§ 7. Mr. Greenwayasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will make a statement on the talks aimed at restructuring the pay and conditions of service of the teaching profession.
§ 16. Mr. Proctorasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will make a statement on proposals for restructuring of teachers' salaries and terms and conditions of employment.
§ Sir Keith JosephDiscussions in the Burnham joint working party on salary structure were adjourned on 13 July to enable the management panel to consider a number of points made by the teachers' panel. A further meeting has been arranged for 15 November.
§ Mr. GreenwayIs it not preposterously stupid that the Burnham committee has been able to discuss teachers' pay but not conditions of service for the past 20 years, due to an enactment of a previous Labour Government? Is it not now important for the structure talks to get going again, with a view to making clear to teachers their promotion prospects and the penalties for not doing their job?
§ Sir Keith JosephI agree with my hon. Friend's conclusion, but the very fact that the joint working party on salary structure has been convened, has been sitting, and is continuing to sit, shows that the Burnham committee is not a barrier if there is a will to discuss pay and conditions of service factors at the same time.
§ Mr. ProctorDoes my right hon. Friend agree that the teachers' pay claim for 1985 is totally unrealistic? Would they not be better off negotiating a revised pay structure linked to performance?
§ Sir Keith JosephI entirely agree with both limbs of my hon. Friend's proposition. I find it worrying that the leaders of the teachers' unions seem ready to enter into negotiations with a claim which they must know is unrealistic. I am appalled by their suggestion that it may prove necessary to prosecute the claim by further disruptions of the education provided in the schools.
§ Mr. FlanneryIs it not a fact that, since the fulfilment of the Houghton report after the Labour Government came into office in 1974, teachers' pay has dropped behind, to the point where all the earlier gains have been lost? Is it not true that the vast majority of teachers linger on scales 1 and 2, which are pitiful, and even less than a three-month trained policeman gets at the start? That is the reality. What does the Secretary of State propose to do about that betrayal of the teachers and the demoralisation of the teachers consequent upon that betrayal?
§ Sir Keith JosephI hope that the hon. Gentleman will join me in totally condemning any disruption of children's education, whatever the teachers' views.