RESIDENTIAL SPECIAL SCHOOLS (SUPERVISORS) (Hansard, 5 July 1966)

§ Captain Walter Elliot (Carshalton)

Mr. Deputy Speaker, you may ask why I am raising the question of the pay and conditions of supervisors employed in children's residential special schools. It is not a constituency problem, although it was first brought to my attention by people from a school in my constituency. I received a letter from these persons who brought the matter to my attention. They say: We, the undersigned, write for no personal gain, for we are both leaving the Service in September to commence studies at university and Teachers' Training College respectively. It is perhaps symptomatic of the service that they are leaving. Accompanying the letter was a very good report which those concerned had obviously been to great trouble to compile, and I think you will agree, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that normally when one leaves a certain job, perhaps in a state of frustration, one is only too glad to shake the dust from one's feet. It is, therefore, to the credit of those concerned that in this case that is not what they did but that for the good of the service they brought the matter to my attention. Accompanying their letter was a good number of signatures from various special schools in different parts of the country concurring generally in the approach the two sponsors had made.

What are these special schools? There are five basic types—for the delicate, the educationally subnormal, the maladjusted, the physically handicapped and the deaf. I have no doubt, although obviously I have not been able to extend ray inquiries all over the country, that these five basic types cover a wide range.

No one can doubt that the task of fitting the children in the schools to take a normal place in society is a highly skilled job. It needs devoted care, even dedication. It would be fair to say that it needs perhaps a higher degree of skill than at a normal school. The penalties of failure are probably very high. At worst, perhaps the inmate who goes out 390 into the world might be condemned to a life of crime; at best to unhappiness and, perhaps, failure in life.

It is against that background that the work and responsibility of the supervisors have to be assessed. In 1963 a working party was empanelled, following the head teachers' conference at Swaylands Special School, and produced a report of the"circumstances of recruitment, conditions of service and employment of children's supervisors. So far as I can ascertain, little action was taken on it, although I intend tonight to make fairly wide quotations from the report.

Now I come to the duties of the supervisors. According to an advertisement that one might see for such a post, the job is to look after small groups of pupils after school hours. But that gives no indication of the type of work expected. The supervisors have to enter into full-scale participation in the total development of the children, and I want to quote here from the report. It is important to realise that children in school do not have the normal home influences which most children enjoy and that such aspects of growing up as toilet training, acquiring acceptable feeding habits, habits of cleanliness in washing, bathing and care of teeth, have to be taught in school. In addition, social behaviour in and out of school is largely a matter of precept, example and training and it is the business of the school to inculcate habits of obedience, politeness and courtesy to adults and children. The bulk of the responsibility falls on the Supervisors who in this very important respect stand in the place of parents. The report also says: Due to a variety of reasons, chief among them is probably the increased day provisions for handicapped children, all residential Special Schools are dealing with an increasing number of children who are emotionally disturbed, in many cases seriously. This poses problems of handling, care and discipline which are not easily solved. What has hitherto been the work of the Specialist Schools is now common to us all and requires qualities of resilience and stability in staff which are not easily found…. Wrong handling can increase the strain on a school to breaking point and of course is disastrous to the children themselves. These supervisors are not passive overseers. The children spend about 25 hours a week in school classes, so 143 hours remain, out of which about 70 hours is the estimate for sleep and about 70 hours out of classrooms, most of that time in the care of the supervisors. When 391 one considers what is at stake and the responsibilities on the shoulders of the supervisors, it is obviously vitally important to recruit the right type of person. It is disquieting in some respects to read in the report: Although great care is taken during appointment and in following up confidential reports, most Heads are only too unhappily aware that candidates"— that is, for the post of supervisor— do succeed in obtaining employment as Supervisors who are not temperamentally or morally suitable to work with children. A period of training resulting in a recognised qualification would enable a much more accurate assessment of a person's suitability for the work and could go some way to avoiding the appointment to schools of the undesirable characters whose actions have given rise to so much trouble in the past. That is a rather serious indictment of some of the recruiting which has taken place. Time is getting on and so I will not give some further quotations which I had intended to give, but my investigations have revealed a good many shortages at many of these colleges.

I want to spend a few minutes discussing the duties of the supervisors. These, as the supervisors admit themselves, are rewarding but tough. Assaults are frequent. It is natural that in class children should submit to a certain amount of discipline, but when they come out of class they assert themselves. It may interest the Parliamentary Secretary to hear that I saw two of my friends just before the debate began. They had been on to the school in my constituency, who told them that one of the supervisors had had a ball thrown at him and had had a bone in his ankle broken and his nose broken. That happened today.

To give a rough idea of the pattern of duty; from 7.30 a.m. to 9 a supervisor may be on duty, from 9 to 12 off, from 12 to 2 on, and from 2 to 4 off, and so on, with the last duty 5.15 to 8.30. A routine can be laid down to some extent, but obviously in schools of this sort, as in others, there cannot be a shift system. For example, on seven days out of 21, they are on dormitory duty, which means being on duty from 8 a.m. to 10.30 p.m. with three and a quarters hours off in a day.

