1. Can the same LNCT/Job Contract terms be denied to some teachers but applied to others, despite the contract being identical?

2. Can LNCT/Job Contract be overridden by a new council cost saving policy? If so, how?

3. Can you be made redundant and asked to re apply to your own job, without a redundancy payment? This is downsizing a team from 2.5fte to 1fte. (LNCT says ‘first in last out’, am I right in saying Redundancy is scored and for two identical employees it’s also then down to ‘last in first out’?) (And I don’t think you can create a redundancy and then advertise the same job immediately?)

4. What redress or compensation might someone have who has been through a process of losing job against LNCT/Job Contract have? Twice – once in 2020 and again in 2024.

5. Any Teachers with EIS here? Currently EIS rep is shrugging shoulders and being chocolate fireguard/parroting employers statements without checking LNCT/Job Contract.

Go above the local rep.  Get on to regional officer or full time rep

Are you Edinburgh area? Terry Gray definitely knows his stuff, I used to work with him when we were both on the employers’ side. He helped  write the rules! https://www.eis.org.uk/area-offices/edinburgh-area-office

Unfortunately we’re Stirling.

Currently EIS rep is shrugging shoulders and being chocolate fireguard/parroting employers statements without checking LNCT/Job Contract.

Sadly, this is what I expect from the EIS. Contact the the main office and explain that the Local Rep is unable to provide clarity.

@matt_outandabout it’s about a hundred years since I dealt with any of this sort of stuff, but I think your answer to (2) lies in para 17 of a his ( if you’re in Stirling area):

17. Where a compulsory transfer has been identified in a secondary school and no suitable vacancy exists, no transfer will take place. The costs of the surplus teacher will remain with the school seeking to transfer until a transfer can be arranged and the teacher will be used to supplement the school’s internal cover arrangements. In exceptional circumstances, the Council may, however, seek to exercise its right to declare the post redundant in line with the Council’s Organisational Change policy.

https://www.snct.org.uk/library/1284/LNCTagr24conditions%20of%20transfer%20Sep10.doc

And on point 4, para 20 suggests to me that protection from repeated redeployment only last 2 years, so this would be 4 years and beyond that period.

IANALNCTspecialist etc.

I think Matt is talking about straight-up redundancy, not being declared surplus. I work in Clacks which I think has a “no-redundancy for teachers” policy, but Stirling will be different.

In exceptional circumstances, the Council may, however, seek to exercise its right to declare the post redundant in line with the Council’s Organisational Change policy.

Indeed that’s what’s being said. And that’s one area of LNCT being applied.

(But it’s not redundancy when all of them are effectively sacked and asked to reapply, with no redundancy to anyone…)

The ‘correct’ way is to go on first in last out. According to LNCT and Redundancy methods. We think. But apparently that clause of LNCT isn’t being applied.

We’ve precedent from 2020 of one more senior person being ‘protected’ and LNCT being cited as the reason, when today and in 2020 others more junior were told LNCT doesn’t apply to anyone. It seems they apply when it suits certain people, not evenly applied to all…

17. Where a compulsory transfer has been identified in a secondary school and no suitable vacancy exists, no transfer will take place.

She’s early years peripatetic.

I don’t think the LNCT was ever drawn up thinking about early years or peripatetic. Which creates grey areas…

I think Matt is talking about straight-up redundancy, not being declared surplus

That’s what’s being *said* – this is redundancy.i

It’s budgetary downsizing of a team. So is that surplus and redeployment should be offered?

And surely it cannot be redundancy unless you are compensated under redundancy rules? In this current situation 1 or 2 people will lose a job but no redundancy payment is offered….and that’s happened once already. Is that legal?

It all looks very dubious to me.  Redundancy as you state has certain rights.  Looks more like fire and hire to me.

I *think* it reads as though you should have the last in first out policy (assuming there are no voluntary transfers) until you get down to 1 from 2.5. Then the extra 1.5 would be subject to transfer procedures unless the council wanted to invoke the exceptional organisational change rule, at which point redundancy kicks in. I can’t actually find anything about making teachers redundant in the Stirling lnct contract, so perhaps they also have a no redundancy expectation. But if it’s a team and there’s already been some reorganisation or redeployment you may have promoted posts and preserved salary/status rules mixed in, which will complicate things – it also occurs to me, is the new/remaining post exactly the same as any of those going, or is it some sort of promoted post that doesn’t currently exist in the structure? I can see they might be able to get away with ‘goodbye all you standard posts, hello one new promoted post’. You deffo want your area/national rep involved I reckon. Some other LNCT areas have a specific policy about teachers’ redundancy (here’s the one for Angus https://www.snct.org.uk/library/2137/ajnct28_04.02.16.pdf but I can’t see one for Stirling).

it also occurs to me, is the new/remaining post exactly the same as any of those going, or is it some sort of promoted post that doesn’t currently exist in the structure?

