Congratulations to the team of civil servants at the DfE. Now that’s a sentence you probably didn’t expect to read on this blog. However, the detailed evidence from the DfE to the STRB issued yesterday 2022 pay award: Government evidence to the STRB (publishing.service.gov.uk) marks one of the most comprehensive analyses of the functioning of the labour market for teachers that has been published in recent years.
Perhaps, I can now retire, since the government has accepted almost everything that I have been pointing out for the past decade, and has also provided the evidence in minute detail that might provide some interesting posts for this blog over the next few weeks.
When a starting salary of £30,000 for teachers was first mooted, it was generous. Now with inflation running at a ten-year high, and the world looking like it might be facing a re-run of the 1972 oil price shock that led to a decade of high inflation and wage erosion, and incidentally did for the plans for much better CPD for teachers in the wake of the James Report, the £30,000 figure may not be as generous as intended. Time will tell.
There are two anxieties behind the good news. The first is whether small primary schools with falling rolls due to a decline in the birth rate will be able to afford the new pay structure? The DfE evidence could have done more to model this scenario, and the possible consequences for different parts of rural England in particular. Church schools in urban areas may also be affected.
My second anxiety revolves around the extent to which the DfE has taken on board the relationship between training and employment and the global nature of the teaching profession. Of course, a willingness to work overseas might change, but with the growth in international schools being largely outside of Europe, might mid-career teachers witnessing their differential to less experienced colleagues diminish consider whether they could earn more teaching overseas? Perhaps, TeachTapp could ask that question?
Schools can restore differential for mid-career teachers by the judicial use of Recruitment and Retention Allowances, and it is interesting to see how these have been used across England, with areas where the labour market is tight seeing schools more willing to use such awards. Of course, it also depends upon having the cash in the budget to be able to do so.
Schools in parts of South East England outside the London pay structure, but with strong competition from the private school sector, such as in Oxfordshire, may well also be concerned about the likely consequences of this pay settlement.
One sensible move that doesn’t need to STRB involvement, would be to better match training to employment to guarantee sufficient supply to all areas. At present, the supply pattern isn’t anywhere near as effective as it should be, especially with the levelling up agenda.
If you are interested in teacher supply, do please read the DfE evidence as it is well worth the effort.
John Howson 
I left wondering how this flatter pay scale will effect ECTs. Surely it makes less sense now to employ an ECT as the pay differential between M1/2 and M3 is smaller? By the time you factor in ECT release time over year 1 and 2 AND mentor release time AND find subtle cover AND mentor workload which has increased massively since NQT there is little to no incentive. In the primary sector which has a large pool of teachers to recruit from overall, it now makes little sense to recruit for an ECT.
Camron,
The law of unintended consequences. I agree and it is particularly of concern in the primary sector since falling rolls will require fewer new appointments to be made unless more teachers quit, perhaps to become tutors on an expanded catch-up programme. We need a good flow of teachers into the primary sector since about one in eight will end up in a leadership position. The smaller the intake pool, the less choice for leaders. Unless that is the number of schools is reduced by amalgamations.