Your interview: Brighton teaching union boss explains Thursday's strike

PETER CHADWICK, HOVE: I am 55 and cannot recall a NUT Conference which did not include at least one motion recommending strike action. Please can he advise the last conference which passed without such a motion?

RON GORDON (RG): I’m afraid I don’t know the answer to Peter’s question. I have only attended conference on one occasion – this year in Liverpool. There was a motion to extend the strike action that the executive had recommended but that motion was defeated. However, I started teaching in 1990 and have been called to go on strike by the NUT for five days in total – which is approximately 0.1% of my 4,485 days of teaching.

MEL MEDAL, EMAIL: If you asked all professionals in the country, 90% of them would say they are not happy with their working conditions. What makes teachers special?

RG: I think there are lots of people who are very unhappy with their working conditions and I am certain that there are people who are much worse off than teachers. The action we are taking is defensive, not offensive – we want to stop the Government from attacking our terms and conditions. However, the action is not simply because we are (quite rightly) angry about these attacks on our terms and conditions but also because we believe that the Government’s plans for teaching and schools are detrimental to the education of our children. For example, the Government wants to bring in performance-related pay for teachers, which has a certain superficial appeal to it but will place one teacher against another and build in disincentives for teachers to share good practice. As a parent and school governor, I think it’s important that such plans are stopped.

STEVE BAINBRIDGE, PORTSLADE: Why is it that parents suffer the consequences of these walk-outs? Why can’t schools take the children for the day and get supply teachers?

RG: It is, of course, profoundly regrettable, that us parents and our children have to suffer the consequences of these walk-outs but the responsibility lies squarely with the Government. If the Government were to offer teachers the terms and conditions that we had when it took charge in 2010 then the strike would be called off tomorrow. As things stand, however, the Government has refused to engage in any meaningful negotiations with our representatives. We have lobbied our MPs, we have written letters and emails, we have marched, we have held meetings. These walk-outs are a last resort.

BARRY STEPHENSON, BOGNOR: How can you moan about workloads when you get six weeks off in the summer?

RG: Every teacher I know believes that those six weeks are vital in order to recharge the batteries. It’s perfectly fair to point out that few people (apart from MPs!) have such good holidays (some time of which, I should add, is taken up with marking, preparing lessons and schemes of work and so on). On the other hand, if the holidays made the job so cushy why is there currently a shortage of teachers at a time of high unemployment? Maybe you should consider a career change, Barry.

CATHY DOBBIN, WHITEHAWK: What is the union’s problem with the Government’s plans? What would make teachers reconsider striking?

RG: Great question. On pensions – expecting teachers to work to 68 is just so wrong. Ask the parent of any reception aged child if they would like a 68-year-old conscript teaching their four-year-old. But if the Government were to conduct a valuation of the teachers’ pension scheme which is five years overdue then it would be a start. The Government say teachers’ pensions are unaffordable but refuses to carry out this valuation. We can only speculate why. On performance-related and the abolition of national pay these proposals are unacceptable and should be withdrawn altogether or radically modified. We are also particularly concerned about the Government’s proposals for unqualified teachers and its proposals for teachers to become midday supervisors, to be required to do admin tasks, and its attack on planning and preparation time. It’s absolutely true to say that schools are not run for the benefit of teachers but having stressed out, exhausted teachers is not a good result for our children. We could fill up a few editions of The Argus with our list of grievances but to sum up, if the Government were to indicate it was ready to negotiate seriously on these issues, I’m certain our national representatives would respond positively.

RICHARD COOMBES, BEVENDEAN: What do you think about proposals to restrict retakes of exams? Will it make pupils take them more seriously first time round?

RG: From a purely personal point of view, I can see some merit in the Government’s argument that schools should be wary of entering pupils early for public exams but what has dismayed school leaders and governors across the country and across the political spectrum is the way this policy was announced at the very last minute. It has left head teachers with a real headache about whether or not to withdraw pupils who thought they were going to sit an exam in five weeks’ time. What would have been wrong with a consultation about this issue so that reforms could be introduced in a planned, consensual way? Sadly, this approach of initiatives on the hoof and a lack of preparedness to consult, has become a hallmark of this Government’s educational policy.

TERRY MIDDLETON, SHOREHAM: Teachers have been urged to put “our children’s futures” ahead of their problems with pensions by top politicians in recent weeks. Are teachers risking pupils’ futures by refusing to work?

RG: I honestly feel that having teachers at the age of 68 running round a football pitch, in front of difficult Year 10 classes, or teaching reception aged children is not a good result for the children of this country, particularly when young people are finding it so hard to get decent jobs. The hypocrisy of top politicians, who have so far failed to reform their own pension schemes, telling others to make sacrifices is especially annoying.

NATHAN HOLLOWAY, HOVE: Is the union doing anything to challenge the growing use of temporary classrooms in Sussex schools? Is it acceptable for any child to be taught in these classrooms?

RG: We would urge everyone, parents especially, to campaign for the proper funding for school expansion. The Government has a radical ideological position on only allowing schools to be built which are academies or free schools. Nationally this policy has failed to provide the country with sufficient capacity. It's a huge failure of this Government.

ANDREW ANTHONY, HOVE: Think-tank Policy Exchange claimed teachers might accept a pay deal over performance-related pay. Is this the case?

RG: I know very little about the Policy Exchange Unit except that it was founded by three Conservative MPs including a certain Michael Gove. I suspect they will be able to give better insight into the Government’s thinking than the thinking of the teaching unions. Speaking personally, I find it difficult to see what a compromise on this issue would look like. The concept of performance-related pay makes sense in some workplace environments but not in teaching, where judgements can be very subjective and where ascribing a monetary value to the input of an individual teacher can be very tricky. For example, a Year 6 class may achieve excellent results but part of their success might be due to the Year 5 teacher or a fantastic TA. An A-level physics class might have benefitted from an excellent maths teacher. How could it be possible to factor in the impact that private tutors might have made in a class’s exam results? What we do know about Performance Related Pay (PRP) is that the Victorians introduced it for teachers in 1861 and had the good sense to get rid of it 30 years later after the catastrophic effect it had on education. Incidentally, it was this very issue that led to the creation of the NUT! Furthermore there is no evidence that PRP for teachers improves pupil attainment – anywhere.

ROBERT MULLHOLLAND, TWITTER: Why are you intent on disrupting the education of the children? Striking will not alter Mr Gove’s mind.

RG: I genuinely feel you should ask the Government that question. We have not picked this fight, the Government has. In relation to its response to the strike, it’s very difficult to know. It’s much easier to predict the results of not resisting these attacks than it is to predict the result of resisting them.

NERYS ROBERTS, BRIGHTON: I’ve heard a lot of parents say “I’m not allowed to take my child out of school for holidays. If I do I get fined so I think I should fine the school or teacher £60 because they are going on strike”. I think this is rubbish – but I understand why parents say it. What do you think?

RG: I do understand the sense of frustration but I think the anger is misplaced – it should be directed at the Government who have embarked on a campaign eroding teachers’ terms and conditions to the detriment not just of the teachers but the children we teach.