Two government bills should be amended to ensure school flexibility over pay, the Confederation of School Trusts (CST) has said.
In a briefing note, CST said it is “very concerned” about the schools part of the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, particularly “the provisions which would remove academy freedoms”.
CST said all types of schools should be given the freedoms and flexibilities the academy system has had to allow the system to keep improving.
As part of this, it suggests an amendment in both the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill and the Employment Rights Bill to require employers to “have regard to” the School Teachers’ Review Body and School Support Staff Negotiating Body processes “rather than to be constrained by them”.
Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill
As it stands currently, the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill brings academies into line with maintained schools in several respects - including extending the statutory teacher pay and conditions framework to include academy teachers.
Concerns had been raised about how this would affect academy trusts paying above the national framework or offering staff additional flexibilities.
Speaking to MPs at the Commons Education Select Committee on Wednesday, the education secretary clarified that “all schools will have full flexibility to innovate with the floor but no ceiling”.
CST welcomed Bridget Phillipson clarifying the bill in this regard, but said the provisions in the bill as it stands “do not reflect this direction of travel and will need to be amended”.
“Restrictive and prescriptive pay and conditions might undermine schools’ and trusts’ ability to attract staff to schools serving disadvantaged communities and/or in need or turnaround,” CST said.
CST has also raised several concerns about other provisions in the bill.
The bill will also require academies to follow the national curriculum, as maintained schools have to, after the conclusion of the curriculum review and require all teachers to have or be working towards Qualified Teacher Status (QTS).
CST said the framework created after the curriculum review must protect the ability of schools and trusts to deliver the curriculum flexibly, and must not constrain their ability to innovate.
Member trusts have raised concerns about how the QTS requirement may affect their ability to deploy higher-level teaching assistants to provide emergency cover when needed, CST said.
It added that this provision could impact the recruitment of specialists who bring important expertise but for whom getting QTS might not be desirable or practical.
The bill also creates a new power that will allow the education secretary to direct academy trusts that are deemed not to be complying with legal duties or that are “acting or proposing to act unreasonably”.
Concerns over ‘broad scope’ of powers
CST said it is concerned about the “broad scope” of these powers and is seeking legal advice on how this could be improved in the bill.
The trust leaders group said the current wording could result in “unjustified interference” in discretionary decision making of academies.
The bill further ends forced academisation for schools causing concern. Member trusts are concerned the government “would seek to reduce or limit the levers it has to improve schools that are failing”.
The secretary of state would instead have a discretionary power on academising failing schools.
CST has said this “could invite a legal challenge each time the secretary of state seeks to use the power, which would leave children in failing schools for an intolerable length of time”, and added: “Members are not clear this provision is acting in the interest of children.”
It raised further concerns that Ofsted is being reformed and the DfE is introducing Regional Improvement for Standards and Excellence teams in the “absence of a wider strategy” for accountability.
It has also said the DfE and Ofsted should use upcoming consultations on accountability to set out clarity on how the system will ensure failing schools improve.
School admissions
Finally, the bill gives councils greater powers to ensure school admission decisions reflect local needs, including enabling them to direct academies to admit children.
The Schools Adjudicator will also be able to set a school’s published admission number (PAN) when an objection against it is upheld. Councils will also be able to put forward their own proposals for new schools.
CST said it was concerned this would create conflicts of interest in local decision making, and that the Schools Adjudicator is not well-placed to make decisions on PANs.
“We accept current arrangements are fractured: introducing the Schools Adjudicator worsens rather than improves this,” CST said.
Speaking to MPs on Wednesday, Ms Phillipson said academies are “crucial partners and often leaders” in driving high standards in schools.
She added: “We are designing a school system which supports and challenges all schools to deliver high standards for every child: expert qualified teachers in every classroom, teaching a rich and broad curriculum, with schools able to create an attractive pay and conditions offer that attracts and retains the staff our children need.
“We will create a floor but no ceiling, enabling healthy competition and innovation to improve all schools.”
For the latest education news and analysis delivered every weekday morning, sign up for the Tes Daily newsletter
