Latest news from FE Week

What would Andy Burnham in Number 10 mean for FE?

The House of Commons doesn’t sit on Fridays. The corridors of power in the Palace of Westminster are quiet today. But on Monday, MPs will gather for the swearing in of their newest member – the now former mayor of Greater Manchester, Andy Burnham.

Over today and the weekend, though, one question is on everyone’s mind: what happens next?

Will Keir Starmer offer Burnham a job in cabinet? How soon does Burnham officially launch his leadership bid? Will Wes Streeting move first? Will we get the contest Streeting says he is pushing for, or will he settle in return for a big job?

Those are important Westminster questions. For further education, there is another one: What sort of prime minister would Andy Burnham be for FE?

Burnham’s win today ends a nine-year stint as mayor of Greater Manchester. Voters in the north west city region now have to choose a new mayor, triggering another Labour vs Reform UK battle which shouldn’t be overlooked.

During his two-and-a-half terms in the role, Burnham has not shied away from picking fights with Westminster on devolved powers for 16-to-19 education, and spoken out loudly and consistently about equally valued technical and academic education routes.

But the sector should resist the temptation to swoon just because a senior politician can say “technical education” without sounding like he’s only just been briefed on it.

Burnhamism may mean a higher political status for FE, more devolution and a more serious alternative to university narrative. Burnham’s brother, Nick, is principal of Cardinal Newman College, a sixth-form college in Preston. His most famous policy innovation over his two-and-a-half mayoral terms, the Greater Manchester baccalaureate (MBacc), made headlines, but not necessarily headway.

College leaders are looking down the barrel of more squeezes on funding on every budget line. Unfortunately for Burnham, they can’t hire construction lecturers or fund teacher pay rises with rhetoric.

Not a recent convert

Burnham’s record on technical education and apprenticeships didn’t start as mayor.

In his first stab at running for Labour leader in 2010 following the downfall of Gordon Brown, his pitch was what he called “aspirational socialism”. His case was then for all young people to be given the chance to be the best they can be.

There wasn’t a detailed FE pitch. He was better known at the time for his stances on health, social care and his idea for a National Care Service.

But he did, more than his 2010 rivals, talk about young people not pursuing traditional academic education pathways and warned against declining practical and vocational education opportunities for 11 to 16-year-olds.

The clearer FE offer came in 2015, Burnham’s second go at the Labour leadership.

His manifesto promised “true parity between academic and technical education”, a national UCAS-style system for apprenticeships (since tried and dropped), and access to student finance to help people relocate for an apprenticeship. He also proposed, as was fashionable at the time, replacing higher education tuition fees with a graduate tax.

That was a decade ago. A time before “skills for growth” was mainstreamed into the lexicon.

Burnham was an MP for 16 years, was a non-education cabinet minister, and later shadow education secretary under Ed Miliband, fighting against Michael Gove’s cuts to the education maintenance allowance for 16 to 19-year-olds.

His pre-mayoral record on FE was more thematic than substantial: devolve power out of Westminster, labour-market fairness, social mobility and scepticism about markets in public services.

The Greater Manchester experiment

“Saying Westminster’s where it’s at, that’s where everything happens and you’re not really a serious politician unless you’re in Westminster would be the biggest mistake”, Burnham told The Guardian in 2016. Fast forward ten years, he’s heading back to “where it’s at”.

Burnham’s first mayoral manifesto in 2017 promised a “revolution in technical education”.

The language was classic Burnham at the time; confident, unambiguous and designed to suggest that Greater Manchester could succeed where Whitehall had failed.

A “UCAS-style application system for apprenticeships” reappeared as part of a catalogue of commitments for 14+ education and training, which also included expanding adult education and retraining.

His 2017 manifesto also talked about retaining apprenticeship levy cash raised by Greater Manchester businesses to spend locally, and turning it into a wider skills levy. If that sounds familiar, Labour’s 2024 general election made the same commitment but without letting mayors control funding.

By his 2021 re-election run, Burnham’s Greater Manchester Apprenticeships and Careers Service (GMAC) a local alternative to UCAS for young people who didn’t want to go university, was on offer. His manifesto also committed to using the £92 million devolved adult education budget for green and digital courses while prioritising digital literacy and ESOL.

