More comments on the NUT pay ballot result
In an ideal world trade unions would win all their demands. When employers attempt to ignore trade unions, in an ideal world, emphatic votes for strike action followed by solid strikes would force their hand.
We are not in an ideal world. The tight strike ballot outcome we have just had is a reminder of that. There is no shame, in my opinion, in a trade union asking its members whether they want to strike against years of pay cuts at a time of rising inflation. However, we did not get the outcome we wanted and the best we can do now is learn the lessons and move on.
Activists in St. Helens were divided over whether strike action was the correct step to take. Some school groups were clearly in support of strike action. Other groups, including groups that have been militant over other issues in the past, were not. This, despite the fact that the strike day in the last academic year was well supported. I think there are three factors that undermined support for the strike.
1. St. Helens has a high NASUWT membership. It is not easy to envisage a victorious strike when you know that only a minority of teachers in the borough will be balloted. Nobody likes to take strike if they think the strike will not be effective. You are just losing pay without any gain. People will only support strikes they think will win. I suspect this fact lies behind the significant regional differences in the ballot. While we have what is essentially a yellow union in the NASUWT unity with other public sector unions is absolutely essential if our members are to have confidence in victory. Linking our action to action taken by other Unions is extremely important.
2. Personally, I think that our tactic of balloting for a one day action last academic year was a tactical error. A one day strike was never going to shift the government. By not balloting for discontinuous strike action, we signalled a lack of resolve to the government. In a local school dispute, we would never just ballot for one day for that very reason. When the ballot for one day was announced I predicted that the government would not shift and we would not get the same support when we reballoted. Unfortunately, that prediction has turned out to be correct. Our members were left thinking, well the last strike did not work, why would this one, instead of seeing the whole thing as a longer term campaign.
3. We failed to link the pay issue with the other issue that really matters to our members - workload (and the related issues of performance management and class sizes). The strategy of linking the issues was rejected by the Union's leadership at Harrogate. One year on it was accepted by the leadership at Manchester, but not acted upon. The workload issue goes right to the heart of all our members' lives. So many of our members are going part-time just so they can cope. Effectively, they are accepting part-time wages for what is still a full-time job. I believe that if the Union leadership had listened to the arguments put forward by some of us now involved in the Classroom Teacher, and linked workload and pay from the off, we would still have a strong campaign.
Why did the leadership reject the idea of linking the issues at the Harrogate conference? I think it was simply because they had not thought of it. CDFU and STA faction leaders agreed the text of what the conference would decide in advance with Sinnott and the Broadly Speaking National Executive members. Once agreed, no alterations were permitted. Although around 40% of the conference voted in favour of linking the campaigns, enough delegates followed their faction leaders in voting with the right wing to stop it happening. This left the Union with what has turned out to be a losing strategy.
The unity policy of the CDFU and STA may now come under pressure in as much as STA members and CDFU members will be asking what the strategy has brought for teachers. However, the faction leaders themselves will continue with the policy. This means that there is an important role for Classroom Teacher to play in influencing the future course of the Union. The issues of pay and workload will not go away. On the contrary, teachers' pay is likely to be kept down as ex-teachers flood back into classrooms to escape the downturn in other sectors. There are no real plans to reduce teachers' workload and the pressures that increase workload are, if anything, intensifying. The debate will be rejoined within the Union and when it is we will hear the argument that our members will not take action on pay. We have to be ready to mobilise the aspirations of teachers who are desperate to reclaim some control of their lives and still look to their Union to help them do so.
Robin Pye, St.Helens NUT
I am disappointed although not surprised that the Executive have decided to 'avert' the strike. The message I received from teachers in meetings was 'when people are losing their jobs and others are finding it difficult to survive financially teachers will be crucified in the press for being greedy.' I disagree with this perspective however it would appear from the information available that as a Union we have been unable to persuade our members at grass root level.
It is vital that we listen to our members, but that we analyse the result carefully and learn from mistakes made. It would be interesting to do a demographic analysis of the votes against action to see if they came form particular areas or if they are across the board.
My thoughts are, that the Executive were mistaken when they dismissed the argument that Workload was an equally pressing issue for teachers. Had this been linked to the pay issue I believe we would have had a far easier time persuading members to take decisive action.
Young teachers who had been energised by the 24th April Strike said to me on several occasions 'why were we not taking all out action?' I think that as a tactic we should have voted for discontinuous action in the first instance. However we must not be despondent teachers are persuaded the argument is just, but the timing is not right, we must not lose this mood and be prepared to reinvigorate the campaign as soon as the mood for action is detected. This can only be achieved if we continue to keep the pay issue on the boil and link it to other issues like workload, inspection and teacher stress.
