Managing Pay Appeals Briefing for Governors Annual Conference 11 th October 2014 Diocese of Shrewsbury Department of Education

Diocese of Shrewsbury Department of Education Items to Be Covered Increasing importance of performance management and role of Ofsted. Process Prior to Governors The Pay Committee The Appeals Process

Ofsted In his letter of the 21 st February 2012 the Secretary of State asked the STRB to consider: how to reduce the rigidity of the pay system so that it best supports the recruitment and retention of high quality teachers in all schools; and how to strengthen the link between teachers’ pay and performance and whether there are any particular barriers to this within the current system. Result was the introduction of performance related pay progression for all teachers (had already been in place for leadership). Diocese of Shrewsbury Department of Education

Ofsted Performance Management/Appraisal In reaching their judgement on leadership and management, inspectors evaluate how well the headteacher/principal, and where relevant, other senior staff are managing staff performance and using the staff budget to differentiate appropriately between high and low performers. Diocese of Shrewsbury Department of Education

Ofsted Inspectors consider the extent to which the headteacher/principal ensures that all staff undergo appraisal process which enable them to benefit from appropriate professional development. Where teachers’ performance is less than good, inspectors will seek evidence that this is rigorously managed, and that appropriate training and support are provided. Where teachers’ performance is good, inspectors will expect to see evidence that this is recognised through the appraisal process. Diocese of Shrewsbury Department of Education

Appraisal Statement on Pay Appraiser in their review will make a recommendation for pay progression Build informal process by which there can be a ‘conversation’ with appraisee if they feel the decision is unjust. Diocese of Shrewsbury Department of Education

Your Pay Policy Date when all pay decisions will be made? Appeals Process? Do there need to be changes ?

Review Process Appraisal Review with Pay recommendation Appraisal Review – No Pay recommendation Headteacher Moderates and recommends pay progression Headteacher Moderates and does not recommend pay progression Internal Review of Pay recommendation – not by Headteacher Pay Committee Approves Pay Progression Pay Committee Rejects Pay Progression PAY APPEAL Headteacher informs Appraisee that there will be no pay recommendation Discussion with Appraisee

Appeals Appeals can be made where a teacher believes that the person or committee by whom the decision was made: a) incorrectly applied the school’s pay policy; b) incorrectly applied any provision of the STPCD; c) failed to have proper regard for statutory guidance; d) failed to take proper account of relevant evidence; e) took account of irrelevant or inaccurate evidence; f) was biased; or g) unlawfully discriminated against the teacher. Diocese of Shrewsbury Department of Education

Appeals Diocese of Shrewsbury Department of Education Schools should ensure that an appeals PROCEDURE is in place before any pay determinations are made. The adoption of an appeals procedure after a pay appeal has already been lodged could leave schools open to legal challenge. An appeals policy should have clear timescales which are reasonable in all circumstances, make allowances for school holidays, but allow appeals to be expedited in good time.

Internal Appeal (Stage 1) Appraisal statement and recommendation – There should be an internal process by which a teacher can appeal the PM statement with its recommendation – Must be related to the “reasons for appeal” – Who does this – best NOT to be the “head teacher”, – School decision as to what form of “informal” appeal – If a “re-appraisal”, the “appeal statement” will stand for the next stage – Although informal, make sure clarity: “reasons” in writing and limit to where these are linked to the pay policy Diocese of Shrewsbury Department of Education

Stage 1 Appealing a moderation – Member of staff should know reasons for moderation – Opportunity for member of staff to put their case to the moderator – Suggest this is a meeting – “Informal” meeting with the member of staff – The member of staff should be able to comment (appeal) in writing a on the moderation statement – The appellant should be advised that the statement should be for one of the appeal reasons stated linked to the school’s Pay and PM policies Diocese of Shrewsbury Department of Education

Moderation Role Of Headteacher Diocese of Shrewsbury Department of Education Head teachers remain accountable for the appraisal process under the Regulations and should make the final pay recommendations following moderation. BUT- must be based entirely on published criteria. Need to relate back to school’s own pay policy/appraisal policy. If policy is not fit for purpose change for next year, but too late for this.

Timeline For Stage 1 Appeals Teacher receives negative pay judgement (9 th October) Teacher has 7 days to make an appeal (16 th October) 7 Days to review the decision and convey decision to member of staff. (23 rd October) Headteacher presents pay decisions to Pay Committee (24 th October) Decision communicated to Teacher (31 st October) If following deadline to be met then all pay decision would have had to be made by Last Thursday!

Timeline For Stage 1 Appeals Teacher receives Positive pay judgement (9 th October) Headteacher moderates and decides against progression and informs teacher (10 th October) 7 Days to appeal (17 th October) Headteacher meets with teacher to discuss moderation (18 th October) Headteacher informs outcome of stage 1 appeal Decision communicated to Teacher (31 st October) If following deadline to be met then all pay decision would have had to be made by Last Thursday!

Timeline For Stage 1 Appeals Most schools will not be able to follow this process by 31 st October Consult with staff and Governors that for this year you wish to alter timescales so that the process can be given due time and consideration and present a revised timescale giving the dates by which stage 1 of the appeals system can be managed.

Diocese of Shrewsbury Department of Education Pay Decisions Governing Bodies need to be assured that the process has been robust and have confidence in the pay recommendations being made. They do not need to review each recommendation. How they assure themselves is not regulated but should not be overly bureaucratic. Pay decisions should be communicated to teaching staff by 31 October (31 December for headteachers) or agreed revised date..

