10B – Salaries and Conditions of Service Committee Report
11 – Education Committee Report
12 – Health, Safety and Wellbeing Committee Report
13 – Additional Support Needs Committee Report
14 – Equalities Committee Report
Agenda Item 10a
SNCT TEACHER SIDE Report to Congress — May 2026
Monday, 23 March 2026 Agenda: RCCT Agreement
Background
An agreement on the RCCT was reached between EIS and the Scottish Government on 13 March 2026. The SNCT had last met on 25 February 2026, at which point a Teachers’ Side response had been issued.
The original proposed implementation dates were August 2026 for primary and August 2028 for secondary.
On Thursday, 5 March, EIS met with the Scottish Government, at which point it was confirmed that use of time would be provided to teachers. Daily meetings between EIS, COSLA, and the Scottish Government then took place from Monday, 9 March. In the course of those discussions, revised implementation dates were agreed:
- Primary: August 2027
- Secondary: August 2029
SSTA Position
The SSTA noted that three unions had held ballots in relation to the RCCT, of which two did not meet the legal threshold required to proceed to industrial action.
The SSTA raised the following concerns:
At no stage during the negotiation process had the implementation of RCCT been examined in detail. The SSTA had raised this concern at the previous Teacher Side meeting on 25 February. The discussions between EIS, COSLA, and the Scottish Government had taken place outside the SNCT framework, and the SSTA did not receive the finalised agreement until the evening of Tuesday, 17 March.
The SSTA further noted that while the SNCT is a sovereign body, this agreement had not been brought back to the SNCT for consideration.
On the basis of the above, the SSTA indicated that it was unable to accept the agreement as it stood.
Discussion
A number of points were raised in the discussion that followed. It was suggested by some members that the SSTA had previously voted to accept a position at the 25 February meeting. The SSTA clarified that at that meeting it had in fact raised explicit concerns regarding the delayed implementation timeline for secondary teachers.
A question was also raised as to why the SSTA was not in a position to agree, given that the delay for secondary teachers amounted to one year. The SSTA noted for the record that the actual delay from the original proposed start date represents three and a half years.
When a vote was called, the SSTA indicated that it was not yet in a position to vote, as the matter still required discussion with the Salaries and Working Conditions Committee. A nominal vote was taken and it was agreed that the Teacher Side would reconvene at a later date.
Friday, 27 March 2026 Agenda: RCCT — SSTA Position Following Member Consultation
This meeting was convened to receive the outcome of the SSTA’s consultation with its Salaries and Working Conditions Committee and membership.
The SSTA reported that the matter had been put to members by electronic survey. The result was that 88% of SSTA members voted to reject the agreement.
The EIS noted that it accepted the outcome, while expressing disappointment.
A formal vote of the Teacher Side was then taken:
- For: 17
- Against: 3
The position was adopted. The matter will now proceed to the Full SNCT for consideration.
Peter Brandon
Salaries and Conditions of Service Committee Convener
Agenda Item 10B
SALARIES AND CONDITIONS OF SERVICE COMMITTEE Report to Congress — May 2026
Special Meeting — Monday, 24 March 2026 Agenda: RCCT Agreement
Attendance and Background
The committee convened for a special meeting to discuss the proposed RCCT agreement. Seamus presented a timeline of events leading up to the EIS-SG-COSLA proposal, and an update from the Teachers’ Side meeting held on 23 March 2026 was shared with members.
Discussion
Members of the committee and Executive engaged in discussion regarding how to proceed in response to the proposal. Two significant concerns were raised:
Firstly, it was the view of the committee that the negotiation had not produced a mechanism to adequately address the needs of secondary teachers during the transitional period in which secondary teachers would hold a less favourable contract while receiving the same pay as primary colleagues.
Secondly, concern was expressed that the proposal did not include appropriate phasing arrangements for the secondary sector. Without such arrangements, there is a risk of a “cliff edge” effect, whereby a large number of posts could be advertised simultaneously in the period immediately prior to implementation, leaving more remote schools vulnerable to significant staff losses.