Then came the MBacc proposal – the Greater Manchester baccalaureate.

When it was time to run again in 2024, he was ready to roll out his quasi-qualification, designed to challenge the Govian EBacc with a badge for a more inclusive basket of subject choices at age 14 to 19.

“While the English baccalaureate concentrates on the subjects most valued by universities, the MBacc will focus on those most valued by Greater Manchester employers,” the manifesto said.

So with A Levels, UCAS and university as one route, Burnham’s MBacc, T Levels, GMAC and apprenticeships would form the other “of equal value”.

His plan was that, by 2030, Greater Manchester’s year 11s would be firmly in one of two neat education pathways taking them through to employment, apprenticeships or higher education.

But neat pathways on paper don’t always make for neat delivery.

Burnham on the buses

Burnham has a gift for turning a policy problem into a branded mission across his portfolio, with the notable exception of adult education.

The Bee Network, Live Well, Housing First, the MBacc. This approach gives people something to organise around, but wouldn’t necessarily go down well nationally in a sector reeling with ‘initiativeitis’.

The MBacc is not yet a national model. It’s not even fully embedded in Greater Manchester, and it relies on a chain of organisations locally to behave in a certain way, which is easier to marshal as a mayor than as prime minister.

But Burnham does appear to have understood something that ministers in Westminster often miss in education – participation is about more than curriculum and qualifications.

His 2017 mayoral pledge for free or cheaper public transport for 16 to 18-year-olds was central to his technical education plank. His 2024 manifesto recommitted to maintaining Our Pass – a travel subsidy scheme for 16 to 18-year-olds and care leavers – and promised half-price monthly passes for 18 to 21-year-olds to back up the MBacc.

Meanwhile in Westminster, conversations about public transport subsidies for young sixth formers and apprentices are shut down as unaffordable.

College students need to travel. Apprentices need to get to work and to training. Young people on specialist courses may need to travel even further these days to get to a new technical excellence college.

A prime minister serious about technical education needs to understand that “parity” and “opportunity” mean transport and maintenance, not just new qualifications.

Adults in the room

Burnham was one of the first mayors in England to have full control of a devolved adult education budget back in 2019. Despite that, local sources struggled to pin down a flagship Burnham win on adult education or lifelong learning beyond the common “flexibilities” you see across devolved areas.

Burnham himself said progressing an agenda on adult education was “hard to achieve” because he needed “more control” over employment support from the Department for Work and Pensions, and his budget from Whitehall was being cut.

At an MBacc launch event last year, one education leader told FE Week that Burnham was “too quiet” on adult education, where he has statutory powers and responsibilities, and was instead prioritising “vanity projects” like the MBacc.

But Burnham did secure Greater Manchester as one of the first two “integrated settlement” areas, effectively exempting ringfence restrictions around various adult skills funding pots.

One of the first things Burnham did with those new powers was to drop skills bootcamps.

Prime devolver Burnham

Whitehall bureaucrats famously resist devolving things, not least at the Department for Education.

Last year, skills minister Jacqui Smith admitted to “tensions” with mayors, led by Burnham, over calls for more devolution of education funding.

Burnham has had some wins. Greater Manchester was one of two “trailblazers” announced in 2023 afforded “deeper” devolution powers. But trailblazers in reality only offered minor tweaks and flexibilities compared to the full control of apprenticeships and 16-to-19 education he wanted.

If Burnham goes all the way, the keys to Downing Street come with strings attached. If he is successful in ousting Starmer, he inherits a manifesto and a mandate the country voted for only two years ago.

He didn’t have a defence investment plan to finance while in Greater Manchester. As mayor he could comfortably argue for devolution because he wasn’t the one giving power away.

As PM, Burnham would no longer be the man outside the Treasury blaming the centre for hoarding power to justify lack of progress.

It is one thing to put technical education on a pedestal from afar. It is quite another to do what needs to be done on school accountability, on careers and, crucially, on 16 to 19 and adult education funding.

FE leaders will likely then welcome Burnham’s return with interest, rather than applause.

£3m in bonuses for C&G bosses? It doesn’t add up

Conflicting accounts continue to emerge about whether City & Guilds Foundation trustees knew large bonuses were paid to senior executives after the sale of their awarding business.

