Whither Scottish education?

C J Baldry, C J Lockyer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

19 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Few, if any, of the predictions for 1987 envisaged the EIS accepting a set of proposals on pay and conditions not markedly different from the Main/Rifkind
package so comprehensively rejected by the profession towards the end of 1986. John Pollock's preparedness to resign if the proposals were not accepted, and the actions of the EIS executive to minimise the influence of those local associations of the Institute that opposed the revised proposals seemed a curious about-turn, given the intensity of industrial action over the past two years. A comparison between the recommendations of the Main Report and the proposals of the Scottish Joint Negotiating Committee for Teaching Staff in School Education accepted by the EIS indicates some success on the part of teachers. A number of anomalies in the Main Report over salaries were eliminated, (eg. ensuring a 10% safety net, introducing a common scale and
maximum salary structure and increased rewards for teachers at the top of the salary scale), and at least a deferment of the moves towards increased managerial powers for teachers. Most importantly, for the EIS, SSTA and NAS/UWT, the agreement still appears to ensure the continuation of the SJNC and full negotiating rights for teachers. Nevertheless, on balance the government has had the greater success. This economic perspective appraises the proposals and considers their impact on the future of industrial relations in the education sector.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)88-93
Number of pages6
JournalQuarterly Economic Commentary
Volume12
Issue number3
Publication statusPublished - Feb 1987

Fingerprint

Education
Salary
Negotiating
Economics
Managerial power
Safety net
Anomaly
Education sector
Prediction
Preparedness
Government
Staff
Industrial relations
Reward

Keywords

  • Scottish education system
  • industrial relations
  • Scottish economy
  • Scotland

Cite this

Baldry, C. J., & Lockyer, C. J. (1987). Whither Scottish education? Quarterly Economic Commentary, 12(3), 88-93.
Baldry, C J ; Lockyer, C J. / Whither Scottish education?. In: Quarterly Economic Commentary. 1987 ; Vol. 12, No. 3. pp. 88-93.
@article{361fddc763934a5caf8733d05f073b4b,
title = "Whither Scottish education?",
abstract = "Few, if any, of the predictions for 1987 envisaged the EIS accepting a set of proposals on pay and conditions not markedly different from the Main/Rifkindpackage so comprehensively rejected by the profession towards the end of 1986. John Pollock's preparedness to resign if the proposals were not accepted, and the actions of the EIS executive to minimise the influence of those local associations of the Institute that opposed the revised proposals seemed a curious about-turn, given the intensity of industrial action over the past two years. A comparison between the recommendations of the Main Report and the proposals of the Scottish Joint Negotiating Committee for Teaching Staff in School Education accepted by the EIS indicates some success on the part of teachers. A number of anomalies in the Main Report over salaries were eliminated, (eg. ensuring a 10{\%} safety net, introducing a common scale andmaximum salary structure and increased rewards for teachers at the top of the salary scale), and at least a deferment of the moves towards increased managerial powers for teachers. Most importantly, for the EIS, SSTA and NAS/UWT, the agreement still appears to ensure the continuation of the SJNC and full negotiating rights for teachers. Nevertheless, on balance the government has had the greater success. This economic perspective appraises the proposals and considers their impact on the future of industrial relations in the education sector.",
keywords = "Scottish education system, industrial relations, Scottish economy, Scotland",
author = "Baldry, {C J} and Lockyer, {C J}",
year = "1987",
month = "2",
language = "English",
volume = "12",
pages = "88--93",
journal = "Fraser of Allander Economic Commentary",
issn = "2046-5378",
publisher = "University of Strathclyde",
number = "3",

}

Baldry, CJ & Lockyer, CJ 1987, 'Whither Scottish education?', Quarterly Economic Commentary, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 88-93.

Whither Scottish education? / Baldry, C J; Lockyer, C J.

In: Quarterly Economic Commentary, Vol. 12, No. 3, 02.1987, p. 88-93.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Whither Scottish education?

AU - Baldry, C J

AU - Lockyer, C J

PY - 1987/2

Y1 - 1987/2

N2 - Few, if any, of the predictions for 1987 envisaged the EIS accepting a set of proposals on pay and conditions not markedly different from the Main/Rifkindpackage so comprehensively rejected by the profession towards the end of 1986. John Pollock's preparedness to resign if the proposals were not accepted, and the actions of the EIS executive to minimise the influence of those local associations of the Institute that opposed the revised proposals seemed a curious about-turn, given the intensity of industrial action over the past two years. A comparison between the recommendations of the Main Report and the proposals of the Scottish Joint Negotiating Committee for Teaching Staff in School Education accepted by the EIS indicates some success on the part of teachers. A number of anomalies in the Main Report over salaries were eliminated, (eg. ensuring a 10% safety net, introducing a common scale andmaximum salary structure and increased rewards for teachers at the top of the salary scale), and at least a deferment of the moves towards increased managerial powers for teachers. Most importantly, for the EIS, SSTA and NAS/UWT, the agreement still appears to ensure the continuation of the SJNC and full negotiating rights for teachers. Nevertheless, on balance the government has had the greater success. This economic perspective appraises the proposals and considers their impact on the future of industrial relations in the education sector.

AB - Few, if any, of the predictions for 1987 envisaged the EIS accepting a set of proposals on pay and conditions not markedly different from the Main/Rifkindpackage so comprehensively rejected by the profession towards the end of 1986. John Pollock's preparedness to resign if the proposals were not accepted, and the actions of the EIS executive to minimise the influence of those local associations of the Institute that opposed the revised proposals seemed a curious about-turn, given the intensity of industrial action over the past two years. A comparison between the recommendations of the Main Report and the proposals of the Scottish Joint Negotiating Committee for Teaching Staff in School Education accepted by the EIS indicates some success on the part of teachers. A number of anomalies in the Main Report over salaries were eliminated, (eg. ensuring a 10% safety net, introducing a common scale andmaximum salary structure and increased rewards for teachers at the top of the salary scale), and at least a deferment of the moves towards increased managerial powers for teachers. Most importantly, for the EIS, SSTA and NAS/UWT, the agreement still appears to ensure the continuation of the SJNC and full negotiating rights for teachers. Nevertheless, on balance the government has had the greater success. This economic perspective appraises the proposals and considers their impact on the future of industrial relations in the education sector.

KW - Scottish education system

KW - industrial relations

KW - Scottish economy

KW - Scotland

UR - http://www.strath.ac.uk/frasercommentary/

UR - http://www.strath.ac.uk/fraser/

M3 - Article

VL - 12

SP - 88

EP - 93

JO - Fraser of Allander Economic Commentary

JF - Fraser of Allander Economic Commentary

SN - 2046-5378

IS - 3

ER -

Baldry CJ, Lockyer CJ. Whither Scottish education? Quarterly Economic Commentary. 1987 Feb;12(3):88-93.