The following are extracts from the final report of the 2023 arbitration panel.
12. In the arbitration hearings the panel has discussed with the parties two of the several options available to them for establishing a structured environment to address issues regarding pay and conditions that can usefully be addressed between bargaining rounds.
A standing committee or similar body
13. One is the establishment of a body in the nature of a standing committee comprised of representatives of the parties with an independent chair. We stress the need to appoint an independent chair to such a body. That person would have responsibility for ensuring that a respectful working environment exists between the parties and that topics raised for consideration by the committee are discussed and actioned in a timely manner.
14. We regard the establishment of such a body as a matter that should be given the highest priority by the parties and that the impending general election does not provide any impediment to the parties reaching agreement on what form that body should take. We also suggest that the claims of the PPTA identified by the panel in this report as benefiting from further discussions should be the basis of the first set of agenda items for the committee.
15. We suggest that the body should set “report back” dates along a timeline that will support both parties in their 2025 bargaining and minimise the risk of further industrial action.
16. We recognise that there would be a cost in the creation and support of such a body. We do not attempt to pre-empt the decision of the pares, working with the Independent Chair, about a resourcing mechanism. We observe, however, that meeting such a cost may be considered preferable to the financial and reputational cost of long-running disputes and industrial action, such as those which have preceded this arbitration.
17. .......
18. The following observations address the comments of the parties about a long-term solution to the determination of appropriate rates of pay that would minimise the need for industrial action in future bargaining rounds.
19. We refer to our discussions with the pares in the arbitration about the Ministry of Education School Teachers’ Review Body (STRB) in the United Kingdom. This is an independent body, established in 1991, that provides advice on the pay and conditions of schoolteachers in England to the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for Educaon. Specified in the Education Act 2002 (UK), the STRB is responsible for advising on pay and conditions for teachers in England. The report provides evidence-based recommendations and is presented to the Parliament. Before making recommendations, the STRB is required to consult certain organisations: teacher unions and associations, organisations representing school governing bodies, and local authorities. The government and the unions are not bound by the recommendations, but the provision of well researched, evidence-based recommendations provides a strong foundation for all pares to begin negotiations.
20. The panel acknowledges that any suggestions for legislative change for a similar body in New Zealand would require policy work approved by the Minister and consultation prior to the presentation of any proposal to the government of the day. We also acknowledge this could be a lengthy process, but we do not consider there needs to be any delay in beginning discussions about any such proposal.