Bosses at new owner PeopleCert this week alleged former awarding body chief executive Kirstie Donnelly and chief financial officer Abid Ismail paid themselves bonuses worth almost £3 million without PeopleCert’s or City & Guilds charity trustees’ knowledge.

But Donnelly and Ismail said they “categorically reject” PeopleCert’s allegations and claim to have evidence showing both the charity and PeopleCert were “fully involved” in structuring and approving their payouts.

The pair are accused of independently making the payments on November 3 last year, the first working day after control of the awarding business – City & Guilds Ltd (CGL) – passed to PeopleCert.

City & Guilds Foundation has also repeatedly denied any involvement in discussions about post-sale bonuses.

In a joint statement, legal representatives for Donnelly and Ismail, who were dismissed for gross misconduct in April following an internal investigation, said: “Our clients will present all their evidence to the courts in due course.

“That evidence overwhelmingly demonstrates that all bonus payments referenced in PeopleCert’s statement were approved, documented and implemented as part of the wider transaction process.

“It further shows that both the seller and the buyer, along with their advisers, were fully involved in the structuring and approval of the bonuses paid.”

Charity ‘not involved’?

The former CEO and CFO’s claims contradict the account offered by the charity.

Its account of how much it knew about bonuses linked to the sale has changed since details of the cash first emerged.

When news first hit in December, the charity and PeopleCert issued a joint statement claiming “no payments” were made outside of its existing bonus scheme.

The charity later claimed, on January 3, that trustees were “not involved in any pre or post-deal conversations” about post-sale pay.

However, in response to media reports that trustees did discuss bonuses, and a formal investigation launched by the Charity Commission, the City & Guilds Foundation updated its statement on January 13, admitting that trustees did have “a discussion” about post-sale bonuses in May last year, but scrapped the proposal shortly before the sale was completed in October.

It claimed trustees decided bonuses were no longer necessary “principally because a higher sale price had been agreed”.

But according to former trustees who spoke to The Telegraph, during the May board meeting trustees approved bonuses of four times the CEO and CFO’s gross salary, similar to the amounts they were eventually paid on November 3.

The statement from the charity, which was led at the time by chair Ann Limb – also a friend of Donnelly – claimed that “trustees were not involved in the widely reported bonus payments to CGL executives”, adding that “these post-sale payments are solely a matter for the new CGL owners”.

The claim from Donnelly and Ismail that the charity and PeopleCert were fully involved, and City & Guilds Foundation’s claim that it was “not involved”, cannot both be true.

City & Guilds Foundation declined to comment on the contradictory claims.

Bonus mystery

PeopleCert said it did not learn about the bonuses until December, but refused to explain how its former executives managed to pay themselves and more than 60 other staff members such a large amount of money without authorisation.

The payouts, worth about £5 million in total, were given to Donnelly, Ismail, several other senior executives, as well as 60 more junior members of staff. They also received significant salary increases.

Donnelly and Ismail claim to have already shared their evidence that proves the transactions were approved with “other appropriate agencies”, including the Charity Commission, which launched a formal inquiry in January when news of the bonuses was first leaked to the media by insiders.

However, the pair have declined to share their evidence with FE Week and PeopleCert has not published the full findings of its investigation.

The former CEO and CFO are now understood to be preparing legal action over their dismissal, while PeopleCert has said it will seek to recover the £3 million paid to them.

A PeopleCert spokesperson said: “As stated, the investigation found that bonus payments totalling approximately £5 million were authorised and paid from CGL funds without authorisation, approval from, or knowledge of, City & Guilds London Institute, the CGL Board or PeopleCert.

“The investigation further found that these payments were not brought to the attention of PeopleCert until December 2025, after they had been paid, and that there was no provision, board resolution or other binding document from either City & Guilds London Institute, the CGL Board or PeopleCert that authorised them.

“Concerns came to light through a number of channels, including internal processes and media reporting, following which the matter was investigated.”

PeopleCert’s findings came from an investigation carried out by a committee of non-executive directors, led by Michael Milanovic, chair of PeopleCert subsidiary LanguageCert, with support from legal advisers at Balfour+Manson.

