24 June 2019

Newsletter Articles

Principals supporting Principals… Principals supporting Principles!

Kia Ora

Please find this week’s Monday Mailing below.

What a great three days the Wellington Study tour was. It was enlightening to see some of the challenges and innovation that our colleagues down there were involved in. It often makes you appreciate what you have at home.

The discussion with the Minister and other ministers has hopefully opened a door for more dialogue in the future.

Thanks WPA for giving all the opportunity to share in the experience.

Have a great week, end of term is close.

Kind regards
Tony Mangan
Glenview School

WPA Dates

Principal Response to the Response:

It was with a great deal of interest that I read the latest Waikato Principals Association newsletter especially the opinion piece ‘Principal Response to Pay Offer’ written by Hamish Fenemor, Principal Cambridge East Primary School. Hamish expressed his disappointment and outlined his thinking about the current Contract outcomes for Primary Principals. Hamish says he would be happy to receive Principal Feedback on his comments and I hope that generous offer extends to Retired Principals.

Two aspects of his comments particularly raised concerns for me, his comments on (i) Principal Representation and (ii) the place of the NZEI.

First and foremost, I should put into context as to who I am, or more relevantly, who I once was!

Steve Ostermann, Associate member of the NZEI Te Riu Roa, former Principal of Woodstock Primary School in Hamilton, former Chair of the Waikato NZEI Principals Council and Former Chair of the Waikato NZEI Counsellors and Advocates.

Hamish I believe made some very good points and posed some very good questions and/or statements namely;

1. He was pleased about the movement in the Teachers Collective
2. His disappointment that Principals seem to be the forgotten party …’
3. The concern he expressed about the negative effect of the proposed 8 TOD’s.
4. The comment about unfair relativity of pay scales in the U1-3 Principals as compared to DP’s/AP’s in large schools.
5. His acknowledgement of the hard work put in by the NZEI negotiators on behalf of members including of course, member Principals
6. Advocating giving the NZEI the opportunity to respond to the concerns around the Principal Pay offer.

I particularly agree with Hamish being disappointed about Principal Contract outcomes especially about the resulting disparities between the U1-3 Principals and DP’s/AP’s pay being of huge concern. That’s not right. That’s unacceptable.

What concerns me is in regard to the following statements;

1. ‘at this time we need change’
2. ‘Principals need different Representation’
3. ‘ .. things have always been difficult for Principals under the NZEI umbrella, especially during times of Competency and Discipline discussions’.

To begin with, I will state that some of the principal’ contract negotiators were in fact, NZEI Principals from our Teaching Communities. There were also Principals representing the NZPF who were part of that as well.

I am unsure and a bit confused as to what Hamish actually meant by ‘different representation?’ for Principals. Did he mean representation (other than the NZEI) with regard to:

1. Principal Pay and Conditions Contract negotiations or
2. Industrial/Personnel action or
3. Personal support
4. a combination of all of the above

Perhaps Hamish could clarify this.

I read a comment (in Social media) written by a local Principal that ‘he hopes that those principals who feel disappointed, angry, hurt or let down with this offer, also take more time to allow those emotions to wash off and cooler heads to come to terms with the challenge of voting (either way) and the implications of their decisions and its impact. I hope that this does not become our ‘Brexit’ moment for principals’ I would concur with the sentiments expressed in this statement.

My response to Hamish is that by all means think about what ‘other Principal representation’ may mean and give serious thought to the implications. The assumption I take from the comment, means Principals leaving the NZEI. That’s a very serious consequence indeed.

There is an old, simple adage, clichéd, but apt for this circumstance is: ‘United we stand … divided we fall’.

My advice to principals is: go with what you already have and if you are unhappy with that, personally invest time and effort to improve it. Throughout our NZEI history many sacrifices have been made by members and that includes countless Principals.

I am reminded of a parliamentary speech I read, many years ago, in which a MP quoted a poem by an unknown Proletarian … which is believed to be a based on a Rudyard Kipling Poem;

‘We have feed you for a thousand years …
And here we are we’re still unfed …
For that was our doom you know
From the days when you worked us in your fields …
To the strike a week ago …
If blood be the price of your cursed wealth, Good God we have bought it fair!’ …

NZEI Principals have given their ‘blood’ and ‘bought it fair’ since the NZEI was founded in 1883.

NZEI Principals have forever been ‘change agents’ and ‘activists’. They have worked within and throughout the NZEI to improve the lot of all teachers and that includes Principals. Primary Principals have always been an important, essential and integral part of the NZEI, at all levels. For the NZEI to lose them would, in my opinion, be a tragedy which will have far reaching and irreversible consequences.

