UNEMPLOYED TEACHERS

Evening Star, Issue 21005, 20 January 1932, Page 10

UNEMPLOYED TEACHERS

SCHEME FOR RATIONING WORK DEPARTMENT'S SCHEME ADOPTED OTAGO BOARD SUGGESTS MODIFICATIONS The scheme of the Education Department for the rationing of work among unemployed teachers was discussed this morning by the Otago Education Board, which adopted the proposals but asked that the board should be allowed to introduce some modifications with the object of doing a little more for those who would have been probationary assistants next year. The following report on the subject was submitted to the board: —

“The department has submitted a scheme under which the following positions are all to be treated as relieving positions:—Probationary and substitute assistant positions; additional assistant positions, and ordinary relieving positions. Salary' to be at the rate of £IOO p.a., plus boarding allowance of £36 p.a. and travelling expenses. The scheme was considered by a sub-committee of the board, and discussed with the director, and the following memorandum was sent the department : ‘‘ ‘The board has applied the scheme to the Otago district, and finds that each unemployed teacher will receive, on the basis of the number at the beginning of the year, about seven and a-half months’ work at the rate of £IOO p.a. If allowance is made for those who will secure permanent apnointments, etc., the period of relieving work will be increased by a month or more. The hoard observes that under this sceme, which has the approval of the N.Z.E.1., only one class of teacher is being asked to help the unemployed—viz., the ex-college students, who would have been probationary assistants next-year. They are to be deprived of a considerable amount of salary and some months’ training. The board recognises that this can be done without breaking a regulation, but, through custom, the year’s work as probationary assistant for division | A students has come to be looked upon as part of the training contract, and to curtail it is practically a breach of faith.’

“ ‘ The board realises that something should be done for the unemployed even if, as under this scheme, it is only a matter of asking them to help themselves, and ,it therefore suggests a slight modification with the object of doing a little more for those who would have been probationary assistants next year. “ ‘ The board’s proposal is that the division A students leaving college be regarded as relieving teachers in the forty-six probationary assistant positions for the whole year, and receive salary at the rate of £IOO p.a., plus boarding allowance for any who may have to live away from home. This w'ould reduce the period of relieving for the others by very little—the board anticipates by not more than three weeks each. “ ‘ The hoard trusts that the department will approve,, of the board’s alteration, or if it does not see fit to depart from its own scheme, that this board be given a free hand to ration the work as proposed.’ “ The department has now replied that it is of opinion that to effect the greatest relief it is advisable to apply the scheme as it was drafted; that to give a full year’s employment as has been suggested to the students who left the colleges at the end of last year would render the scheme much less effective for'the purpose for which it was framed.”

The Chairman (Mr J. Wallace} said that in times like the present he did not likp to •be too critical, but he thought that the department, if not actually breaking a contract, was breaking an implied contract with the students who were leaving college and who would have been appointed to probationary assistant positions. It was a most important part of the training of ex-college students that they should be placed on their own in this way under a headmaster, and he thought the department was doing an injustice not only in the matter of payment but also in the matter of training of the students coming out of college. He was surprised that the Educational Institute had agreed to the scheme', but, of course, that was its business. It seemed to be another case of the department theorising and leaving the practical work to the hoards. It was easy to put students into a job for a term, but, when it came to other relieving jobs, the board knew that they ran from one week to three months. The working of the scheme would be difficult—he thought it would beat the secretary, the board, and the department itself. Though the scheme of the department was an endeavour to do the best for the whole of the teachers, the board thought it should be exceedingly wide in its interpretation. The department should leave the boards to use their own discretion. A committee of the hoard had met the Director of Education, and stated that, if the board’s proposals cost the department any more money the hoard would pay it. That had not been taken any notice of by the department! Mr Cooper asked if the department guaranteed employment to the students who went through college. The Chairman said the bond into which the students entered was a onesided document. It stated that the students must teach, but it did not say jobs would he provided. Mr Wilkinson pointed out that, while he recognised the department was anxious to do all it possibly could for unemployed teachers, ho thought the scheme might ,not work out well in particular districts. The Hon. D. T. 'Fleming said he waa surprised the department had not fallen in with some of the board’s suggestions. He thought the director recognised that there should be some flexibility. The speaker thought they should adopo the scheme generally, and reserve the right of a certain amount of freedom. He thought the department would agree to certain modifications. The suggestions of the hoard would not break down the scheme, but, on the other hand, would improve it. On the motion of the Hon. D. T. Fleming it was decided “that the hoard approves of the scheme of the department, and assures the department it would do its best to carry it out, hut points out that the board might require modifications from time to time, and guarantees that the cost to the department will not he exceeded.”