First area for improvement will be maternity pay
In a move which should see the establishment of universal minimum pay and conditions for school support staff, the government has confirmed that it will set up the School Support Staff Negotiating Body (SSSNB). Having consulted on the matter last year, the government has now published its response to that consultation, with formal establishment of the SSSNB planned for Autumn this year. However, there won’t be any immediate changes to terms and conditions, with school support staff continuing to work under their existing arrangements for the 2026/27 financial year. The government says any recommendations from the SSSNB will come into effect from the 2027/28 financial year ‘at the earliest’.
The SSSNB will bring together trade unions and employer representatives to agree statutory minimum terms and conditions, but existing terms that exceed this will be protected. Where new minimums are set, those currently below them will see their terms improved, while those already on more favourable terms will retain them. Employers will also retain the flexibility to offer more than the statutory minimum, enabling them to respond to local needs and labour market conditions. The government has confirmed that the first area the SSSNB will look at is maternity pay. Any improvement would be the first national uplift to support staff maternity provision in 25 years.
The body will cover a wide range of school staff, including teaching assistants, school business professionals, administrative staff, technicians, and other non-teaching staff up to and including middle leadership roles. It applies to staff directly employed by local authorities, school governing bodies, and academy trusts in England. This includes staff who work for academy trusts from locations away from a school site, for example, administrative or finance staff based at a trust’s central office. The responses to the consultation showed very strong support for this approach, with nearly 92 per cent of respondents agreeing that those off-site employees should be included, to avoid creating different standards for staff doing similar work in different locations. However, senior leaders with strategic responsibilities, such as executive leaders and finance directors who oversee whole organisations, will not be included, as their roles are considered different from operational support roles.
Writing in the foreword to the government’s consultation response, education secretary Bridget Phillipson wrote: ‘More than half of the directly employed workforce in our schools are support staff…..For too long their voice has not been heard clearly by their employers or by the government, and the work they do has lacked the recognition it deserves. Too many do not feel properly rewarded for the contribution they make, and too often they decide to move on, leaving vacancies in the vital roles that support our children to succeed’. She added: ‘Moving to a dedicated negotiating body marks an important step forward, recognising the professionalism of this workforce, the importance of the trade union role, and providing a clearer framework for improving pay, conditions and career progression.’
Responding to the news, the NAHT’s Paul Whiteman hailed the ‘vital contribution’ made by school support staff, and said they deserved ‘a pay and conditions framework that helps recruit and retain the skilled workforce schools need’. He also welcomed that senior leaders with strategic responsibilities wouldn’t be covered by the SSSNB but warned that they shouldn’t be left ‘in limbo’, adding: ‘NAHT believes school business leaders should be recognised as part of the wider school leadership team, with pay and conditions aligned to leadership structures. The government must now work urgently with the profession to develop a clear and coherent framework for school business leaders and other senior strategic leaders.’
Emma Harrison, Business Leadership Specialist at the Association of School and College Leaders, also welcomed the exclusion of strategic leaders from the SSSNB but proposed a different way forward: ‘There is currently no national pay framework that specifically recognises business leadership roles and as a result there is a disparity in the level of pay and recognition in these roles. We believe the time has come for business and executive leaders to fall within the remit of the School Teachers’ Review Body (STRB) and be included in the STPCD (School Teachers’ Pay and Conditions Document).’