Students or Employees?

The STANZ's position is that teacher trainees are employees and should be recognised as such by the inclusion of their allowances under the provisions of the State Services Conditions of Employment Act, 1977. In fact, the actual status of the allowances has been in a state of flux for several years now. Prior to 1969 teacher trainees were included under the provisions of the Education Act, 1964 and the Government Services Tribunal Act as members of the education services. As such their income was a 'salary' negotiable by the appropriate service organisations (PPTA, NZFKTA, NZEI) under the auspices of the Government Service Tribunal.

After the passage of the State Services Conditions of Employment and Remuneration Act, 1969, which superceded the above legislation it was discovered that teacher trainees had been accidently (or purposely?) excluded. Despite this exclusion the allowances were negotiated in 1972 and 1974 with the Education Service Committee by the interested parties as if they were subject to the provisions of the Act.

In effect, therefore, they were being treated as salaries, subject to tax and superannuation deductions, even though they did not have this status legally. This continues to be the case today.

In 1975, however, the then Labour Government took advantage of this situation to initiate an all-out attack on teacher trainee allowances with little or no prior consultation with the STANZ and NZUSA. In the budget of that year it was announced that teacher trainees would receive the standard tertiary bursary. This amounted to an attempt to undermine the solidarity between students and their organisation by taking from one group in order to give to another. Fortunately this attempt at 'divide and rule' was unsuccessful.

The STANZ fought a successful campaign with the support of NZUSA, NZTISA, the other teacher organisations, and some backbench Labour MPs such as Russell Marshall and Mike Moore to have the budget provision reversed. In the face of massive opposition the Government had no choice but to back down and accept the maintenance of the status-quo with regard to the allowances. This campaign, more than anything else, emphasised the importance of student unity of purpose on all matters affecting their livelihood and conditions of service.

In 1976, however, the attacks continued; this time under a National Government, acting in direct contradiction of its stated election policy of retaining teacher trainee allowances at their current level. The Government decreed that teacher trainees were not eligible for cost-of-living adjustments. Teacher trainees were understandably incensed. The effect of the action would have been to steadily devalue the level of the allowances over a number of years - basically a back-door method of achieving the same goals as the previous Government.

Once again the STANZ and other organisations forced a reversal of this action and the allowances retained their increasingly tenous status. During both 1976 and 1977 the STANZ and NZUSA argued that no decision should be made on the long term future of teacher trainee allowances until such time as a thorough enquiry had been conducted into all aspects of teacher training. In 1976, such an enquiry was, in fact, initiated by the Minister of Education under the auspices of the Review of Teacher Training. Now, three years later, the report of that review has been completed and will be ready for publication in the very near future.

While the Review of Teacher Training was in progress the Minister of Education, Mr Gandar, gave repeated assurances that there would be no decision on the future of teacher trainee allowances until such time as this review is completed and its report made public. In spite of Mr Gandar's assurances, members of his department have continued to work against the long-term interests of teacher trainees by attempting to initiate an examination of the allowances within the context of the Review of Financial Assistance for Post School Study (the Bursaries Working Party).

As recently as 9 February, this year, the new Minister of Education reiterated Mr Gandar's assurances during a meeting with members of the NZUSA national office. Just two weeks and four days later, however, it became clear that the situation had altered drastically. This time, during discussion with a STANZ delegation Mr Wellington refused to give any such assurance. Why had be changed his mind?

The next day, 28 February, the infamous leak appeared in the Wellington Evening Post (quite by coincidence?). Could it be that Mr Wellington and his department have realised that the Review of Teacher Training is not going to come forward with the, hoped for, recommendations. If, the recommendations of the Review are indeed ignored, it will be an act of gross irresponsibility on the part of the Government.