Filter Content
Kia ora e te whānau
This week our thoughts are with our Auckland principal whānau and the continuing challenge to beat Delta. Kia kaha e te whānau o Tāmaki Makaurau. Kia ihi, kia maru.
It is humbling to observe the incredible innovation of our teaching teams and their distance approaches to schooling at level 4 and incorporating hybrid approaches for those at level 3.
Parents and students in our schools are fortunate to be served by such a dedicated and committed workforce. Thank you for being so prepared to pivot, adopting these remote and hybrid approaches, despite the frustrations of operating in this way. Staying positive and holding to official advice is not easy but as leaders in times of crisis, it is critical.
Primary Principals’ Collective Bargaining Union
What an exciting start it has been with 100s of principals joining PPCB over the past 2 days. The website to join is live and Denise and her team anticipate adding many more members over the next week.
It is important to join as quickly as possible as Tom, Hayley, and Denise want to gather your draft claims for the pending Collective Bargaining process. Upon joining, you will be issued with an electronic survey that you will have one week to respond to.
There are some interesting, exciting, and creative claims principals have highlighted:
- The payment of an allowance to compensate for the added responsibility of student wellbeing and behaviour needs.
- The targeted funding of PLD to support the development of principal cultural competency in kaupapa Māori and/or Pasifika.
- The establishment of an agreed pathway and resources for solving employment disputes with Boards of Trustees early in the lifecycle of a dispute and at the lowest level of seriousness.
- Dealing with the significant staffing and resourcing disjuncture between Middle schools covered by the secondary collective and Intermediate schools or Year 7 and 8's in Full Primary schools covered by the primary collective.
- The establishment of an Executive Assistant resource to better support principal wellbeing, deal with the administration mountain, and release principals to lead learning.
- The need to ensure Māori principals have EAP services and/or appraisal/professional growth cycle and/or Board of Trustees problem solving processes that reflect kaupapa Māori.
- Additional significant incentive payment at 5 years for U1-3 principals to encourage retention in small, rural, and isolated communities.
- Establish a higher rate of government contribution to a principal's superannuation savings.
- Review and rebuild the principal salary model to decouple salary from school size, make it fairer to encourage the movement of expertise and experience across schools of different contexts, and introduce contextual weightings to ensure matters such as length of service is recognised.
- A significant pay jolt particularly for U1-3 principals
These are just some of the exciting new claims being explored by PPCB. Having a bespoke voice in bargaining truly enables a breadth of claim that will address a job that has become too vast, too stressful, and too isolating.
The Process of Dual Unions in Collective Bargaining
I want to be clear about the mechanism that SPANZ and PPTA use to effectively be two separate entities who are also bound together as one entity in the Collective Bargaining process. This enables both to function as a single voice facing the Ministry of Education in bargaining. The approach of embracing diversity in having the perspective of two Unions and then front-footing the Ministry with a single joint claim, is powerful.
The Establishment of a Joint Single Claim
The approach taken by PPTA and SPANZ is for a single joint claim to be presented after PPTA and SPANZ have negotiated the claim together. That single joint claim is then taken into Collective Bargaining with negotiators from PPTA and SPANZ participating but led by a trained professional negotiator who deals directly with the Ministry and does the bargaining.
The Ministry of Education’s approach to joint bargaining is the expectation of a single Collective Agreement outcome. They will not countenance two collective agreements so PPCB and NZEI will need to engage together in a process that reflects the intent of the process our secondary colleagues use.
In essence, there is no other sensible approach but for PPCB and NZEI to work together.
PPCB welcomes this!
Ratification of Claims
Ratification for both Secondary Unions occurs through a Memorandum of Understanding. PPTA and SPANZ agree to seek ratification of the agreed outcome of bargaining from their respective members. Both Unions’ votes are tabulated and counted to establish an outcome across the whole principal community irrespective of which Union they belong to. It is essentially one count.
Here you can once again see a preparedness to put aside partisanship and work together in the best interests of the whole community of principals.
I congratulate SPANZ and PPTA who have evolved these processes to ensure there is a representative model of diversity and collective strength.
It is no small thing to launch a new Union, but I hope the collaborative example of our secondary colleagues gives you a better understanding of the successful design and function of the dual Union model.
