1.—13 a.

98

[a. erskine.

we have since thought was necessary, and I ask permission to put in another table, which explains the whole matter in detail. There was a little confusion between Grades 111 and IV in the statement that we put in, and I wish to clear that up. [Table handed in by witness, as follows] : —

Grades proposed — For Salaries only.

I wish that detailed table to go in in place of the one appearing on page 6of our statement. I desire now to explain the suggestions that we make with regard to the alterations in the scale. In the Bill there are seven grades of schools instead of ten, and therefore seven grades of salary instead of ten. The Institute is specially pleased with the larger range given in the case of salaries in that particular, but it has certain suggestions to offer which it considers would make an improvement in the scale. I wish to refer, first of all, to Grade 111. In the Bill Grade 111 is in two sections —A and B—in which there are 623 teachers, all earning a salary of £200 to £250. I may say that the figures we give in regard to schools are the nearest we have at our disposal; they are not the latest, but they will be quite satisfactory as far as what we wish to illustrate is concerned. In Grade IV there are three sections of schools, numbering altogether 122. and all headmasters of these schools are paid from £260 to £310. In Grade V there are four sections —A, B, C, and D—sixty-six schools, all the headmasters of which are paid under the Bill £320 to £360. Of the 623 schools in Grade 111, 115 are in Grade lIIb, and the headmasters get an increase of £10 on the maximum, while the 230 assistants engaged in those schools get no increase whatever. Of the 122 schools in Grade IV thirty-six are in IVc. The headmasters of these schools do not get an increase at all under the Bill —in fact, they start with a £10 lower minimum—and the seventy-two assistants in those schools do not get an increase. We fully appreciate the difficulties .involved in drawing up a scale where the schools are graded for the purposes of salary as well as of staffing ; and in a scale such as this there must be boundaries to the grades, and the men in the schools on the boundaries of the grades are the men who suffer under the Bill, as I have tried to show. Again, there are 623 men in Grade 111 who are waiting for 122 positions in Grade IV. Then there are 122 men in Grade IV who are waiting for sixty-six positions in Grade V. Under such conditions it must be admitted that promotion will be very slow indeed. Now, taking those things into consideration, the Institute has the following suggestions to make. It suggests that the 115 schools in Grade lIIb should be placed in Grade IVa, and that the thirty-six schools in Grade IVc should be placed in Grade Va. Then you would have the position whicli is shown in the figures on the opposite side of the table. There would then be in Grade 111 604 teachers, in Grade IVa there would be 165 teachers, and in IVb thirty-six teachers, so you would have 604 teachers in Grade 111 waiting for 201 positions in Grade IV. The Institute further suggests that the thirty-six schools in Grade IVc should be placed in Grade Va, and the position would then be that instead of the sixty-six schools in the latter grade there would be 102. Instead of there being 623 men in Grade 111 waiting for 122 positions you would have under the Institute's proposal 604 men waiting for 201 positions —that is, there would be three times as many men to positions under the Institute's suggestion as against five times as many under the Bill. Then there is an improvement between Grade IV and Grade Yin the same way. The effect of this change would be to give a certain number of teachers increases in salary who get little or no increase under the Bill, and at the same time it seems to us that it would make promotion from one grade to another easier. There would not be such a block between Grade 111 and Grade IV and between Grade IV and Grade Vas there would be under the Bill. With regard to the higher grades, I have to say on behalf of the Institute that it is delighted at the action of the Minister and the Government in placing all schools over 501 in the higher grade. That means a very great gain indeed to the service, for where originally there were only about thirty-one what we might call " plums " in the profession there are now fifty-nine, and not only do the headmasters benefit by this but the assistants in those schools as well. That is the explanation of the figures I have submitted. I wish now to draw the attention of the Committee to a statement at the top of page 6 of our statement, " The Institute considers that the salaries proposed for assistants are not sufficient for married men. Most of those concerned live in the areas of high rents, and the general rise in the cost of living has reduced the value of their salaries below the original amount. A very large proportion of these teachers have to add to their incomes by private teaching, to the detriment of their school-work." This resolution specially applies to the male assistants in the large city schools—both the first and the second assistants. In the majority of cases these men are married ; they are living in expensive areas where rents are

In Bill. By Institute. Attendance. Grade. Schools. Salary. Attendance. Grade. Schools. Salary. 9-20 21-35 36-80 81-120 121-160 161-200 201-240 241-280 281-320 I II IIIa IIIb IVa IVb IVc Va Vb 643 456 508 115 50 36 36 22 18 £ £ 100-140 140-190 200-250 200-250 260-310 260-310 260-310 320-360 320-360 9-20 21-30 31-80 81-160 1 II III IVa 643 360 ■ 604 165 £ £ 130-140 140-190 200-250 260-310 161-200 201-280 IV ii Va36 58 260-310 320-360 281-320 Vb 18 320-360