I would contend that Principals don’t need change in Representation … they don’t need to form ‘or explore other options for Primary Principal Representation’ … in my opinion, what they do need to do though, is to take a more active and involved part in the activities of NZEI Te Riu Roa. There are many opportunities at all levels, Local NZEI Branch, NZEI Area Principals Council (both at Waikato and National level) or by becoming a NZEI Support Person. Principal Voice in the NZEI, whilst strong, could be greatly strengthened in this way.

Without Principals, NZEI Te Riu Roa would be a poorer place. A split and fractured Union would be picked off easily. Principals should consider, whether, or not, changing representation could be the ultimate act of self-destruction. No doubt there will be people who would really enjoy seeing such an event happen. Many Neo Liberalist Politicians to start with! Changing the way Principals are represented may well result in Principals having to individually represent themselves! I urge all principals to be very wary of this.

Moving out of a ‘Collective Agreement’ opens the way for Individual Contracts to be introduced. There is no doubt about this. These would of course be controlled by Boards of Trustees who would of course be advised by the NZSTA. Is that desirable?

Many experienced Principals will recall what happened (circa 1991/1992) when Principals had to go to their Boards of Trustees and ask them for a Pay increase. Boards had the right to decide whether or not a Principal ‘deserved’ a Discretionary Allowance. This resulted in much stress for Principals, especially for those with difficult Boards and most particularly, for many Rural School Principals. This was a most unsatisfactory situation. The Government of the day wanted to introduce Individual Contracts for Principals.

The other suggestion from Hamish that … ‘things are very difficult for Principals under the NZEI umbrella especially in Competency and Discipline discussions’. This statement confuses me a little. The comment seems, by implication, to suggest the NZEI is the cause of that difficulty. If that is so, I would take strong exception and refute that strongly.

I would be the first to acknowledge that for Principals managing Competency and Discipline issues, it is indeed one of the most difficult, and stressful, actions to undertake. It is threatening for all concerned. Careers, livelihoods, self-esteem and mental well-being are all at risk, including pupils and parents. These are very high stakes issues for everyone.

NZEI does not, and never has, ever, supported ‘incompetency’. Representatives of the NZEI are there to ensure that, for Teachers (and that includes Principals), the correct legal procedures (as dictated by the Collective Agreement) are followed and that the Principles of Natural Justice can be seen to be enacted for its members. Is it this that Hamish makes reference to as being the ‘difficulty’ for Principals? That has never been ‘easy’.

Principals are the only ones who can initiate Competency and/or Discipline procedures and therefore, ipso facto, they become the ‘Employer’. NZEI cannot represent them in this situation. NZEI can however, supply personal support to Principals and if asked, advice and guidance. In the past, this has happened, often.

I was heartened to read that Hamish advocates giving the NZEI the opportunity to respond to and address the disappointment and concerns of Principals about their latest Pay Offer. Let that happen first before making any decision.

‘I’ in NZEI, means ‘Institute’. It is not just a ‘Union’ … and those that know that understand there is a profound difference between the two.

NZEI is the sum of all its members. It is Democracy in its working. It is led by its members. It relies on strong leadership supported by loyal and faithful members. It has been over 136 years in the making! Historically NZEI Presidents have been strongly represented from Principal ranks, both women and men (I have known many of them).

I would be saddened if that were to change and/or weakened.

Steve Ostermann

From Your President

A big thank you to those who joined us last week in Wellington which was a highly successful outing for the WPA. We saw a wide range of schools who were very clear in their message and what they were trying to achieve within their own school setting. The most exciting part was the use of student and community voice and data, the use of research to back up what each of the schools was trying to achieve and the fact that they had taken the time to adapt to formulate models and systems that worked for their own setting.

There is no doubt for many, that the time we spent at Parliament was a highlight of the trip. We held court with Minister Hipkins and Associate Minister Martin for well over an hour and got the opportunity to share and hear responses directed from them, rather than what is watered down or beaten up via the media. This is something that the Minister wants to improve, a direct line to principals.

The Minister spoke openly that things aren’t right and outlined the areas of concern that highlighted, that he is listening, but very much stuck to the line that it will take time. There are significant announcements to come around growth and meeting the demands of growth moving forward. He highlighted that $150 / removal of donations is going to require some extra work, especially around the costs of camps. He acknowledges that Operational Funding, particularly around relieving will need a shot in the arm if the Teachers Collective is given a green light this week.

One of the biggest relief movements was when Associate Minister Martin outlined that schools will directly receive the FTTE for the soon to be appointment Learning Support roles, these will have a Nationwide Job Description to help outline expectations of the role but for purposes, it would appear schools will receive this extra funding with smaller rural areas receiving a higher allocation to help with isolation.