PeopleCert said a subsequent appeal process, led by CGL non-executive director Richard McCarthy CBE, did not uphold appeals against the dismissal decisions.

Donnelly and Ismail claimed that the process leading to their dismissal was “fundamentally flawed and lacked the necessary independence”.

IBIS Capital, which advised City & Guilds Foundation on the sale, declined to comment, citing “confidentiality obligations that prevent us from commenting on any aspect of the matter”.

Extra help for more students on Turing’s final trips

The Turing scheme’s budget will remain unchanged at £78 million for its final year despite more ‘disadvantaged’ students becoming eligible for extra support.

Refreshed guidance for 2026-27 reveals the government has raised the learner household income threshold by £10,000, meaning students from a household with an income of £35,000 or less can receive additional funding.

Persistent under-spenders could also be penalised by the Department for Education.

Named after the mathematician and code-breaker Alan Turing, the DfE-funded scheme replaced Erasmus+ in 2021 as a student placement programme prioritising disadvantaged students for work or study opportunities abroad.

The UK rejoined the EU-funded Erasmus+ scheme in December after months of negotiations by ministers.

The DfE can award education providers extra money to prepare students and apprentices from disadvantaged backgrounds for their “readiness to travel”, such as paying for passports, visa application fees, vaccines, medical certificates and travel insurance.

Bids for providers to access Turing funding for 2026-27 closed in March.

FE providers have consistently sent a high proportion of learners from disadvantaged backgrounds onto Turing placements.

Two-thirds of the 11,352 placements arranged by FE providers this academic year were for disadvantaged students, compared with 52 per cent for university students and 82 per cent for school pupils.

Since the scheme began, 60 per cent of all FE placements have gone to students from deprived backgrounds, compared with 52 per cent in schools and 50 per cent in universities.

Underspends ‘considered’

Limits introduced last year on the maximum funding pot available per FE provider application remain at £205,000 (increasing to £600,000 for consortiums) and daily living cost allowances for students are unchanged.

The 2026-27 guidance informed providers that allocations will consider whether they had persistently underspent their previously allocated funding.

“This may be taken into account when the DfE ranks the applications and affect the likelihood of being awarded Turing scheme funding, or how much the applicant is awarded,” the DfE said.

Any unused funds are recouped by the DfE and cannot be rolled over into the next academic year.

Erasmus+ returns

Colleges will have to seek funding through Erasmus+ for foreign study trips for the 2027-28 academic year.

The UK will pump around £570 million into the programme.

Though £78 million was committed to Turing last year, only £73.6 million was ultimately allocated to schools, FE colleges and universities. The scheme sent 35,249 learners from the UK on trips.

Half of the 318 applications made by colleges and FE providers were successful, resulting in £24.1 million being allocated to the sector.

College staff face zero pay rise warning

College staff risk a real-terms pay cut next year unless ministers provide significant funding, college leaders and unions have warned in a joint letter.

In a rare show of unity, the Association of Colleges (AoC), University and College Union (UCU) and UNISON told education secretary Bridget Phillipson that a zero per cent pay rise recommendation could trigger “further disruption” and “inevitable consequences”.

The letter revealed that employers told unions at the first National Joint Forum meeting for the 2026-27 pay round that, without a “material change” to college funding, “a very low pay award, possibly zero, may be the limit of affordability”.

It came with a warning from union leaders that teachers will not tolerate another disappointing below-inflation or zero pay offer, hinting at future strikes.

The AoC last made a zero per cent pay recommendation in 2015-16, which triggered a national one-day strike by teachers across more than 200 colleges.

The representative body made low pay recommendations of 1 per cent (or £250) between 2016 and 2021. But in 2023-24 it delivered an exceptional 6.5 per cent proposal after the government facilitated additional 16-to-18 funding to all providers.

A 2.5 per cent pay rise was recommended in 2024-25, followed by a 4 per cent proposal last year.

The AoC and unions last joined forces seven years ago to march on parliament to demand fairer college funding.

‘Wholly insufficient’ FE funding

The government pledged “significant investment” in October’s post-16 white paper to respond to a demographic increase in 16 to 19-year-olds.

