Case Study: UPS progression appeal

Case studies from subscribers

We support school staff in England and Wales with a wide range of employment-related issues in schools.These range from clarification with employment contracts, PPA time, job references to allegations from pupils, dismissal from role to employment tribunals and Teaching and Regulation Agency hearings. This case study looks at an appeal process for UPS.

Below, we highlight the types of questions and situations teachers contact us about. We have removed specific details about the cases and the actual names of subscribers for confidentiality reasons. You can also read our latest reviews from our subscribers on TrustPilot.

Case Study: ‘UPS progression appeal’

Case Headlines

Ethan had been at his school for four years and had progressed onto point M6 of his school’s pay structure. In a relatively small primary school elements of subject responsibility were shared out amongst staff, but no TLR had been allocated to him for this.

After being on M6 for a year he applied to cross the threshold and become an Upper Pay Spine teacher. His application was refused but was told a number of complimentary things.

Subscriber View

Ethan felt the rejection of his application to be placed on U1 was unfair. He felt he had made a good contribution to the school and to recent success over a period of years. He realised that school budgets were tight but didn’t think that should be a factor, (not that he was told this) but it certainly formed part of his perception. 

Ethan wanted to appeal the decision and turned to Edapt for support.

How did Edapt support?

The school had a Pay Policy which had a number of appeal stages. In fact in addition to Stage 1 ‘Informal Discussion’, Stage 2 ‘Written Appeal’ and finally Stage 3 ‘Governor Hearing’ there was also a stage linked to the original outcome, outside of the appeal process, where feedback was given by the decision maker.

The policy, whilst it laid out the procedures, confused the initial ‘feedback stage’ with the Stage 1 ‘Informal Appeal’. The first response he got about how to submit an appeal was to submit this in writing, jumping the informal discussion written into the policy.

Over and above forming the basis of the appeal, navigating the employer’s understanding of the policy and its application became the first task. Ethan’s caseworker made contact with the school via their HR provider and began a dialogue clarifying which stage of appeal the process was at. This was important because this then allowed Ethan access to all stages of the process rather than jumping in at Stage 2, the written stage.

After a period of ‘back and forth’ dialogue it was agreed Ethan was at Stage 1, the informal discussion, which had been previously confused with the Headteacher’s feedback.

The basis of the case built by Ethan’s caseworker was that the policy wording for ‘substantial’, ‘sustained’ and ‘high performing’ had not been measured correctly according to the wording of the descriptions. An important element of this was about subject leadership which, of course, is not mentioned in the Teacher Standards.  The Teacher Standards say clearly that they underpin the process for accessing the upper pay range in the headline paragraph Annex 1. [STPCD link] 

A script was prepared by Ethan’s caseworker for him to present to the original decision maker at Stage 1.

It is important to note that each school will have its own pay policy with it’s own descriptors and expectations for UPS. Under the School Teachers Pay and Conditions Document there is no set process other than what the employer decides. Some Academies have come away from UPS altogether on their pay structure so, when moving school, it is certainly worth researching the pay structure of a prospective new school.

The Outcome

Ethan’s decision on refusal was overturned and he progressed to UPS1. The school accepted the policy had been misapplied and his evidence did in fact meet the criteria. The school were clear that in future the appeals process would have greater clarity and that a better understanding of UPS had been gained through this case.

Ethan was of course very pleased with the outcome.

Find out more about the service we provide at Edapt: https://www.edapt.org.uk/