The Government's approach to the PCW pay agreement lacked any semblance of principle or coherent policy, the ASTI's general secretary, Mr Charlie Lennon, told the teacher union's annual convention in Killarney. "The consequences may be that that there will be insurmountable difficulties in reaching a new agreement," he warned.
"The public sector difficulties over the way in which the various PCW deals were negotiated and the consequential unfairness to those groups who operated within the framework of the agreement raises serious issues about the Government's approach to dealing with the implementation of such agreements."
Any new agreement would have to provide a mechanism to address the concerns of teachers who believed they were missing out on the benefits of a booming economy.
The length of the pay scale and the relatively low initial salary for graduates made it increasingly difficult for young teachers to obtain mortgages. "We hope to see action on that front in the near future," he said. ASTI had operated within the constraints of Partnership 2000 and accepted the majority decision on the agreement with the trade union movement. The concept of power involved sharing power and sharing responsibility for policy and other decisions.
"This is a difficult concept for those who have power, whether they are school owners, boards or civil servants or politicians. They are always most reluctant to abandon their authority in any measure at all," he said. However, the partnership approach had worked well at national level in education in some instances.
"Some progress had been made through the development of formal consultation structures. Many decisions though, were still being made behind closed doors and the consultation process was often ignored.
While Mr Lennon welcomed many aspects of the Education Act 1998, he noted that the union might find itself "willingly going to court" to seek implementation of some parts of the Act.
The ASTI might also find itself involved in complex legal action to defend its members and its interests. Mr Lennon was critical of the section of the Act relating to a student appeals system in schools. Improvements on earlier versions had been anticipated. "The situation after the enactment of the legislation," he said, "remains unclear and is open to the same interpretation as the original draft."
As a result of the Act, extensive and sometimes difficult negotiations were due to take place. These would involve school management, parents and teachers' representatives and the Department of Education and Science.