New collective agreement concluded for teaching staff

Download article in original language : NL0304102FNL.DOC

In April 2003, following difficult negotiations, a new collective agreement for the Dutch primary and secondary education sector was concluded by the Minister of Education and the trade unions representing civil servants and teaching staff. One of the main issues that the new agreement seeks to address is the shortage of teaching staff that has affected the sector in previous years. However, there has been no major general increase in wage levels, which lag behind both those for both teachers in other countries and other highly-qualified workers in the Netherlands.

According to the findings of a survey carried out in 2003 by the education sector social partners under the aegis of the Sectoral Board for the Education Labour Market (Sectorbestuur Onderwijsarbeidsmarkt, SBO), relatively little public money is spent on education in the Netherlands (Investeren is terugverdienen. Kosten en baten van onderwijsinvesteringen[Invest to earn. Costs and benefits of education investments], SBO, The Hague, 2003). Recent decades have seen waves of cutbacks, with the proportion of gross national product (GNP) spent on education falling from 7.5% in 1972 – when the first cutbacks occurred – to 4.7% today. By comparison, other western countries spend an average of 5.7% of GNP on education. In terms of education expenditure, the Netherlands is currently at a level characteristic of former eastern bloc countries such as the Czech Republic. Furthermore, student numbers have risen dramatically. Calculated as the amount spent per student, expenditure has fallen since 1972 by 11.3% in higher vocational education and by 54% in university education. Education expenditure per student is now very low in comparison with the average for Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries in Europe.

For years, there have been calls for increased investment in education, in infrastructure - including buildings, information and communications technology (ICT) facilities and teaching material - but especially in teaching staff. While the previous government did invest in reducing the size of classes, in ICT and in facilities to cater for increased numbers of pupils and students, substantial investment in teachers' terms and conditions of employment was lacking. According to commentators, pay and conditions for teachers do not compete with those elsewhere, exacerbating the serious and growing shortage of staff in the sector. As a result, the willingness of education sector staff to strike or take other industrial action is relatively high.

Staff shortages pose major problem

The growing staff shortage is an important factor which contributes towards what is widely regarded as the diminishing quality of education in the Netherlands. Furthermore, improvements arising as a result of investments in other areas of education are sometimes cancelled out as a result of staff shortages. For example, in 2001 the Education Inspectorate asserted that quality gains arising as a result of smaller classes in primary education were being undermined by a lack of staff. A report published in 2002 by the Social and Cultural Planning Office (Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau, SCP) pointed to a high number of classes cancelled due to an absence of teachers (Ouders bij de les. Betrokkenheid van ouders bij de school van hun kinderen[Parents return to the classroom. Parental involvement in their children’s schooling], SCP, The Hague, 2002). Staff shortages in secondary education are especially chronic. According to forecasts made by the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science the 2002-3 school year will witness 2,750 teaching vacancies and the shortfall will swell to as many as 6,000 in 2006 and 10,000 in 2011. In primary education, the shortfall is most pronounced in terms of an increase in vacant head-teacher positions. Teaching staff shortages in primary education also fluctuate between 1,500 and 2,500. The Randstad conurbation is especially hard hit when it comes to staffing.

According to the Abvakabo public sector trade union affiliated to the Dutch Trade Union Federation (Federatie Nederlandse Vakbeweging, FNV), the most important precondition for the quality of education is investing in sufficient qualified staff. At the start of 2002, the unions and employers' organisations represented in SBO presented an integrated plan to reduce existing and future staff shortages. At the start of 2003, SBO once again attempted to draw attention to the plan in political circles, this time within the context of the new formation of a new government (NL0302101N). In addition to an inadequately equipped working environment, bottlenecks are identified by SBO in education staff's overly heavy workload and below-par terms and conditions of employment. To solve such problems, the government would have to increase spending on education by 1% of GNP, which would mean an extra government contribution of EUR 4 billion a year.

The position of teachers

A study carried out by the University of Amsterdam in 2002 finds that teachers in the Netherlands earn less than their counterparts abroad (Incentives in secondary education, JM Waterreus, Max Groote Kenniscentrum voor Beroepsonderwijs en Volwasseneneducatie, Amsterdam, 2002). Furthermore, on average, teachers in the Netherlands earn less than other highly-qualified employees outside the education sector to a greater extent than in other western countries. This is especially true for lecturers with an academic background. Teachers in the Netherlands also have to work longer hours for their wages than their colleagues abroad. For example, compared with 868 teaching hours a year in the Netherlands, teachers in Germany teach for only 685 hours and in France for only 589. Finally, workloads are higher for teachers in the Netherlands because of larger classes (an average of 18 pupils per teacher, compared with 15 elsewhere).

According to the report, countries in which teachers’ wages are comparable with those enjoyed by highly-qualified employees in other sectors, such as Germany and France, are not confronted with a general shortage of teaching staff. Apart from wage levels, high levels of unemployment in these countries are cited as a possible explanation.

New collective agreement

On 1 April 2003, following difficult negotiations, a new collective agreement for the primary and secondary education sector was reached by the Minister of Education and the trade union federations representing civil servants and teaching staff.

In the central 'social agreement' for 2003 concluded in November 2002 (NL0212101N), trade unions and employers' organisation agreed on a maximum pay increase limit of 2.5% for the 2003 bargaining round. In the education sector, the Minister of Education initially proposed a wage increase of 2.2% and agreement was finally reached on a rise of 2.25%, while the year-end bonus will be increased by a one-off amount of EUR 100. Critics point out that, as a result, the position of the education sector in competing for staff has worsened further - other sectors have agreed increases of 2.5% - doing little to improve the situation regarding staff shortages or heavy workloads.

Other measures in the new agreement are mainly directed at greater 'job differentiation'- ie creating a wider range of different teaching jobs and pay levels - initially by making more resources available. For example, funds will be released for support staff in primary schools, while upper-secondary vocational education – where staff shortages are most pronounced – will receive additional funds for differentiating the jobs of the teachers concerned. A second approach to job differentiation is to offer schools more leeway to develop their own employment and staffing policy, by increasing information related to school budgets and by pursuing a policy of deregulation and decentralisation. While the latter relates to 'secondary' conditions of employment, opportunities for decentralised employment regulation and evaluation will also be examined.

Finally, there are also measures directed at: better using incumbent staff (by encouraging them to work more than the standard annual 'package'); retaining new and more experienced teachers; and recruiting staff through 'cross-promotion' (ie classification on the teaching scale corresponding to a worker's last-earned salary outside the education sector).

Commentary

Despite arguments put forward by the social partners in the education sector that teachers’ wages should be increased to help attract highly educated individuals, wage moderation seems to have won in the new collective agreement. In fact, the agreed pay increases falls below the ceiling of 2.5% set in the central agreement. Consequently, the education sector now lags even further behind the other sectors.

A solution has thus not been sought to staff shortages through a general wage increase, but instead by way of job and wage differentiation in the broadest sense, in a drive both to retain incumbent employees and attract new staff. Support staff numbers will be increased, the opportunity of differentiating between various types of teachers will be expanded and the option of competence-linked pay is being studied at decentralised level. Wage differentials will also creep in by introducing specific classifications for 'cross-promotions' and making it more attractive for full-time teachers to work overtime.

The approach based on job and wage differentiation in education is certainly worthy of study, considering the lack of career opportunities afforded in the past. However, the unions warn against the danger of transferring teaching tasks to support staff. Additionally, care should be taken to avoid a potential negative gender effect by, for example, giving full-time teachers greater rewards. (Marian Schaapman, HSI)