Appeals Appeals can be made where a teacher believes that the person or committee by whom the decision was made: a) incorrectly applied the school’s pay policy; b) incorrectly applied any provision of the STPCD; c) failed to have proper regard for statutory guidance; d) failed to take proper account of relevant evidence; e) took account of irrelevant or inaccurate evidence; f) was biased; or g) unlawfully discriminated against the teacher. Diocese of Shrewsbury Department of Education

Professional Associations Appeals 1. Setting aside provisions of the policy Challenging excessively demanding criteria In such situations you are challenging the criteria, not the decision - and asking that the criteria are set aside for all decisions because they are now seen to be creating unfair obstacles to progression and potentially leading to discrimination in some cases. Challenging use of the Teachers’ Standards as a checklist and/or use of Career Stage Expectations checklists. Challenging quotas and relative performance judgments Challenging funding constraints 2. Challenging the evidence or the application of the criteria Challenging decisions - Evidence is important Challenging decisions - Using the “no surprises” principle Challenging decisions that are not clearly based on appraisal evidence Challenging decisions that set aside the appraiser’s recommendation Challenging decisions based on moving the goalposts Challenging decisions based on objectives The aim in such situations will be to persuade the governing body that the decision to deny pay progression is unjustified because there has been sufficiently good performance even though a particular objective or objectives may not have been achieved. Challenging decisions based on student outcomes objectives Challenging decisions based on lesson observations Challenging decisions based on pupil or parent feedback Challenging decisions based on requirements which teachers have not had the opportunity to meet Challenging decisions that don’t take learning curves into account Challenging decisions based on inappropriate expectations of UPR teachers Challenging decisions based on a need for training Challenging decisions on the basis of the financial impact of denying pay progression 3. Challenging discrimination Challenging decisions on the basis of potential unlawful discrimination Challenging decisions to deny progression to teachers on maternity leave or extended sickness absence 4. Applications to be paid on the Upper Pay Range (threshold applications)

Three Stage Appeal Stage one: Informal discussion with the appraiser or head teacher prior to confirmation of pay recommendation Stage two: A formal representation to the person or governors’ committee making the pay determination. Stage three: A formal appeal hearing with an appeals panel of governors Diocese of Shrewsbury Department of Education

Appeals Stage one Informal discussion with the appraiser or head teacher prior to confirmation of pay recommendation Diocese of Shrewsbury Department of Education

Stage 1 Appraisal statement and recommendation – There should be an internal process by which a teacher can appeal the PM statement with its recommendation – Must be related to the “reasons for appeal” – Who does this – best NOT to be the “head teacher”, – School decision as to what form of “informal” appeal – If a “re-appraisal”, the “appeal statement” will stand for the next stage – Although informal, make sure clarity: “reasons” in writing and limit to where these are linked to the pay policy Diocese of Shrewsbury Department of Education

Stage Two Stage two A formal representation to the person or governors’ committee making the pay determination. Diocese of Shrewsbury Department of Education

Stage 2 Member of staff should be able to put their comments to the decision maker(s) if the recommendation is “negative” – Either from a PM review – Or from a Moderation Must be in written format linked to grounds of appeal. Some schools ALSO allow for the Member of Staff to present their case and answer the decision maker’s questions. This Must be managed – time and content advised. TU Representation normally allowed, but meeting can go ahead if rep cannot make it. Diocese of Shrewsbury Department of Education

Stage 3 Stage three A formal appeal hearing with an appeals panel of governors Diocese of Shrewsbury Department of Education

Stage 3 Need to manage expectations Be clear in letter inviting them: – how long the session is likely to take – the sequence – how long they may verbally present for – The role of the chair – The grounds of appeal being heard – Trade Union Representation allowed (if in policy) Don’t leave open-ended otherwise risk having half day sessions. Ensure ALL involved are trained Diocese of Shrewsbury Department of Education

Introduction by chair – Including that all document have been read by panel – Time for the relevant presentations – Explanation of “questions” – Explanation of limitation of grounds of appeal and possible areas of discussion – Not a re-hearing of the process Presentation by appellant – This could be entirely in writing, or time limited Questions of appellant by school – Good practice, but kept short Questions of appellant by panel – Essential!– focussed on appeal Diocese of Shrewsbury Department of Education

Presentation by decision makers – Who will present from the decision makers – chair of first committee? head? – Needs to be same rules as for the appellant Questions to decision makers by appellant – Need to keep this focussed from the chair Question to decision makers by panel *Summary statement by decision maker – Kept very short *Summary statement by appellant – Kept very short – * can be other way round Diocese of Shrewsbury Department of Education

Make sure the TU rep understand their role as part of the hearing Challenge the first “non-process” interruption – And any subsequent one Allow “withdrawal” of rep and member of staff at any time – make sure that ALL parties withdraw Diocese of Shrewsbury Department of Education

Write to member of staff with outcomes and clear reasons why appeal is accepted or denied. – Link this to grounds for appeal – Link this to Pay & PM Policy / Teacher Standards Consider relevant actions with / against managers Make sure pay decisions are filed and payroll informed Review Pay policy and Cycle Diocese of Shrewsbury Department of Education

Appeals should be considered as a normal part of the cycle. Implications include: ensuring the appeals’ process is robust but not onerous; that relevant governing body members have appropriate training where required; Time is put aside by governors to process appeals each year Diocese of Shrewsbury Department of Education

Use management data from the appeals’ process to improve for future years. Look at where appraiser recommendations are being overturned at moderation or where appeals are being successful. Are there weaknesses with specific Departments or individuals. Will never completely get away from appeals being submitted but should work to reduce the percentage. Diocese of Shrewsbury Department of Education