Short-changed over threshold back pay anomaly
We awaited our increase in salary, backdated to September 2000. But when our payslips arrived, we found that my colleague had received her back pay, but I had not. The reason? I am currently being paid as acting deputy on leadership 4 and so do not qualify.
When I checked this out with my local NASUWT branch, I was told that everything was in order, but I want to protest in the strongest possible terms.
First, I am only an acting deputy. While I appreciate that if I do not become a permanent deputy by September I will be paid on threshold 1, it does not detract from the fact that the threshold payment was supposed to reward good classroom teachers and, if sccessful, the remuneration was to be paid with effect from September 2000. The evidence I provided to support my application was based on the three years from 1997-2000 when I was a class teacher, and therefore had little bearing on my current role as acting deputy.
As acting deputy, I am presumably being paid to do a very different job, while remaining a class teacher, and my salary rightly reflects this. But I do not feel that I have been rewarded for going through the threshold, whereas my colleague has. Surely this is an injustice in the system?
I appreciate that I now draw more money than other colleagues who have gone through the threshold - but this is not a case of greed, more a point of principle. I assume that there are others in my situation who must feel equally cheated.
Jo James, West Bridgford, Nottingham