The national union needs to lead

Hi Nick

I read your criticism of Martin's proposed amendment of the Camden motion. In effect your argument amounts to this: cover supervisors are a fact of life in lots of schools so let's roll over and play dead and do nothing about it.Your comments make no mention of the longer term threat posed by unqualified staff taking on the responsibilities of teachers. Once cover supervisors are accepted in most schools then many head teachers will start using them to take on other jobs carried out by teachers. Cover supervisors are the thin end of the wedge. A work colleague of mine told me about a school where unqualified staff not only do cover but also are used to teach classes. Where do you draw the line?

The main argument of your article misses the point about action over cover supervisors. The national union needs to campaign to defend the jobs of our supply teacher members. It can't be just left to individual schools to fight on their own; which is what you imply. The national leadership have pursued this strategy for the last few years and look where it has got us. Thousands of teachers have lost out over the introduction of TLR payments precisely because there was no national coordinated campaign. Individual schools were left to fight on their own. In many schools NUT members felt isolated and lacked confidence having to fight on their own.

In my own school no teachers lost out over the introduction of TLR's no thanks to the national union.Three years ago we also fought off the introduction of cover supervisors. We had to fight on our own. Many members are tired of having to fight on their own. They need the confidence of being part of a national campaign, which is what Martin's amendment is calling for.

Dylan Murphy Kirklees NUT