David Bell ("Getting away from ... the past", TES, March 20) gives a very good synopsis of recent arguments for changing teachers' contracts. At first reading, some of them might appear very attractive. But where were the references to levels of pay, workload, and total number of hours per week?
Teachers have learnt from bitter experience in recent years that changes in working conditions inevitably leave them worse off, and those who have forgotten, or not experienced, the imposition of the 1,265 hours (plus whatever else is reasonably required in order to do the job) and the loss of five holidays ought to refer to coverage in The TES, and elsewhere, of the changes in the contracts of FE lecturers.
Who was it who, in recent years, stated that no one forgets a good teacher? Who was it who quipped that they just forget to give them a decent salary? Until the current mantra of "education, education, education" is coupled to "decent salary, decent salary, decent salary", I don't think I'll be too keen on listening to arguments as to why my working year should change. Especially as I can only sell what I have once and recent history is not very good at guaranteeing non-erosion of any improvements.
RC MOSES, 41 Parkleigh Drive, New Moston, Manchester