Tim Woodcock, Greenwich NUT
We are not in an ideal world. The tight strike ballot outcome we have just had is a reminder of that. There is no shame, in my opinion, in a trade union asking its members whether they want to strike against years of pay cuts at a time of rising inflation. However, we did not get the outcome we wanted and the best we can do now is learn the lessons and move on.
Activists in St. Helens were divided over whether strike action was the correct step to take. Some school groups were clearly in support of strike action. Other groups, including groups that have been militant over other issues in the past, were not. This, despite the fact that the strike day in the last academic year was well supported. I think there are three factors that undermined support for the strike.
1. St. Helens has a high NASUWT membership. It is not easy to envisage a victorious strike when you know that only a minority of teachers in the borough will be balloted. Nobody likes to take strike if they think the strike will not be effective. You are just losing pay without any gain. People will only support strikes they think will win. I suspect this fact lies behind the significant regional differences in the ballot. While we have what is essentially a yellow union in the NASUWT unity with other public sector unions is absolutely essential if our members are to have confidence in victory. Linking our action to action taken by other Unions is extremely important.
2. Personally, I think that our tactic of balloting for a one day action last academic year was a tactical error. A one day strike was never going to shift the government. By not balloting for discontinuous strike action, we signalled a lack of resolve to the government. In a local school dispute, we would never just ballot for one day for that very reason. When the ballot for one day was announced I predicted that the government would not shift and we would not get the same support when we reballoted. Unfortunately, that prediction has turned out to be correct. Our members were left thinking, well the last strike did not work, why would this one, instead of seeing the whole thing as a longer term campaign.
3. We failed to link the pay issue with the other issue that really matters to our members - workload (and the related issues of performance management and class sizes). The strategy of linking the issues was rejected by the Union's leadership at Harrogate. One year on it was accepted by the leadership at Manchester, but not acted upon. The workload issue goes right to the heart of all our members' lives. So many of our members are going part-time just so they can cope. Effectively, they are accepting part-time wages for what is still a full-time job. I believe that if the Union leadership had listened to the arguments put forward by some of us now involved in the Classroom Teacher, and linked workload and pay from the off, we would still have a strong campaign.
Why did the leadership reject the idea of linking the issues at the Harrogate conference? I think it was simply because they had not thought of it. CDFU and STA faction leaders agreed the text of what the conference would decide in advance with Sinnott and the Broadly Speaking National Executive members. Once agreed, no alterations were permitted. Although around 40% of the conference voted in favour of linking the campaigns, enough delegates followed their faction leaders in voting with the right wing to stop it happening. This left the Union with what has turned out to be a losing strategy.
The unity policy of the CDFU and STA may now come under pressure in as much as STA members and CDFU members will be asking what the strategy has brought for teachers. However, the faction leaders themselves will continue with the policy. This means that there is an important role for Classroom Teacher to play in influencing the future course of the Union. The issues of pay and workload will not go away. On the contrary, teachers' pay is likely to be kept down as ex-teachers flood back into classrooms to escape the downturn in other sectors. There are no real plans to reduce teachers' workload and the pressures that increase workload are, if anything, intensifying. The debate will be rejoined within the Union and when it is we will hear the argument that our members will not take action on pay. We have to be ready to mobilise the aspirations of teachers who are desperate to reclaim some control of their lives and still look to their Union to help them do so.
Robin Pye, St.Helens NUT
I am disappointed although not surprised that the Executive have decided to 'avert' the strike. The message I received from teachers in meetings was 'when people are losing their jobs and others are finding it difficult to survive financially teachers will be crucified in the press for being greedy.' I disagree with this perspective however it would appear from the information available that as a Union we have been unable to persuade our members at grass root level.
It is vital that we listen to our members, but that we analyse the result carefully and learn from mistakes made. It would be interesting to do a demographic analysis of the votes against action to see if they came form particular areas or if they are across the board.
My thoughts are, that the Executive were mistaken when they dismissed the argument that Workload was an equally pressing issue for teachers. Had this been linked to the pay issue I believe we would have had a far easier time persuading members to take decisive action.
Young teachers who had been energised by the 24th April Strike said to me on several occasions 'why were we not taking all out action?' I think that as a tactic we should have voted for discontinuous action in the first instance. However we must not be despondent teachers are persuaded the argument is just, but the timing is not right, we must not lose this mood and be prepared to reinvigorate the campaign as soon as the mood for action is detected. This can only be achieved if we continue to keep the pay issue on the boil and link it to other issues like workload, inspection and teacher stress.
Tim Woodcock, Greenwich NUT
posted by classroom teacher at
12:10
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home