Member's statement: Education Support Workers: Strikes
Member's statement by Mr Gerry Carroll on .
- MLA
- Mr Gerry Carroll
- Party at the time
- People Before Profit Alliance
- Date
- 20 May 2024
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Education Support Workers: Strikes
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4490549
Read the official Assembly record
Text
This morning, I was once again proud to stand with the striking education workers at St Joseph's Primary School on Slate Street in my constituency and also outside this Building with workers who were striking from various schools. I want to say categorically that I support the strike. Disgracefully, the Education Minister sent a statement to MLAs, imploring us to support the strike's being called off. The strike will end, Minister, when workers are paid what they are owed. In different schools and across constituencies, the experience is universal. Education workers are sick, sore and tired of being taken advantage of. When the Stormont Executive were cobbled together with much pomp and celebration, we were told all about workers' pay and how it and many other things would be a priority for this Executive, but, once again, education workers, cleaners, porters, drivers, escorts and assistants have all been forgotten about by this place. No Ministers have been listening. They have ignored the plight and fight of these workers for five or six years — same as it ever was. However, it is OK for Ministers, who got a salary bump. Ministers who are on £90,000 a year have the temerity to tell workers, some of whom earn £1,000 per month, that they must take another year, two years or three years — who knows how long? — of pay cuts. It is completely unacceptable, and the reality for those workers is that they are underpaid for working in schools and educational settings but they do the essential job that they love while also working two and three jobs. They are working all the hours of the day just to pay their bills. Today and this week, unions that represent those workers are demanding that the money be released for the pay and grading review. Ministers talked a good game when Stormont was down. Now that Stormont is up, the Finance and Education Ministers need to cough up the money, put it in the pockets of those workers and pay them what they are owed.
344 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.04 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.82).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.05 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.03 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.82 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.04 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.74 |
| Education structures, integration and community division | 0.17 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.03 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.03 |
| Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice) | 0.02 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 10:20 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.