I would like to thank Tony Mangan, Geoff Booth and Nathan Leith for their efforts in the background to ensure this was another successful event for the WPA.

Hamish’s Response

While I was away, I had the opportunity to discuss my piece from last week with many colleagues. I reminded them that this week we get a chance to vote which would appear we will be asking NZEI to go back to the table.

On Sunday evening, I received a response from Steve Ostermann (included in this Monday Mailing) who has been a spearhead of the Waikato Branch of the Principal Council of NZEI for many years. Steve has requested that his response is shared with members to provide a different view. I’m unsure what is different as he calls for calm to allow the NZEI team to get back around the negotiating table which has been my stance from the start!

He seeks clarification around representation of Principals moving forward, what he probably isn’t hearing directly from those in principalship is that they are concerned that the principal voice has been completely lost in these negotiations and in essence, NZEI has lost the voice of Principals in recent years and over the last few collective negotiations. Principals (not Hamish Fenemor) are looking for and actively seeking alternative representation, be it NZPF or through SPANZ (changing the name from Secondary to Schools). It has been pleasing to see NZPF step in to work with NZEI as they try to pave a constructive way forward. I was simply gauging the waters if this was the case across the Waikato and did the WPA need to be prepared to step into this space to provide leadership during these difficult times. BUT I’m glad that Steve has noticed that my bottom line was to give NZEI the chance to address Principals’ concerns. Something I believe they have heard and they await the outcome of voting before they proceed.

I would like to point out how things have become difficult during mediation and how Principals have been put in awkward positions as a result of negotiations. This was highlighted by an NZEI staff member at our recent Connections Day. This staff member highlighted our duty as Principals around compulsory reporting to the Education (back to Teachers) Council around serious mis-conduct but the simple fact of the matter, is NZEI negotiation teams are placing a 12 month suspension clause in which means Principals careers are on the line if Boards choose to accept deals that have this clause in it. While I’m unaware of any cases where over the 12 month period there has been any issues, it is only time until this is tested and a Principal will be hauled in front of the Teachers Council to please explain…..this is what I mean by the waters have been muddied by NZEI….NZEI is now putting Principals careers on the line, and at this time with no support for the Principal. The Board Members who are involved during these mediation sessions jobs aren’t personally being put on the line, no one is there to support the Principal which is now of grave concern! This is something that has happened in recent years but is becoming more common a practice that needs to stop!

Steve raises some very good points around Principals need to get more involved with NZEI if they are not happy with what is currently happening. I know there are many of you out there that have struggled with NZEI’s approach to negotiations, the continual barrage of negativity about a profession we love and do because we want to make a difference, money isn’t really a driver. Many that I have spoken to don’t agree with strikes and see once Teachers settle (which isn’t a done deal but looking more positive) we lose the power of numbers. The Minister looks at the fact that all schools have a name against the Principal Column, this cannot be said about every classroom.

NZEI has lost touch of the principal’s voice and we cannot throw stones if we aren’t getting involved but NZEI needs to look at themselves as well, if principals aren’t engaging with their sector groups.

While at Parliament, Minister Jan Tinetti outlined the difference between NZEI and NZPF for example, that NZEI resources are huge in comparison to that of NZPF or SPANZ and if we broke away as a principal group from NZEI (as highlighted by Steve) this would water down our traction and would be a huge risk. We would like NZEI to make better use of this resource ($24 per fortnight x 26 pays = $624 per year x 2000 principal members = $1,248,000 per year) and do a better job of breaking the Principal Collective away from the same timing as Teachers. The Minister made a personal observation that this has been a distraction for Principals, Teachers negotiations happening at the same time and the two collectives being separated out.

Hopefully we can get an end to this mess so we can get on with the important work of teaching and learning without distractions.

Thanks for your response Steve, I’m more than happy to have it published out of respect for the work you have done over the years for WPC and NZEI. It would appear from the responses that did come back (personally to me) from my piece last week, that we need an NZEI response to the Principal Collective to get a better outcome.

Regards
Hamish Fenemor

Trots night. Friday 30th August (registration is now open, 40% of the tables have already gone)

Follow link to register:

Laugh

Remember our sponsors, support those that support us

Schoolzine

Schoolzine is proud to be a digital partner and supporter of Waikato Principals' Association.

Schoolzine has been an industry leader in digital school communications for 14 years. They are dedicated to customer service, product development and understanding the school landscape that keeps them at the top of the industry. Schoolzine’s Parent Engagement Platform consists of 3 packages, an eNewsletter, Mobile App and Website offering. Purchased separately or together, they guarantee each package will make engaging with parents easy and even enjoyable for a school of any size. Schoolzine addresses the need for media-rich, interactive content that engages parents.