Exactly the same post. Absolutely no difference in job description, pay scale or manager.

I *think* it reads as though you should have the last in first out policy (assuming there are no voluntary transfers) until you get down to 1 from 2.5. Then the extra 1.5 would be subject to transfer procedures unless the council wanted to invoke the exceptional organisational change rule, at which point redundancy kicks in

That sums up our reading of LNCT.

“Any Teachers with EIS here? Currently EIS rep is shrugging shoulders and being chocolate fireguard/parroting employers statements without checking LNCT/Job Contract” (still no quote button!)

Go straight to the EIS area rep or head office. School reps vary a lot and as soon as it’s dealing with local authority level stuff it should be the area rep rather than school rep.

If they are not abiding by the LNCT then the EIS should be able to challenge it.

“I don’t think the LNCT was ever drawn up thinking about early years or peripatetic”

This doesn’t matter, it’s the agreement that was signed between unions and authority and should apply to anyone employed as a teacher.

I’ve asked for a area/national contact for you. I’m a grumpy rep and have a few “let’s sort this out before I’m involved officially” conversations.
Situation isn’t correct. LNCT applies to all.
It’s an area rep vs HR/council situation. Peripatetic will be managed/contracted centrally.

Interestingly, some other councils have sections in their LNCT documents that cover peripatetic teachers, but Stirling does not. Stirling also doesn’t have as many LNCT agreements as most other councils, so perhaps it isn’t as active as elsewhere? Stirling wide rep is listed as ‘Ann Skillen and she can be contacted on 07432 133280 or emailed using stirling@eis.org.uk.’ It’s her name that’s on the LNCT agreements that do exist.

Outside of the LNCT contract as TJ says they can’t just fire and rehire (unless someone has less than 2 years service), the fire is redundancy. Everyone in the pool should be told they are at risk so consultations (a sham) can commence. This selected to leave are them made redundant with the entitlements they have in law.

The LNCT contract won’t over rule those basic rights, just enhance them. Last in first out is archaic and unless someone has been hired very recently is rarely used as a criteria in most redundancy situations. The redundancy criteria should be based on things like skill set, experience, contribution and absence.

Ann is so far no help.

We agree that LNCT applies fully, irrespective of the details of teacher deployment.

The clause 17 on compulsory transfer is written a) for secondary teachers and b) after other processes are exhausted.

They can’t apply clause 17 without applying all other clauses.

We have good evidence now that LNCT is not applied consistently between employees or even fully with each individual. Arguably its been applied in a discriminatory way.

We’re pretty sure that the Redundancy process both now and the one she went through in 2020 is illegal.

We know the last 1fte post will be cut again next year to zero. But while we can, mrs_oab would like the job she loves and is brilliant at to earn one last year of salary before being got rid of in August 2025.

It’s all mixed up with some pretty unsavoury behaviour and incompetence from those managing the process.

But while we can, mrs_oab would like the job she loves and is brilliant at

This is might well be out of your or the union’s hands but the EIS should at least try to ensure that proper procedure is followed.

Last in first out is archaic and unless someone has been hired very recently is rarely used as a criteria in most redundancy situations. The redundancy criteria should be based on things like skill set, experience, contribution and absence.

That’s interesting. There’s two almost perfectly identical colleagues. They’ve worked together for many years – so have both been through the same training and updates with the current employer.

The only difference is length of service, length of specific early years experience, and one has led on more projects recently.

This is might well be out of your or the union’s hands but the EIS should at least try to ensure that proper procedure is followed.

Agreed. We can’t stop the cuts, this year or next.

But they can damn well stick to the LNCT and the Union should be fighting for that.

Do you have any idea why the area rep has not taken this on? I’d ask that question directly, there may be some technicality you are unaware of.

I’m an EIS rep by the way!

