Debate contribution: Teachers: 2024-25 Pay Award and Threat of Industrial Action
Debate contribution by Mr Paul Givan on .
- MLA
- Mr Paul Givan
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 21 January 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Teachers: 2024-25 Pay Award and Threat of Industrial Action
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4749766
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I agree with the Member on the hugely important contribution that our teaching staff and support staff make. That is why, when the institutions were restored, the Executive prioritised them. The Finance Minister made funding available, and I worked with the unions to negotiate a pay settlement that resolved a three-year dispute. We increased the starting salary for new teachers from £23,000 to £30,000. We increased teachers' pay by double digits, and a backdated payment was made for that. We also resolved the industrial dispute by support staff through the pay and grading review, and that has resulted in significant pay increases for all support staff. We are now trying to resolve the issue for the current financial year. I am engaging in good faith to get a resolution. My team is meeting the unions right now, and diaries have been cleared to allow negotiations to continue tomorrow and Thursday. We have an opportunity over the next number of weeks to bring those negotiations to a conclusion. I have outlined the parameters within which we need to reach agreement, and I have been working incredibly hard to try to identify the funding that we need in order for a formal pay offer to be made. I will continue to do that. I absolutely accept that support staff require support. I met the Member's party colleague the Member for Foyle, who did some work on the role of classroom assistants and provided me with a report. That was very helpful and demonstrated their value, which I already knew. During that meeting, he provided evidence that was helpful to me. I know that it is a shared aim of all of us in the House to support teachers and the wider support staff, and I know that the Executive want to do that.
301 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: 0.03 (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 (0.81).
- 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 | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.81 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | 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 | 0.84 |
| Education structures, integration and community division | 0.15 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:47 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.