The Malta Union of Teachers yesterday threatened to organise a national rally for all academic employees of the education sector, in protest against what union president John Bencini referred to as the “Education Ministry’s negative attitude that is causing unnecessary tension and anxiety”.

Speaking at a media conference at the MUT premises in Valletta yesterday morning, Mr Bencini gave details of the union’s three main concerns, particularly one involving employees at the Institute of Tourism Studies (ITS), a government institution that falls under the direct responsibility of the Education Ministry.

Shortly after, the ministry issued a call for another media conference to reply to the union president’s comments and unsurprisingly, this was instantly followed by a counter-statement by the MUT.

Mr Bencini explained that the first matter concerned ITS employees. The ITS management called for a conciliation meeting with the MUT on 19 December, in what was meant to end the impasse on the collective agreement for ITS employees, said Mr Bencini.

The meeting was mediated by Noel Vella, director of industrial and employment relations, and the two parties agreed to five points that would be included in the collective agreement, said the MUT president.

Displaying an email from Mr Vella that outlined the conclusions of the conciliation meeting, Mr Bencini said the agreement was “vetoed” by the Education Ministry, clearly showing that both the director of industrial and employment relations and the ITS administration are “like puppets on a string”.

Mr Vella’s email states that: “Both sides agreed to consider the acceptability of introducing the following package in the collective agreement:

“-maximum normal contact working hours of staff to be 22 hours/week;

“-extra contact hours worked in excess of 22 hours up to 24 hours per week to be paid at normal hourly rate;

“-hours worked in excess of 24 hours to continue to be paid at overtime rate;

“-no overtime to be given to employees who refuse to work extra hours above 22 hours/week;

“-new clause to be introduced in collective agreement to provide for the immediate commencement of discussions between ITS and MUT on measures to facilitate staff development, performance of research activities and streamlining of recruitment procedures.

Mr Vella concluded the email by saying: “Please inform me of the acceptability, or otherwise, of this package”.

The MUT president complained that even though the union had informed the ITS administration that it had accepted the agreement, the Education Ministry had issued a statement saying that it was not true that the ITS management had reached an agreement with the MUT.

The government statement, which was issued in reaction to another one issued by the MUT, also stated that “the ministry believes that reducing teaching or contact time with students beyond what is already established in collective agreements is an important matter of principle”.

In fact, during yesterday afternoon’s media conference, Education Minister Louis Galea repeated over and over again: “Would any parent want to have teachers’ direct contact hours with students reduced?”

Dr Galea said the ministry can only consider negotiating such an issue if agreement can be reached on the justification of the union’s claim in the context of the interests of the students.

As for the MUT’s complaint that the ministry had not accepted the conclusions of the conciliation meeting as a definite agreement with ITS, Minister Galea said ITS is a government educational institution, and falls under the direct responsibility of the Education Ministry.

The MUT knows that on such issues educational institutions are obliged to follow ministry policy and guidelines, and to consult before coming to any definite agreement. Doing otherwise, as the MUT unjustly expects, is contrary to the good governance of educational institutions.

In reality, the justification given by the MUT for the reduction of direct contact hours was that 24 hours of contact with students can be very stressful for ITS employees working in the kitchen, for example. Sometimes they end up spending up to 27 hours of direct contact time with students, said Mr Bencini, adding that the maximum number of direct contact time in similar European institutions was 19.5 hours.

In reaction to this, Minister Galea said: “If need be, we will employ more teachers. Everyone should be surprised at the MUT’s request, considering that we now live and work in a knowledge based society and economy”.

As for the second issue of contention, Mr Bencini explained that this was about the anomalous situation of supply teachers, (formerly known as facilitators).

Mr Bencini lamented that these were the only casual workers that were excluded from legal notice 51/07, issued on 7 December, which states that employers should change definite contracts to indefinite contracts when workers would have been engaged for at least four years.

However, Minister Galea said supply teachers, kindergarten assistants and supply learning support assistants are already engaged on an indefinite contract.

“What exactly is the MUT after? Do they want these employees to be engaged by a definite contract instead?”

Nonetheless, the MUT pointed out, such teachers have to re-apply for their post at the end of each scholastic year.

The third and last point of contention between the MUT and the ministry is about the fact that the ministry would not agree to increase allowances for teachers, despite new responsibilities introduced in the education reform.

“The MUT respected the parameters when it was told that professionals in other sectors would also demand an increase in allowances, should this be given to teachers. However, the health reform did actually introduce allowances, so it was a blow below the belt for the education sector,” said Mr Bencini.

However, Minister Galea said the education reform did actually introduce improvements in benefits and allowances for teachers. The MUT, like the Medical Association of Malta (MAM), had signed the respective reforms that both addressed the particular needs of each sector.

Meanwhile, in its counter-statement, the MUT said MAM had actually refused to sign the collective agreement for public sector employees on 26 October 2005.

The MUT also invited the Education Ministry to meet every sector of employees in the education sector to justify yesterday’s statement.

The MUT expressed its satisfaction that Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi had accepted to meet them to discuss all three issues. The meeting will be held on Tuesday afternoon.

Mr Bencini said all of the MUT’s committees will be meeting in the coming weeks and a national rally will be organised (date to be announced at a later stage), should no positive developments be forthcoming.

“We will not wait months for replies and ITS employees will not be working any extra direct contact hours. We may be on the eve of the election, but I don’t care, the MUT is not interested in politics,” he said.