The SSTUWA has held a number of IPS forums for members to assist them in understanding the concerns the our union has with the direction of this program.

Senior Officers and Industrial staff are available to speak to your school community if you are considering applying to be in the IPS program. It is very important a school community [staff and parents] is provided with the opportunity to understand all issues associated with the introduction of this program into the public education system.

I note, it has just come to the attention of the SSTUWA that a trial of a similar structure has been undertaken in 47 schools in NSW. The leaking of a dcoument by Boston Consulting indicates that such directions are clearly associated with moves to school closures and general cost cutting in the NSW Education Department. The schools who entered the trial in ‘good faith’ now have grave concerns at the move towards greater autonomy and one-line budgetting. See www.nswtf.org.au for further details.

FUNDAMENTALS WHICH SHOULD BE IN PLACE BEFORE A DECISION IS MADE BY A SCHOOL COMMUNITY

• A clear and agreed mechanism to determine the view of the school’s community (parents and staff)
• Opportunity to clarify what being a IPS may mean, including
  • (a) upfront intentions around the use of the various flexibilities; and
  • (b) no commitments or expectations which are counter to the industrial agreements of staff members
• A forum by which the school community can hear alternate views on the matter of IPS
• Public availability of the proposal intending to be forwarded to the Director General in the event that an application is supported
• A constitutionally viable School Council

SOME ISSUES COMING TO THE FORE

• Unilateral changes to staffing profiles with loss of administrative positions;
• Loss of specialist teacher positions;
• Decrease in number of schools available for Referred Teachers;
• Inferences that staff with Referred Teacher status may be of less quality;
• Referred Teachers / Administrators as super numerary in schools;
• Policy changes which risk leaving broad and varied interpretations workplace by workplace;
• Increased workload demands;
• Lack of transparency and tensions around consultation
• A belief that that if ‘sick leave credits’ in the salary pool are spent then sick leave is not available – NOT TRUE

Current context (a) AMENDOLA REPORT

The Barnett Government released the Amendola Report in December 2010, after sitting on it for over14 months. Amendola was one of the architect’s of Howard’s Work Choices. We have on the table again the spectre of individual contracts, removal of the concept of ‘bargaining in good faith, gutting of the WAIRC ... and much more. In the context of IPS this is very worrying. KEEP YOURSELF INFORMED.

Current context (b) Treasury and 3% budget cuts

Early in its term of office the Barnett Government received the Economic Audit Review. Arising out of the review was a recommendation that the budgets’ of public sector agencies be cut. This applied to the Department of Education. Despite what have been significant cuts by DoE, the Treasurer is berating the Minister and the Department for failing to meet the required cuts ... over 3%. How confident are we that the extra dollars being seen in IPS will continue?

In the USA, the Charter School Movement [similar to IPS] has commenced significant campaigning in the face of declining budgets.

Current context (c) Log of Claims Negotiations [Schools]

The Barnett Government’s wages policy for the public sector is 9.5% over three years with a possibility of up to 13.25% with trade-offs. BUT ... the quantum of between 9.5% and 13.5% has to serve for salary increases as well as any costs associated with improvements in working conditions. How confident can we be in the provision of appropriate levels of support and funding in our schools.