Abolition of sick cover for teachers criticised

THE ABOLITION of a scheme that provides a panel of supply teachers to cover sick leave for some primary schools is “shortsighted” and will affect disadvantaged schools hardest, the Irish National Teachers’ Organisation (INTO) has said.

As part of Budget 2010, Minister for Education Batt O’Keeffe announced he would discontinue the Supply Panel Scheme this September. The scheme was piloted in 1993 and extended and made permanent in 1998.

Its purpose was to provide substitute cover for teachers absent for up to four weeks. It also provided relief for teaching principals to allow them to concentrate on administrative duties and supply teachers were also available to host schools as an additional resource.

Some 60 staff are currently employed full time under the scheme and are available to 212 schools grouped in clusters around 17 host schools. Schemes are in operation in Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Kilkenny, Galway, Athlone, Dundalk, Monaghan, Donegal, Mayo and Wexford.

If the panel is abolished, most of the 60 teachers will be redeployed to other posts, but some who are temporary, may not have full redeployment entitlements.

The INTO has said axing the scheme is shortsighted and it is the schools and pupils that will miss out.

Sheila Nunan, incoming general secretary of the union, said sourcing substitute teachers will be more difficult, particularly for disadvantaged schools, which often experience difficulty employing substitute teachers.

She said the scheme is cost-neutral but the proposal to axe it could end up costing more.

A spokesman for Mr O’Keeffe said it made sense and was more cost-effective to use the normal substitution arrangements applying to all other schools to cover sick leave absences instead of having a cohort of full-time teachers on call all the time to cover sick leave absences that may or may not arise.

“A value-for-money review published in July 2006 found that about 60 per cent of supply teachers’ time was used to cover sick leave absences with the balance on various other school duties,” he said.

Separately, Impact, the public and services union, has called on Green Party education spokesman Paul Gogarty to speak out about cuts in special needs assistants (SNAs). The union said an estimated 1,200 SNA jobs would be lost due to cutbacks. Some 10,342 SNAs are employed in both primary and secondary schools at present.

Impact official Philip Mullen said while he could understand why Mr Gogarty may feel obliged to stick with the Government line on this issue, he had not even responded to union correspondence.

“Meanwhile, jobs are being lost, vulnerable children have lost services or had them reduced, while parents and teachers are understandably anxious, but he says absolutely nothing,” he said.

Mr Gogarty said he did not recall a request from the union for any meeting.

He said he did support the relocation of resources used where there had been over deployment, but the Green Party had an agreement to ringfence any money saved to finance additional educational psychologists.

He also said he had some concerns that some SNA posts are already being earmarked for removal, in advance of the completion of a review of the scheme and had raised these with the Minister.

Also yesterday, second-level management bodies met the National Association of Principals and Deputy Principals to discuss the loss of assistant principal posts in schools.

They have called for a meeting with the Minister for Education to discuss the losses.