Bridget Phillipson must amend the children鈥檚 wellbeing and schools bill to guarantee a restrictive 鈥渃eiling鈥 is not placed on academy pay freedoms, sector leaders and MPs have warned. said extending 鈥渞estrictive and prescriptive pay and conditions鈥 to academies 鈥渕ight undermine schools鈥 and trusts鈥 ability to attract staff to schools serving disadvantaged communities and/or in need of turnaround鈥. It comes as MPs prepare to scrutinise and amend the bill at a public committee, with hearings due to begin next week in Parliament. Schools Week understands that several high-profile trust bosses are being lined up by the Conservatives to give evidence. Much of the concern of trust leaders has centred on a move to subject academies to national pay and conditions for teachers via the School Teachers鈥 Review Body (STRB) process, which they fear will stop them paying above national scales. Phillipson said this week that 鈥渁ll schools will have full flexibility to innovate with a floor and no ceiling鈥. The education secretary added that she wanted 鈥渢hat innovation, that flexibility, that excellence 鈥 much of which we have seen within the academy system 鈥 I want to be available to all schools鈥. Conflict between bill and minister comments This is a departure from the wording of the bill, which is described as 鈥渁llowing the secretary of state to determine academy teacher remuneration and conditions鈥. 鈥淭his will largely mirror the provisions that currently exist in the maintained school sector,鈥 it added. The CST welcomed the clarification, but cautioned: 鈥淎s laid, the provisions do not reflect this direction of travel and will need to be amended.鈥 It is calling for an amendment to the draft laws to state that employers 鈥渟hould have regard鈥 to any pay rules, rather than be 鈥渃onstrained by them鈥. 鈥淭his would mean flexible national frameworks which might protect a minimum pay threshold but would allow innovations in both pay and conditions that are responsive to local contexts.鈥 Labour is facing calls from other quarters to amend the bill, which does not at present explicitly guarantee there will be no 鈥渃eiling鈥 on pay. Currently, national pay scales also do have a maximum salary for different school roles and pay levels. Government accused of ‘u-turn’ Laura Trott Shadow education secretary Laura Trott called the admission a 鈥淯-turn鈥, adding: 鈥淚f that really is [Phillipson鈥檚] intention, why does the bill not make that clear?鈥 Patrick Spencer, a former DfE adviser and now a Conservative MP, told Schools Week there was 鈥渘o provision鈥 for what Phillipson had introduced and 鈥渁 huge amount of ambiguity because she is saying one thing while the bill says another鈥. He added that 鈥渨e need to see clarity because the drafting is not that comprehensive. They certainly do not use language of floors and ceilings. So my question is, are you going to amend the bill? Or are you going to amend the framework that governs the STRB?鈥 Patrick Spencer Tom Richmond, another former DfE adviser, said developments this week 鈥渦nderline how little clarity there has been about what problem the government is trying to solve鈥. 鈥淭he department is talking about wanting more 鈥榠nnovation鈥, but it is not clear what that means in practice or what issues are being caused by an apparent lack of innovation at present.鈥 Trusts want relaxation of curriculum requirement The schools bill will also extend to academies a requirement to follow the national curriculum. The CST instead suggested that a 鈥渉igh-level national framework that protects the ability of schools and trusts to deliver the 鈥榚nacted鈥 curriculum in a flexible and responsive way, would not necessarily undermine or constrain the ability of schools and trusts to continue to innovate and become centres of curriculum excellence鈥. The bill gives councils the power to direct academies to admit pupils, but the CST warned that, 鈥渨hile local authorities still maintain schools, they cannot reasonably operate in a regulatory space, such as directing providers to admit pupils鈥. And a plan to give the Office of the School鈥檚 Adjudicator power to set schools鈥 capacity 鈥減laces the adjudicator in a commissioning space鈥. 鈥淲e accept current arrangements are fractured: introducing the schools adjudicator worsens rather than improves this.鈥 The CST is also seeking legal advice about how the bill might be 鈥渋mproved鈥 in its section granting the education secretary the power to direct academies to comply with their legal duties. 鈥淲e are concerned that the definitions of the 鈥榬elevant duty鈥 and 鈥榬elevant power鈥 of academies which will be subject to that direction making power are too broad and do not achieve that equivalence with maintained schools.鈥
Johnny storm 20 January 2025 CEOs and SLT bricking it that they can no longer award themselves megabucks salaries and can’t get away with cherry picking what they teach any more? Boo hoo.