Next Steps
The committee agreed to conduct an electronic survey of members to gather:
- their views on the proposed deal; and
- their agreement in principle to measures aimed at reducing workload.
Peter Brandon
Salaries and Conditions of Service Committee Convener
Agenda Item 11 – Education Committee Report
The Education Committee has met regularly over the past year – with the addition of a number of new members – and has discussed the following issues:-
- Curriculum Reform
- Qualifications Reform
- Impact of AI (on both Learning & Teaching and behavioural issues)
- Mobile phones – impact and SG / LA / school policies
We received a briefing from Education Scotland on the Curriculum Improvement Cycle and hope to receive more. We were pleased to note ES’ commitment to a realistic time schedule and extensive consultation with teachers.
We have been regularly attending the former SQA – now Qualifications Scotland – NQ26 Working and Strategy Groups. The continued rise in requests for Alternative Assessment Arrangements (AAA) remains a concern. Work has been done on the level of dual presentations: this apparently varies widely between LAs, and 2 or 3 LAs are reponsible for a large share. They may now reconsider their policies.
We have registered with Qualifications Scotland our concerns over their stated intent to consider moving to more electronic assessment, and a return to more modular assessment. Again, we were pleased to note Qualifications Scotland’s commitment to a realistic time schedule and extensive consultation with teachers.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology is continuing to develop at pace. While it may present opportunities (and indeed requirements) for teachers to change their approaches to teaching, it also presents major challenges. Homework – or indeed any work not done under supervision – has potentially been rendered obsolete. There is also a growing risk of pupils using AI to assault teachers by creating fake images and videos. We note and encourage the development of robust AI polices by all institutions in the education sector.
Mobile phones continue to pose challenges to learning and teaching, behaviour and the welfare of teachers and pupils. We note and welcome the belated gradual development of robust mobile phone polices by schools, LAs and the Scottish Government.
I would like to thank all members of the committee for their work and commitment over the past year, and in particular must pay tribute to my predecessor as convener, James Cowans. The group continues to get great support from Euan Duncan. If you are interested in joining the committee please speak to me or Euan, or contact the office by email.
Stewart Gray
Education Committee Convener
Health, Safety and Wellbeing Committee
Congress Report
May 2026
The biannual Health and Safety Representatives meeting will be held in September 2026.
Congress is reminded that Union Health and Safety representatives training entitlement is in statute, and schools cannot refuse attendance.
The committee has written to the previous Cabinet Secretary following last year’s motions on Mental Health First Aiders and the Education Workforce Support Committee.
The Committee would like to remind members that working beyond the contracted 35 hours can be injurious to health and that all workplaces including education settings are required by law to create a Mental Health Risk Assessment for its employees.
The committee’s major piece of work in the past twelve months is the Stress Indicators Survey and the follow up focus on Demands last month.
SSTA Health, Safety and Wellbeing Committee: Survey Report on Work-Related Stress
1. Executive Summary
The SSTA Health, Safety and Wellbeing (HSW) Committee conducted a staff survey to formally identify and assess the prevalence of work-related stress among teaching staff, explicitly moving beyond the term ‘workload’. The survey was structured around the Health and Safety Executive’s (HSE) six key Management Standards, asking the 603 respondents to rank the factors from most stressful (1) to least stressful (6).
The results reveal a clear hierarchy of stress factors, with a single, overwhelming primary concern:
- Demands (Workload) is the most significant factor, with a mean rank of 1.55 and being ranked in the top 3 by 93.7% of staff.
- The secondary stressors are clustered, led by Support and Change, indicating that the problem is not just what staff do, but how the work is managed and supported.
The committee recommends immediate action focused on reducing the volume of demands and simultaneously addressing the poor management of organisational change and resources (Support).
2. Methodology and Key Findings
Staff were asked to rank the six HSE factors from 1 (Most Stressful) to 6 (Least Stressful). The Mean Rank determines the overall ranking, where a lower score indicates a higher average level of reported stress.
