trade Unions in the education
sector.
The NUT position nationally is moving towards an advisory body(a professional
association?) concerning the issues of finance and the curriculum protecting
teachers' interests, expressing their opinions and watching the government trying to
change it for the better. They have also recognised the need to counter the media
bias, and union glossies together with PR appearances at every opportunity were
becoming the NUT norm in 1992.
The role at the grass roots has to significantly change as well. Financial decisions,
under the ERA, are made by the governors so the union rep or someone equally
knowledgeable needs to be one of the teacher reps on the governing body. The NUT
was also pressing through the TUC that trade unionists need to become parent
governors, and I know that through the local Trades Councils they can take
community posts on governors but I cannot remember the details.
I also see the welfare aspects of the NUT increasing with a greater number of
disciplinary cases because greater powers are falling to headmasters and governing
bodies. This will accentuate the role of the representative whilst increasing demands
on the full-time officers (case workers), and I can see a greater need arising for
escape valves as the pressure expands.
But there is one final area that I touched on in appendix 8A and that is teacher unity.
For many teachers the main function the union provides is legal insurance, in 1992
associations were sprouting up which provided this cover - I suspect this trend has
increased. The NUT specifically has seen the need to focus on the issue of unity. In
appendix 8E I have photocopied part of the Executive Memoranda for 1994 which is
given to conference each year - it is the annual report of the Executive to its
accounting body(conference), on a par with the Board of Directors' annual report to
its shareholders. Item 3 of Motion 48 recognises government desire to split the
unions, the third paragraph of the 1993 conference motion recognises the need for
single workplace unions and the importance of working on the governors. Overall it
was looking at a Federation of Education Unions from nursery to higher education.
Sadly this report concludes in statements 39 & 40 that at national level unity or
federation is not logistically possible, and turns it back to conference by saying it can
only be achieved through staff room contact - a sad indictment indeed(see statement
45 for the Executive's Summary of recommendations).
So the pressures from the New Right will actually increase the role of the unions not
in the blinkered-media areas of industrial action but in the welfare areas - areas
where the individual expertise of humanitarian teachers, wishing to support their
colleagues, have an opportunity of fulfilment through being union representatives -
whichever union!!
Here we have a specific example of change - the New Right, and the union response,
particularly limited on national unity. Since 1979 the Tories have changed the way of
change. The Secretary of State writes a letter, various education bodies appear such
as the NCC, SEAC and others, career teachers note the nature of the new innovation
and apply for the finance, and the structure of education has been changed. And the
teachers they have been squeezed into these changes. These are not changes that
have been implemented, they have been imposed. They are not changes that are
working they are changes that are heartlessly being carried out by professionals,
these same professionals, who are the problem with education if you read the Sun or
listen to government statements , are actually the very people who by external force
are accepting the change in a limited way. Yet at the same time there is this quality
ethic, how can that possibly happen if the motivation of teachers for doing the job is
the negative "professionalism" ie no heart? The BSI document throughout has no
heart, the government has taken the heart out of the teaching profession and yet it
wants better quality. And then they ask how do we deal with the demoralisation of
teachers?
With regards to race policy implementation I noted that teachers at Brixton
Comprehensive were fed up of talking shops. Process of educational change at that
time, in the 70's, was difficult. Although the teachers wanted the change, they wanted
help in dealing with the problems of race in a racist society, there was very little
forthcoming, and the reason was finance as discussed in this section. Nothing of
professional quality came out of our work because there was never the finance to
ensure that quality(the GLC tried but there were too many problems and they tried to
solve them all without the finance). The Tories changed this, they decreased the
funding in schools whilst at the same time telling parents they can pay more and have
better schools if the schools opt out, and increased the funding for their changes. So
we now have the policy in place, we have teachers implementing the policy in a
heartless way and the students suffering because there is less money in the schools
and who now controls how the money is spent - the governing body. part-time unpaid
people are controlling the decisions of finance. Who gets the blame? The
government? Who is really at fault?
The keynote of this analysis of change is the cynical abuse of the control of the
finance to ensure that policy change is instigated without any serious desire to see
proper implementation. As a learning outcome recognition of this means of causing
change has registered very heavily with me.
References for Part 8
BSI Guidance Notes for the Application of ISO9000/EN29000/BS5750 to
Education and Training. BSI Quality Assurance, 1992. Document
Number QGN/9310/395:ISSUE 2
Fullan M "Change Forces" Falmer(1993) ISBN 1 85000 825 6
MMR "Policies for the Curriculum" Moon, Murphy and Raynor. Hodder &
Stoughton 1989. ISBN 0-340-51436-1
Senge P "The Fifth Discipline" New York Doubleday (1990)
TUC The Quality Challenge - A TUC report on the trade union response to
Quality in Public Services. Twentieth Century Press 1992 ISBN 1
85006 233 1
Reader - Do you want to go back to the contents page?
pbcontents.htmOr read the next part? part9.htm