Other duties include supervisors' meetings, held in their own time; times "on 392 call", as it is known, with no set time or days; availability for escort of boys to hospital, the dentist, and collecting boys from home. There are out-of-school activities such as the savings scheme, the care of pets, cycling parties, which is a great responsibility with such children, and group activities such as stamp collecting, art, scouting and so on. In addition there is all the preparation made by the supervisors in their spare time for such occupations.

Another extract from the report is illuminating. It says: A leaflet issued to intending supervisors by one school for maladjusted boys in our area— that is in my constituency, states: No fixed hours of duty are specified. Supervisors are appointed to carry out duties as determined by the headmaster, the hours being as required by the nature of employment. Entitlement is to one clear day off each week, only in exceptional circumstances should rest days not to be taken … and so on. A reasonable estimate of the hours put in by a supervisor is something over 50 hours per week with the additional "on call" days.

That is some idea of the responsibilities of children's supervisors and the special qualities and skills needed by them. I would like to have a short look at pay and conditions and the status of supervisors. First of all, pay. I obviously cannot go into detail in view of the time that I have left, but I want to show that it is grossly inadequate for the responsibilities of the people concerned. This is the salary scale at the schools with which I am concerned. It begins at £525 a year, rising to £675 a year, rising by August, 1966, to £725 a year. An annual deduction of £133 is made for board and residence. The report says: For our part we receive monthly cheques in the region of £44. After all deductions, superannuation, board and residence, about £24 remains. The report of the panel formed had the net effect of raising the starting pay by £10 per annum in 1964, from £515 to £525. That puts the seamen's demands or any other demands in some sort of perspective.

It is interesting to note that when this happened the Middlesex County Council raised the board and residence charge by £9 so that the supervisor was left with £1 net rise in the year. There is a good deal 393 more, but I have not time to give it. The rates vary"between authorities, and this is one of the difficulties; everyone seems to compete with everyone else in offering different salary scales. I inquired from Surrey County Council and it had no supervisors at all. They pay their teachers an additional £300 a year for so many extra hours' work a week. It seems to work very well, and it may be a thing which ought to be looked into.

That, briefly, deals with their pay. Now may I quote some remarks from the report about their living conditions. It says: We feel that insufficient attention has been given in the past to the living conditions and amenities which are offered to our Supervisors. We have to remember that the life we ask them to lead is in many occasions isolated and unnatural. They are required to work at times when the rest of the world is free, at evenings and especially weekends. There is a good deal more to the same effect.

If I may, I will now give a few more intimate details about the actual living accommodation in the schools. The bed-sitters for the residential staff, including the supervisors, are in the main school buildings and naturally suffer from any disturbances. These may seem small things, but they are very important, as anyone who has studied these sorts of things knows.

It was found, for example, that one room was very close to the kitchens, and the noise from domestic appliances such as potato peelers and washing machines caused disturbance. Another room was adjacent to the haircutting and medical room, with constant traffic in and out. Another room was between two dormitories, and the supervisor could not put on his record player or entertain guests because he disturbed the dormitories. Another had a bed-sitter above the staff room and, as a result, was kept awake.

Those working in the schools realise that they must accept noise and inconvenience, but, due to the fact that many of the buildings housing these children were not designed for schools, the living accommodation cannot be away from the main buildings, and that is a most vital need so as to give the staff opportunities for rest and relaxation. If it was provided, it would prove to be one of the most decisive steps towards attracting residential 394 staff. In addition, of course, food is also important.

Then I come to status, and again I quote from the report: For too long Supervisors have hovered uneasily in status between the domestic and professional staff. Every effort should be made to integrate supervisory staff into the total life of the school. It is important to realise that they should feel valued and that all staff, teaching as well as non-teaching, should understand that the work of Children's Supervisors is skilled, exacting, professional work. Pay and conditions are important to status, of course. But, in addition, the 1963 report recommended that a training centre be established and a recognised qualification granted. I believe that that would be more important than anything else in improving the status of these men.

Finally, I summarise the five points which I ask the Minister to consider. Firstly, on salaries, there should be a national scale for children's supervisors and allied workers. There must be an increase in the present salaries to bring them in line with the responsibilities of the work. Secondly, there should be a fixed upper limit on the number of hours worked, because there is none at present, and all time worked after that should be paid overtime. I believe that the police have a scheme to meet this, and that might be looked at. Thirdly, on living conditions, there should be a building programme to give a basic standard of accommodation, and, most important, living quarters should be away from the main school building. Fourthly, there should be a training centre with recognised qualifications for supervisors being trained. Fifthly, there should be a standard advertisement setting out the conditions of work, and the conditions of service should be available at interviews.

I hope that the Minister will consider these points very seriously. If he cannot promise acceptance now, I hope that he will at least promise to inquire into the situation, with a view to correcting what I believe to be a very great evil today.