2.1 Staff Ranking of Stress Factors
| Rank Position | HSE Factor | Mean Rank (1 = Most Stressful) | % Ranked in Top 3 Most Stressful | Description |
| 1 | Demands | 1.55 | 93.7% | Workload, work patterns, and the work environment (e.g., excessive working hours, unreasonable deadlines). |
| 2 | Support | 3.50 | 49.1% | The encouragement, resources, and assistance provided by the organisation, line management, and colleagues. |
| 3 | Change | 3.63 | 49.1% | How organisational change (large or small) is managed and communicated. |
| 4 | Control | 3.65 | 46.9% | The amount of say you have in the way you do your work (e.g., control over pace, tasks, and methods). |
| 5 | Relationships | 3.75 | 46.9% | Promoting positive working to avoid conflict and dealing with unacceptable behaviour. |
| 6 | Role | 4.91 | 14.2% | Whether you understand your role and responsibilities and whether you have conflicting roles. |
3. Analysis of Key Findings (Validated)
A. Rank 1: Demands (The Overwhelming Primary Stressor)
The Mean Rank of 1.55 is almost unchanged and represents a resounding consensus: 93.7% of staff place excessive workload in their top three stressors. This confirms that the volume of non-contact, administrative, and data-driven tasks is the single biggest threat to staff wellbeing and retention.
B. The Clustered Secondary Stressors (Ranks 2-5)
The close clustering of the next four factors highlights that the solution must be multi-faceted.
- Support (Rank 2) and Change (Rank 3): These two factors are virtually tied. Half of all staff (49.2%) report high stress due to a lack of resources and poorly managed, communicated, and implemented organisational change.
- Control (Rank 4) and Relationships (Rank 5): Also clustered closely, these show a high prevalence of stress stemming from insufficient professional autonomy and, in a significant minority of cases, issues with workplace relationships.
C. Rank 6: Role
The factor of Role remains the lowest concern, confirming that staff stress is not about role confusion, but about the unmanageable demands and unsupportive environment surrounding the established role.
4. Recommendations and Action Plan (Unchanged)
The robust consistency of the updated data validates the original three-pronged action plan. The HSW Committee maintains that targeting Demands, Support, and Change is the most effective strategy for mitigating work-related stress.
Priority Action 1: Addressing Demands (Workload Reduction)
| Factor | Recommended Action | Rationale |
| Demands | Administrative Task Audit: Institute a review of all non-statutory reporting, tracking, and administrative tasks. The goal must be elimination or significant reduction, not just streamlining. This should be conducted at school level, with a clear oversight at local authority level to develop systemic changes. | Direct response to the highest-ranked stressor. Reduces volume of non-essential work that detracts from teaching. |
| Demands | Email Protocol Implementation: Establish a clear policy that sets boundaries for professional communication, explicitly stating that no reply is expected outside of working hours. | Provides clear boundary protection, allowing staff to disconnect and manage their time more effectively. |
Priority Action 2: Enhancing Support (Resources and Assistance)
| Factor | Recommended Action | Rationale |
| Support | Protected Time & Collaboration: That the proposed increases in minimum non-contact time ring-fence specific, protected time within the working week for collaborative planning and dedicated non-contact work, ensuring it is not used for additional meetings. | Directly tackles the lack of practical resources and encouragement needed to manage high demands. |
| Support | Manager Training: Implement mandatory training for all line managers on the HSE Management Standards, focusing on initiative-taking, supportive welfare check-ins and effective resource allocation. | Improves the quality and consistency of support provided by direct supervisors. |
Priority Action 3: Managing Change Effectively
| Factor | Recommended Action | Rationale |
| Change | Consultation and Communication Strategy: For all new initiatives, enforce a mandatory consultation period and develop a communication plan that clearly articulates the why, what, when, and how of implementation. | Addresses the elevated level of stress caused by poorly managed change, promoting a sense of involvement and understanding. |
| Change | Phase-in Strategy: All new policies or procedures must include a clear ‘phase-in’ period with associated training and a specified period for the removal of old tasks to prevent additive workload. | Acknowledges the reality of high demands and provides staff with the capacity to cope with new requirements. |
5. Our Immediate, Data-Driven Action Plan
The HSW Committee, in collaboration with working with COSLA and Scottish Government, will focus all efforts on these three priorities. Our goal is to achieve systemic, measurable relief, not just temporary fixes.
