Levels of consultation – meaningful consultation and consultation with trade unions at school level over rarely cover - Shown as a table

Communicating the Policy to Staff

It might reasonably be assumed that an effective written policy and procedure for managing rarely cover is one that is communicated to all staff who are affected by it, where staff are familiar with the content of the policy and its associated procedures and where they understand fully the implications of policy for their own practice.

However, at the end of the first term of the statutory provision, two thirds of all respondents (69.8%) did not know what, if any, policy or procedures their schools had for managing rarely cover. The situation was even worse for primary phase respondents, where nine in ten indicated that at the end of the first term they did not know the content of the schoolʼs rarely cover policy and procedures.

Planning School Calendars and Timetables

Since 2008, schools have been required to consult with staff and trade unions prior to publishing an annual calendar setting out the activities that will take place during the year. Schools are able to review and revise their calendars in light of significant educational developments, although, as the STPCD guidance makes clear, such revisions should not be frequent. Schools are also required to provide each teacher with a timetable setting out the teachersʼ expectations for teaching, planning, preparation and assessment (PPA) time and the provision of other non-contact time. These new requirements were not as a result of the introduction of the rarely cover provisions, although it can be said that rarely cover has heightened the importance of securing these arrangements both for schools and staff.

The vast majority of respondents (91%) said their schools published a school calendar that sets out the schoolʼs activities for the year and most, albeit a smaller proportion of respondents (82.2%), said their schools provided them with a timetable for the year setting out their teaching and other commitments.

It should be noted that prior to 2009, schools were not prohibited from timetabling teachers to undertake periods of cover, regardless of their contract of employment. However, the 2009 STPCD meant that schools were no longer able to do so and it prohibited the inclusion of cover on the timetables of teachers or headteachers, other than those who had a contract of employment to wholly or mainly undertake cover for absence.

Despite this, more than one third of all respondents (35.6%) said that for the period since 1 September 2009, their timetables included periods when they might be required by their school to provide cover for absence. It is important to note that these respondents did not have a contract of employment that

Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12