鈥淯nfair barriers鈥 stop teachers advancing to the upper pay range, a report has warned, as school staff reported goalposts 鈥渟hifting all the time鈥. In England, pay scales for classroom teachers comprise nine points: a six-point main pay range (M1 to M6), and a three-point upper pay range (U1 to U3), also known as the upper pay scale. Outside London, MPR advisory salaries range from 拢32,916 to 拢45,352, while UPR salaries range from 拢47,472 to 拢51,048. Any teacher can apply to move to the upper pay range. But data collected for the found teachers faced obstacles leading to a bottleneck, as well as slow progression once they reached the UPR. An Incomes Data Research survey gathered responses on the UPR from 2,300 union members, across primary and secondary. Of them, 52 per cent agreed or strongly agreed that 鈥渦nfair barriers are put in place鈥 to prevent teachers reaching the UPR. Examples included inconsistent criteria between schools, financial constraints and 鈥渆xcessive鈥 evidence requirements. Slower pay progression on upper pay range Once teachers reached the UPR, around three-quarters said they experienced slower pay progression, with many reporting negative effects on morale and retention. Female teachers and primary teachers were particularly scathing. They were less likely to say the current speed of progression 鈥渇airly reflects鈥 their experience and contribution. They were also 10 percentage points less likely to find expectations of UPR teachers 鈥渞easonable and achievable鈥. NEU general secretary Daniel Kebede said the findings 鈥渦nderline鈥 concerns around equality in teacher pay and conditions. 鈥淭hose with family commitments, caring duties or other roles outside of school are likely to find inflated expectations of work intensity insurmountable,鈥 he said. Daniel Kebede Overall, thirty-seven per cent of respondents said expectations of UPR teachers 鈥渁re not reasonable or achievable鈥, often involving 鈥渟ignificant鈥 extracurricular responsibilities, or additional work like CPD, mentoring and admin. The union believes the current structure should be replaced by a single six-point scale for classroom teachers, with automatic annual pay progression. Kebede said the 鈥渦nfair pay and unreasonable expectations鈥 associated with the UPR 鈥渕ake a significant contribution to the exodus of talented and experienced teachers鈥. Department for Education guidance states teachers may apply to move onto the UPR 鈥渁t least once a year鈥. Applications should be accepted where teachers are 鈥渉ighly competent in all elements of the relevant standards鈥 and make a 鈥渟ubstantial and sustained鈥 contribution to their school. However, this guidance is non-statutory. 鈥楪oalposts kept shifting鈥 One special school teacher who spent 10 years on the first point of the upper pay range told Schools Week: 鈥淓very time I was asking to move up, they were giving me new targets.鈥 Frequent changes in line managers exacerbated the situation. 鈥淚’d get a new one, and they’d say鈥 鈥業 haven’t seen you do these things, so you need to demonstrate them鈥.鈥 She felt her experience was also affected by taking maternity leave twice. 鈥淭he goal post basically was shifting all the time, and every line manager [said]…. 鈥榶ou’re going to need to show us the evidence again鈥.鈥 After nearly a decade, she was told progression would have to wait until a new national pay policy was published. 鈥淭hat’s kind of what broke me,鈥 she said. She added her headteacher appeared to have 鈥渁 total lack of accountability鈥, with benchmarks being set without 鈥渁ny kind of empirical evidence鈥. She has since聽left, and聽is now on the UPR at a different school. There, she moved onto UPR2 after two years “without having to demonstrate meeting any targets聽or taking on a new area of responsibility”.聽 Wider evidence Research by Teacher Tapp suggests such experiences are not unusual. In December, more than 10,000 teachers were asked whether their school鈥檚 process for progressing to the UPR was fair. Just under half (49 per cent) said it was, while almost a third said they did not know what the process was. Seventeen per cent said it was unfair. Fifty local authorities now provide teachers on the UPR with annual pay progression, it is understood. This month, West Sussex County Council confirmed progression on the UPR could now be annual, replacing its previous approach that allowed two-year progression unless in 鈥渆xceptional circumstances鈥. Tom Chitty, joint assistant secretary for the NEU鈥檚 West Sussex Branch and District, stressed the UPR 鈥渋s not a promotion, but in practice it has been treated as one, with progression slowed, blocked or made conditional on factors that have nothing to do with classroom teaching鈥. Last year鈥檚 School Teachers鈥 Review Body鈥檚 report to ministers highlighted 鈥渢o pay progression decisions鈥 and a 鈥渓ack of clarity on the purpose of the upper pay range鈥. The DfE did not respond to a request for comment.