A. Priority 1: Eliminating Demands (The ‘Don’t do’ List)
We will be campaigning on the Administrative Task Audit immediately. This is not a review to ‘streamline,’ but to eliminate non-essential bureaucracy.
- Task Audit: Members will log all non-statutory administrative and data-driven tasks over a four-week period to identify those that can be removed or delegated.
- Communication Charter: We will work to establish a formal protocol that creates clear boundaries for electronic communication, confirming that no response is expected outside of contractual working hours.
B. Priority 2: Enhancing Support (Practical Assistance)
- Protected Time: We will continue to campaign for the increase in minimum non-contact time, (90 minutes) is ring-fenced, protected time within the working week dedicated purely to planning, preparation, and collaborative support, ensuring this time cannot be usurped by meetings or administrative cover.
- Targeted Training: We will campaign that management receives focused training on the HSE standards, emphasising how to provide practical support and conduct meaningful, supportive welfare check-ins, rather than just performance monitoring.
C. Priority 3: Managing Change Effectively
- New Change Protocol: We will propose a formal requirement that all new initiatives include a clear Consultation Period, a guaranteed Phase-in Strategy, and the removal of a corresponding old task to prevent additive workload.
The follow up Demands survey opened after the Congress print deadline and will be given verbally. District Secretaries will be sent a copy relating to their Local Authority.
Grant McAllister
Health, Safety & Wellbeing Committee Convener
ASN Committee
Congress Report
May 2026
This is a brief summary of the business of the ASN Committee.
The business of the Committee continues to be dominated by the need for members to address the needs of pupils with Additional Support Needs whilst protecting the health and interests of teachers and others meeting those needs.
Issues addressed by the Committee include:
- Use of the £28 million additional Government funding for ASN
- Review of the EIS ASN Report
- Council Motion on ASN Provision and Local Authority Responsibility
- Minimum standards for ASN support in schools
- National ASL event
- Falkirk proposal to close Primary ASN Provisions – press release issued
- Teacher of Visual Impairment/Deaf/Deafblind Competencies
- Review of the SLS ASN Report
- Review of March SfL review
- Workload relating to Coordinated Support Plans
- Workload demands – documenting multiagency working
- SAGRABIS
Actions taken forward:
- Letter sent to COSLA seeking clarification on the use of the additional ASN funding by Local Authorities
- Webinar to empower ASN teachers to understand their role
- Member involvement in National ASL event on 12th March
- Review of impact from the March SfL review
- Motion(s) for Congress
- Continued involvement in SNCT ASN Working Group
- Continued involvement in SAGRABIS
The Committee is always keen to expand on the range of backgrounds and experiences of its members. The Committee therefore would welcome new members who may be put forward via District meetings. Members who have recently been in contact with positive suggestions which we are already taking forward may also be co-opted.
This concludes the ASN Committee report.
Ruth Nicoll
ASN Committee Convener
Equalities Committee Report
Congress 2026
The panel has met four times over the past year.
Following on from the emergency motion at Congress last year, there were robust discussions regarding next steps. It was agreed that it should not be the responsibility of teachers to make decisions regarding the Scottish Governments guidance. We feel it would be the best option for senior education staff to produce guidance for all schools in their local authority to follow. We feel it is important that any guidance produced should also protect the rights of all teachers in our schools. The General Secretary wrote to all chief education officers urging them to do so.
The committee has spent much of the meeting time discussing advice for supporting neurodivergent staff. Our thanks to Euan Duncan for sharing work he had already produced for this area. An advice note has been produced and is available on the SSTA website. My thanks to members for the hard work in this area.
There are spaces available on the committee if you would like to join, please contact myself or the office team.
My thanks to General Secretary Seamus Searson for his support this year.
Maggie Nesbitt
Equalities Committee Convener