Above all and critical to the success of PPCB is a strong membership base. We invite you all to join and back the establishment of exciting and overdue changes and additions to the terms and conditions of your employment.
Please make it a priority to join up.
Ngā manaakitanga
Perry Rush
perry@nzpf.ac.nz
NZ Principal Magazine also Online
You and/or your team members can easily access the NZ Principal Magazines online, as an e-magazine or as a PDF. Additionally you can search for a previous issue, an article by title or by the author of the article. All magazines back to Term 1 2012 are available in this format. To view or search click here.
Banking Staffing Update September 2021
Roll Review Application Suggestions for Formal Cohort Entry Schools
Presuming that your provisional staffing might not staff you at the same level as non-cohort entry schools I offer a modified Staffing Roll Review form to send to MOE Resourcing if useful for your circumstances. Ignore the 5% requirement, remember to include MMI numbers and include SMS lists of names, ages and school enrolment dates for those you seek to have included in your provisional staffing for 2022.
Do you need to do this?
Here are two ways of checking whether the current staffing entitlement for your cohort entry school includes all pupils who would likely have been enrolled if mid-term cohort entry dates had been 1 March and 1 July.
1. Using this year’s staffing as a test, enter the current 2021 provisional staffing roll numbers, including the Y1 Adjustment, in the MOE staffing calculator and note the Total Roll Based Staffing generated.
Now using the “Edit Roll Input Data” button, increase the Regular Student numbers at Y1, Y1 Adj and Y2 by the number of pupils identified as enrolling on 15 March this year who –
- turned 5 from 9 Feb to 1 March inclusive (add these to the Y1 roll on the staffing calculator)
- are 11/12ths of the Y1 identification above (Round up to nearest whole number and add to Y1 Adj)
And those identified as enrolling on 30 August this year who -
- turned 5 from 8th June to 1 July inclusive (add these to the Y2 roll on the staffing calculator)
Calculate staffing again, making sure you have also completed the Maori Medium Index row (MMI) if any of these pupils are Level 1 or 2 MMI. Any improvement in total Roll based staffing suggests how much staffing improvement might have occurred for this year to gain parity with non-cohort entry schools had you been able to supply it last September.
2. Consider the “cost” of just one 5 yr old not being enrolled on 1 March because of cohort entry dates:
Initial prediction of next year’s year 1 roll is established using the Y1 roll from this year’s Y1 roll. Then, because the Y1 Adjustment prediction uses the Y1 roll above, the one child Y1 not enrolled on 1 March escalates to 2 children because of the y1 adjustment you miss out on for that child.
Two Y1 pupils not counted out of 15 (1:15 ratio for Y1 staffing) is 2/15ths of a teacher lost.
Turning that into dollars using the MOE overuse rate means 2/15ths of $80500, or $10000+ worth of staffing that non cohort schools do not have to absorb.
Even acknowledging that you will minimize the overuse cost of cohort entry using your cheapest salary, let's say $65000, the FTTE loss will still equate to well over $8000 per child.
Knowing that the initial September funding advice notice also uses the provisional staffing roll total, including the Y1 adjustment, to generate initial per pupil funding (about $800 per pupil) and other formula based funding levels, the loss of just 1 Y1 pupil means the loss of $1600+ in funding to put alongside the ftte loss, so likely $10000.00+ disparity per child when compared with non-cohort schools.
For MACS Schools (roll less than 176) cohort entry might be a bit more confronting. If cohort entry results in you provisional roll landing on a multiple of 25, you will be about 0.6 Fttes per fortnight worse off (say $39000+ at $65000 rate) than if you had been a non-cohort entry school with just one more pupil counted.
Will your informing MOE of the above via the Suggested Roll Review process be favourably received?
I am encouraged by this statement that can be found on the Cohort Entry section of the MOE website (And taking a bit of poetic licence by assuming “funded” means both Operations Grant funding and FTTE funding:
“The Ministry will ensure that cohort entry schools are funded appropriately equal to other state and state-integrated schools.”
Gavin Price NZPF Life Member 027 607 6220 gavin.price@xtra.co.nz www.bankingstaffing.co.nz
NZPF assures its business partners that, as members, you will contact them to have a conversation if you are purchasing products, services or solutions for your schools that a business partner supplies. Please support our partners as their assistance to NZPF means better membership services to you.