§ The Joint Under-Secretary of State for Education and Science (Mr. Denis Howell)

In the short time available to me I shall deal as fully as I can with the points raised by the hon. and gallant 395 Member for Carshalton (Captain W. Elliot). May I first say that this is an opportune moment for the hon. and gallant Gentleman to be raising this question. In fact, it is rather more opportune than even the hon. and gallant Gentleman may believe, because tomorrow my right hon. Friend's own advisory committee on handicapped children will meet to start some new deliberations into this whole problem, in addition to other research and thought with which I shall deal shortly.

At the moment there is probably more thinking going on about the whole of this problem than there has been for some years past. I appreciate what the hon. and gallant Gentleman said, and the report on which he drew for his comments. I had not had the opportunity of reading or knowing about this report until the hon. and gallant Gentleman mentioned it, but I assure him that I shall study it to see whether there are any lessons which my Department or I ought to draw from it.

It goes without saying that we all wish to endorse what the hon. and gallant Gentleman said about the dedication of these people. I think that was the word the hon. and gallant Gentleman used, and I do not disagree with him. I do not think that it is too strong a word to use about the people to whom the whole of our society should be grateful, these folk who give so much of their lives to dealing with the categories of children about whom we are talking.

The hon. and gallant Gentleman quoted five categories of children. I had listed seven categories, in the hope of giving them to the House, and perhaps I might therefore add two to those listed by the hon. and gallant Gentleman. These are the blind and partially sighted children, and epileptic children, both very important and large groups of children. It is impossible to be too enthusiastic about the work of those who are responsible for the education of these children.

The hon. and gallant Gentleman was concerned about the pay and conditions of these supervisors. There is no doubt about the esteem in which we hold them, but I think that I ought to say, as I attempted to say on an earlier occasion when the hon. and gallant Gentleman 396 questioned me about these matters, that it has always been the practice that the House of Commons and the Government cannot accept direct responsibility for salary negotiations in the case of these special residential schools. They are covered by the National Joint Negotiating Committee for Local Authority Services, and I think that there is a special sub-committee which deals with the special residential schools category as well as other categories affecting the Home Department and other local authority residential homes.

It is important for us to remember that there are 336 residential schools, with a total of 21,000 residential places for children who are unfortunate enough to be in these categories. I am aware that the hon. and gallant Gentleman has drawn upon his experience in his constituency where there are one or two schools, but the fact is that there are 336 of these schools with 21,000 residential places in them. In order to get the picture into perspective, I should point out that there are another 50,000 handicapped children who receive their education in day schools, and not in boarding schools. It is clear that conditions vary considerably among these 336 schools.

Clearly, in some of the schools conditions are likely to be first-class. I would like to see them first-class in all. I agree that the learned Member may be aware of some schools where conditions are not up to the standards that we would like to see. I can only tell him that this is a local authority matter, but that I shall be delighted, if he will let me have details of the schools to which he referred, to see that they are personally investigated by my Department. It is the practice that H.M. Inspectorate, who constantly keep in touch with the schools, as far as possible, take up with them points which they feel to be important. The schools themselves are very well aware of the constant need for new thinking in this regard.

On the question of a further inquiry, which the hon. Member raised earlier by way of a Question, I must tell him again that such an inquiry is already well under way, being chaired by Professor Lady Williams, who is well known in this field, on behalf of a committee of the National Council of Social Service. I am advised that the committee, which 397 has gone into all the questions that the hon. Member has raised, has been extremely thorough in its investigations and has taken a great deal of evidence, and I know that he will be encouraged to know that its report is now in draft form. Again, I will see that all he has said this evening is conveyed to Professor Lady Williams and her colleagues, in order that they can have the advantage of the hon. Members comments before finalising their report.

I cannot stress enough the importance that the Government have always placed on the question of the independent negotiation of salaries. This is not something in which Ministers can directly intervene. It is sufficient for me to say that I am quite clear that the case that he has been putting forward this evening will be considered by the National Joint Negotiating Committee, and I hope that it will have realistic and sympathetic regard to his remarks. I am certain—having had a little experience of the way in which these joint negotiating committees work, and the importance of all employees belonging to their appropriate organisation so that they can have their point of view adequately presented in these negotiations and discussions—that the people whose job it is to put forward a case on behalf of teachers and supervisors will be quoting and praying in 398 aid the remarks of the hon. Member when they next negotiate their case.

I finish by repeating the five conditions to which the hon. Member referred. Salaries and hours of work are questions for the National Joint Negotiating Committee, and I have no doubt that the Committee will have regard to what the hon. Member has said. Living conditions are matters for each local authority. We are aware of the constant need to keep them up to date and the hon. Member would expect that in my Department there is tremendous sympathy for the whole field of education of the handicapped. In the Department of Education they often get more consideration than other branches, and I am delighted that that is so.

Training centres and qualifications, and standard advertisements are matters that I had not previously thought about, but I will give the hon. Member an undertaking that I will think about them—