Learning the lessons - more views
What a disaster! Teachers set to lose pay in the order of £2000 to £4000; some possibly to lose homes in the repossessions frenzy; all to suffer skyrocketing prices - and now no national strike to even register a protest. The government must be well satisfied that the most radical teachers’ union leadership has pulled back.
Undoubtedly the financial bombshell that fell during the balloting period had a huge effect. With the prospect of millions of workers, including professionals expected to face the dole over the next few years at least, many teachers hesitated, calculating that better a job on current pay than no job at all, even though, in the longer term, the public sector will be no safe haven. The squeeze will reach schools as well as car factories.
Lots of teachers feared that they would be portrayed as greedy, in comparison to some of the rates of pay of parents in their community. This is, for sure, the case that the employers and media would have played on. However any campaign means winning hearts and minds by vigorous, fast rebuttals, getting the message out actively. If such a stance was adopted it might have turned out that other workers might have recognised the necessity to fight for pay and, rather than condemning teachers, they might have tried to emulate, even applauded teachers for setting the tone. If all those teachers who had the foresight and the bottle to vote in favour could have been mobilised to explain and defend our action they might well have become the new active layer that the union so badly needs.
What could follow now is teachers feeling generally less able to take on the very real issues of workload, class size etc, and the idea that we can’t change things is reinforced. This will not last for long, like after the SATs ballot, but there is likely to be some repercussions of this nature for a time.
While it is useful to discuss what might have been in the minds of teachers when they came to cast their vote, the other side of the equation has to be what the leadership had in mind as a strategy to win. And here teachers have identified shortcomings.
April 24th was a watershed. All noted the ebullient mood of striking teachers. Young teachers in particular offered the leadership a fund of goodwill. Uncritically they calculated that ‘If my union calls me out, I must respond. They have my best interests at heart”. Even the more conservative layer of union leaders were pleasantly surprised by the upbeat character of the response. And even though it was not a solid 100% strike it marked a really favourable beginning. But by delaying any further action by a full six months, which sent out messages that this was not a serious fight, a wave of enthusiasm has been squandered. It is not simply organising action that can win benefits, but the whole strategy to win must be apparent and understood. With the failure to follow up quickly after April 24th, then to reject the opportunity to strike alongside Unison in July, many were bound to question whether further action had any realistic chance of winning.
If further action had been undertaken in the summer term it could have meant that, rather than going into withdrawal mode, teachers would be facing the terrible financial crisis from a more organised, collective and optimistic position.
So, what was the cause of this delay? Some on the Left, now in a majority on the national Executive, have undoubtedly worked hard to get to the stage of calling a ballot for discontinuous action on pay. But the shortcomings of the STA have been to try to appear united when both the right around Broadly Speaking and the left in the CDFU have stood their ground - and got their way. The STA have in effect provided cover for those more faint-hearted forces on the Executive who sought to delay further action, and so are, therefore, subject to the same criticisms.
The Executive, including all on the Left have now made their decision and teachers have to live with it. But that does not mean we do not discuss how the strategy went wrong and how we can avoid this situation again in future. On the contrary never was it more important to debate the issues, the strategy and the tactics, and how they are implemented, and learn the lessons for the next battle. Alongside such an appraisal must be a political dimension. Teachers had high hopes when Labour came to power. Now they realise the government will not fix things for them. This unfortunate, but temporary set-back on pay will undermine their belief in the ability of their union to protect their living standards. It is therefore even more urgent that teachers, and other workers come together to create a new mass workers party that can act as a pole of attraction for millions of workers looking for a way out of the crisis. The old parties and attitudes have had their day. Time for change!
Linda Taaffe, Waltham Forest NUT
Undoubtedly the financial bombshell that fell during the balloting period had a huge effect. With the prospect of millions of workers, including professionals expected to face the dole over the next few years at least, many teachers hesitated, calculating that better a job on current pay than no job at all, even though, in the longer term, the public sector will be no safe haven. The squeeze will reach schools as well as car factories.
Lots of teachers feared that they would be portrayed as greedy, in comparison to some of the rates of pay of parents in their community. This is, for sure, the case that the employers and media would have played on. However any campaign means winning hearts and minds by vigorous, fast rebuttals, getting the message out actively. If such a stance was adopted it might have turned out that other workers might have recognised the necessity to fight for pay and, rather than condemning teachers, they might have tried to emulate, even applauded teachers for setting the tone. If all those teachers who had the foresight and the bottle to vote in favour could have been mobilised to explain and defend our action they might well have become the new active layer that the union so badly needs.
What could follow now is teachers feeling generally less able to take on the very real issues of workload, class size etc, and the idea that we can’t change things is reinforced. This will not last for long, like after the SATs ballot, but there is likely to be some repercussions of this nature for a time.
While it is useful to discuss what might have been in the minds of teachers when they came to cast their vote, the other side of the equation has to be what the leadership had in mind as a strategy to win. And here teachers have identified shortcomings.
April 24th was a watershed. All noted the ebullient mood of striking teachers. Young teachers in particular offered the leadership a fund of goodwill. Uncritically they calculated that ‘If my union calls me out, I must respond. They have my best interests at heart”. Even the more conservative layer of union leaders were pleasantly surprised by the upbeat character of the response. And even though it was not a solid 100% strike it marked a really favourable beginning. But by delaying any further action by a full six months, which sent out messages that this was not a serious fight, a wave of enthusiasm has been squandered. It is not simply organising action that can win benefits, but the whole strategy to win must be apparent and understood. With the failure to follow up quickly after April 24th, then to reject the opportunity to strike alongside Unison in July, many were bound to question whether further action had any realistic chance of winning.
If further action had been undertaken in the summer term it could have meant that, rather than going into withdrawal mode, teachers would be facing the terrible financial crisis from a more organised, collective and optimistic position.
So, what was the cause of this delay? Some on the Left, now in a majority on the national Executive, have undoubtedly worked hard to get to the stage of calling a ballot for discontinuous action on pay. But the shortcomings of the STA have been to try to appear united when both the right around Broadly Speaking and the left in the CDFU have stood their ground - and got their way. The STA have in effect provided cover for those more faint-hearted forces on the Executive who sought to delay further action, and so are, therefore, subject to the same criticisms.
The Executive, including all on the Left have now made their decision and teachers have to live with it. But that does not mean we do not discuss how the strategy went wrong and how we can avoid this situation again in future. On the contrary never was it more important to debate the issues, the strategy and the tactics, and how they are implemented, and learn the lessons for the next battle. Alongside such an appraisal must be a political dimension. Teachers had high hopes when Labour came to power. Now they realise the government will not fix things for them. This unfortunate, but temporary set-back on pay will undermine their belief in the ability of their union to protect their living standards. It is therefore even more urgent that teachers, and other workers come together to create a new mass workers party that can act as a pole of attraction for millions of workers looking for a way out of the crisis. The old parties and attitudes have had their day. Time for change!
Linda Taaffe, Waltham Forest NUT
posted by classroom teacher at
08:50
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home