She’s ‘taken it on’ but basically agreed with the employer that they can behave outside of LNCT, her reasoning being that you can’t stop the cuts so you may as well go with the process….The rep has overseen the same situation in 2020 and was useless then when 3fte posts were cut and multiple members made redundant without redundancy payment. I think she’s out of her depth. She’s also told mrs_oab that the peripatetic teachers are ‘not classroom teachers’, a line being used by employer to explain why LNCT is not being applied and the Organisational Change Plan takes precedent .

She’s got one last chance when the HR meeting happens in two weeks, but basically mrs_oab is having to do her own homework.

The replies on here have helped us shape a few basic questions for the HR meeting to show the inconsistencies and argue that mrs_oab should be retained, not her two colleagues.

The redundancy criteria should be based on things like skill set, experience, contribution and absence.

I have just re-read this. Absence could be an issue – mrs_oab has a chronic health condition which has had one period of extended absence a year ago and a few other shorter periods. She has HR & Occupational Health meetings each year and it is a protected characteristic. How might this play out against a ‘healthy’ colleague?

She’s ‘taken it on’ but basically agreed with the employer that they can behave outside of LNCT, her reasoning being that you can’t stop the cuts so you may as well go with the process….The rep has overseen the same situation in 2020 and was useless then when 3fte posts were cut and multiple members made redundant without redundancy payment. I think she’s out of her depth.

Obviously I don’t know all the details so I can’t really judge but on the surface this doesn’t sound right. Checking correct procedure has been applied and agreements followed is what union reps should do. It’s pretty much all they can do.

How might this play out against a ‘healthy’ colleague

Don’t assume it will be based on those criteria. Local Authorities in Scotland do not work like the private sector or even like schools in England.

If the absence is due to a protected characteristic and they tried to use that against her they’d be in trouble. Absence is usually cited when someone has duvetitist. Doesn’t stop you being made redundant because of the absence but it won’t be part of the criteria. As above though my experience is private sector where things are more, shall we say, fluid.

Worked for Stirling – not on a contract, started a 6 week cover for a secondment and the school bent lots of rules to keep me on. Hung on for 5 years and then turned 60. Was instantly out on my ear.

(left EIS when they negotiated a massive pay and conditions cut for supply teachers in 2010)

The rep has now arranged to get more advice on this, a real step forward.

Employer meanwhile we’re not going to engage with until a formal meeting is arranged and the union rep has proper advice.

The range of knowledge, experience and willingness to help on this forum is amazing 👏

The range of knowledge, experience and willingness to help on this forum is amazing 👏

All brought together by a lovely of cycling. 🙂

Joking aside, one person’s obscure knowledge is someone else’s day to day business.

It is great though!

We’re now 6.5 weeks since council publicly announced the cuts.

And no formal notification of what is happening or what the process is.

Apparently HR have sent out invite to voluntary severance. But have sent it to her old work email (council have changed her email twice and the old email doesn’t ‘bounce’).

Apparently she should have had notification, but it’s delayed. We think that council are getting more legal advice.

Union rep meeting with union legal advisors is next week.

Meanwhile mrs_oab is slowly crumbling under the stress and fear of no job by August, and before that the prospect of having to reapply for he job and fight her managers.

Sucks.

Time to take control and get out / take voluntary. I know a few people in this position who decided to leave, taking back some control took a lot of the pressure off. Long term would she want to stay where she is given the way she’s been treated?

No, but one more year of salary and pension, then voluntary would be good for all sorts of reasons….

No, but one more year of salary and pension, then voluntary would be good for all sorts of reasons….

do they have wind of that?  There’s enough identifying information in this thread that it certainly wouldn’t be hard to piece together who Mrs OAB is!

fwiw – whilst I’m not a teacher some of the basic redundancy stuff in the OP is so wrong that it sounds like some classic Chinese whispers going on unless the council are even more incompetent than usual.

Probably incompetent. I had similar when I was TUPED over to the council. Wasn’t until I got an employment lawyer involved that things changed. They simply thought they could do what they liked until it was pointed out to them that they were going against their own policies. Problem was it took a lawyer to point it out for them to accept it. I had already done everything the lawyer did.

do they have wind of that? There’s enough identifying information in this thread that it certainly wouldn’t be hard to piece together who Mrs OAB is!

That is the employers choice – manager has made it clear that the last remaining post will be put forward for the cut in 2025. So the fight for one last remaining post is for one year only.