Union considers legal action over cuts to resource teachers

Union NZEI Te Riu Roa may file legal action against the government for its recent decision to cut 174 fulltime resource teachers of literacy (RTL) and resource teachers of Māori (RTM). 

NZEI secretary Stephanie Mills said they waiting for more information from Minister of Education Erica Stanford about how she came to the decision, before considering next steps. 

Read the latest print edition of School News online HERE.

The Union told RNZ that it has issued an official information request to the Minister of Education, Erica Stanford’s, office asking for more details on the decision process. NZEI said they were told a consultation document around the decision would be provided a fortnight in advance, but the disestablishment of the roles was confirmed in the budget announcement.   

Mills said teachers felt “really disrespected and gaslit… These teachers are some of our most experienced and skilled, and they’re not being treated in a good way.” 

An unpopular move  

The proposal to disestablish the RTL and RTM roles was circulated at the end of February, with educators given a month to submit feedback. It caused a widespread outcry in the media, with many expressing shock and strong opposition.  

At the time, NZEI President Ripeka Lessels said “why would you even consider wanting to do this?… This proposal sounds really ludicrous to me and it is just unfair.” 

RTL and RTMs noted that the proposal was counterintuitive to the rollout of structured literacy initatives.  

“Given that this is the Government’s mandate at the current time to improve literacy within New Zealand, it just does not make sense to take out front line, very highly trained professionals,” said Judith Bradley, president of the Resource Teachers: Literacy Association. 

Māori educators said the proposal showed a lack of consideration for Māori education. 

Rāwhiri Wright, co-chair of Te Rūnanga Nui o ngā Kura Kaupapa Māori and Principal of Te Kura Kaupapa Māori o Ngā Mokopuna, said “we have been short changed, not only by this government, but by previous governments in terms of adequate funding and resourcing in order to protect, promote and develop this option. 

“There certainly did need to be a review of how they might be better used, and if that’s what can come from this consultation round great, but we are cautious.”  

Mr Wright said RTMs were used in his kura to provide PLD for new and emerging teachers and this was different to how they were used in English-medium schools.  

Ms Lessels added that the proposal was a “gut-punch” to Māori as RTMs have been shown to contribute to lifting outcomes for ākonga Māori in Māori-medium settings. 

The New Zealand Principals Federation, Te Akatea (Māori Tumuaki and Leaders), NZEI Te Riu Roa, PPTA Te Wehengarua, the Secondary Principals Council and the New Zealand Pasifika Principals Association released a joint statement raising concerns about the proposal, especially the lack of transparency around the decision.  

“[The proposal] disrespects the mana and expertise of Resource Teachers and places schools and teachers in the impossible situation of having to comment on this proposal when they are desperate for any additional funding to support children,” read the statement.  

At the time, NZEI said they will explore “all feasible legal avenues” to stop the decision. 

Ms Stanford says resources being “reinvested” 

The initial proposal said the Ministry of Education was seeking to ensure resources were “equally distributed” across the education system.  

“The RTLits themselves have for a long time… said, ‘Look, we’re not being used efficiently, we’re driving for long periods of time between schools’, and I think that’s fallen on deaf ears,” said Ms Stanford.  

“They are an excellent resource – and we can use them in a much better way.”  

Ms Stanford said the savings would be used to “deliver multi-tiered, in-school supports to accelerate student progress and enable further expansion of existing initiatives like structured literacy approaches, staffing, and learning support interventions.”  

When asked about NZEI’s potential legal action, Ms Stanford said she could not comment, but said the move was about supporting schools and students.  

“It’s about the way we deliver the service, and this advice was given to me by the sector itself, by schools saying ‘the way the model is being delivered it’s not equitable and many schools are missing out’ … The ones who are getting the service may not have the greatest need, so it’s very inequitable. 

“What we are doing is shifting that model to an in-class delivery – small groups, intervention teachers, in school.” 

Ms Stanford said the RTL association had “clear information” and had multiple meetings with ministry officials to inform them of the reasons for the cuts and other available opportunities.  

“We’ve already resourced 349 tier-two structured literacy intervention roles, over and above the 100 literacy positions that there currently are, so it’s not a cut, it’s a reinvestment into a better delivery model.”  

RTLs unconvinced  

Despite Ms Stanford’s statements, RTLs have continued to express their concern.  

Manawatū RTL Liz Hansen says that the new proposed system would not meet current needs. Though an increase in funding for tier-two intervention was welcome, it won’t replace the tier-three support that RTLs offer, said Ms Hansen.  

“It puts pressure on the classroom teachers more because they don’t have that specialist support coming in to work with these kids or support them in the classroom, because that’s what we do, a two-pronged approach. 

“I work with the students in smaller groups, sometimes one-to-one, one-to-two, one-to-three and also support the teachers in the classroom with how to adapt their programme and differentiate what they’re teaching to match the needs of these kids and that won’t happen.” 

Most RTLs work with children who have persistent learning difficulties. They fill the gap between children who need support and children who qualify for the Ongoing Resourcing Scheme.  

“One of the strengths of RT lits is the ability to be able to meet the needs of these kids by looking at what they’re doing, how they approach their work… we’ve become experts at problem solving for these kids and looking at how to teach them in different ways for what they need. 

“A lot of the tier-two teachers don’t have time for that because they have group after group coming in.” 

Ms Lessels agreed, saying that the move to “equally distribute” resources didn’t make sense as RTMs mostly teach in kura kaupapa Māori, and not all schools are eligible for RTL support.  

RTL and RTM association leaders have rejected Ms Stanford’s claim that the service is inconsistent.  

The Ministry of Education have cited reports from 2014, 2012 and 2008 as evidence for the inconsistency of the service. Both RTL and RTM associations say these reports are over 10 years old and are outdated.  

Teachers and principals concerned  

Bronson Meehan, a teacher at Onekawa Primary said that though a three-day structured literacy PLD was “awesome”, it couldn’t replace the in-class guidance from an RTL.  

“The amount of tamariki that they are affecting positively as well as the support that they provide teachers and also the growth that we receive as teachers… How could you take this service away? 

“It’s to the detriment of all tamariki and Aotearoa.” 

Jason Miles, vice president of the New Zealand Principals’ Federation said their members were concerned about the cut.  

“Not only will we lose the access to a very skilled literacy specialist for our most vulnerable children, we’ll also lose the support that RTLit provides our teachers in professional development.”