Ministers were accused in March of breaking their promise of a 16-to-19 real-terms funding increase after the DfE revealed core funding rates would only rise by 0.5 per cent, equating to a real-terms cut.

Consumer price inflation currently stands at 2.8 per cent.

The joint letter slammed the “piecemeal and wholly insufficient” 16-to-19 rate real-terms cut and recent freezes to adult and apprenticeships funding.

“If current funding levels were sufficient, colleges would be able to recruit and retain the staff they need and employers would be in a position to make a meaningful pay recommendation,” the letter said.

“The fact that neither is true demonstrates the scale of the challenge facing the sector.”

The letter added it was “inexcusable” that funding-strapped colleges are forced to turn away learners, particularly following the recent news that the number of young people not in education, employment, or training had surpassed one million.

Colleges of Further Efficiencies

Last week, the AoC met with sector unions to discuss the 2026-27 pay round.

Five trade unions representing FE staff have demanded a 10 per cent, or £3,000, pay rise next year, as well as a mirroring of starting salaries with schoolteachers and binding national pay agreements in FE.

College bosses are free to set their own staff pay, unlike in schools and sixth form colleges which have binding national pay negotiations.

All parties at the meeting agreed colleges were “hamstrung” by funding, and the widening pay gap between FE lecturers and schoolteachers, which is currently estimated at £12,500, was causing impossible recruitment and retention issues.

The AoC’s employment policy committee chair, New City College CEO Gerry McDonald, said his committee “absolutely does not want” to make a very low pay recommendation, or possibly a zero pay award, but it could be their “only option” with the current funding landscape.

“In many colleges, efficiencies will have to be made,” the letter warned.

The UCU and Unison also gave a stark warning of the “inevitable consequences” of a lack of meaningful pay awards.

UCU members at 17 colleges walked out in January over disputes with college employers who refused to meet the AoC’s 4 per cent recommendation, but some union branches settled their rows ahead of the strike.

The joint letter urges the Department for Education to commit to funding colleges so ministers’ priorities for economic growth can be met.

“Despite the injustice of college funding, and therefore pay, the sector is committed to work with you and deliver on your and the nation’s priorities,” it said.

The letter added that FE teachers hear conflicting messages from the government on the importance of a trained workforce to build more homes, grow digital capability and hit net-zero targets, but it “does not match the reality in their pay packets”.

“Until the government backs up its warm words about colleges with investment, the pay gap will only widen,” said AoC chief executive David Hughes.

“It’s quite simple, really: without extra funding, the government will fail to deliver on its own priorities.”

Jo Grady, UCU general secretary, said: “This government continues to highlight the importance of further education but the time has come to put its money where its mouth is and provide proper funding for colleges and fair pay for staff.”

Andrea Egan, general secretary of UNISON, added: “Further education is crucial for delivering the skills needed to help meet ministers’ growth ambitions, yet colleges are hamstrung by a lack of funding.”

The DfE was contacted for comment.

School rules are imposed on FE’s errant teachers

FE teachers and trainers are set to be brought into England’s national teacher misconduct regime under reforms expected to pull around 2,000 providers into scope.

Under the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act, which received royal assent in April, powers to permanently ban teachers guilty of serious misdemeanours were extended to staff at FE colleges, independent training providers and special post-16 institutions.

It also means FE settings will have a new “duty to consider” making a referral to the Teacher Regulation Agency (TRA) when a teacher is dismissed for serious misconduct.

The sector is now awaiting guidance from the Department of Education on how the rules will be applied. No date for implementation has been given and officials refused to say if the TRA – which is beset by backlogs – will get extra resources to handle its increased workload.

The DfE’s own impact assessment estimated the changes would add up to 500 additional referrals a year, based on the TRA investigating 0.3 per cent of the 470,000 school teachers already in scope during 2023.

The assessment also made a “conservative assumption” the new law would affect 2,000 providers, half of which are private companies.

Last year, the TRA spent £17 million on the regime and held a record 301 hearings, a 20 per cent increase from the year before.

Cases took an average of 113 weeks to conclude in 2023, more than double the agency’s 52-week target.

How the ban regime works

The TRA is an executive agency of the DfE. It investigates the most serious teacher misconduct cases and decides whether they should be referred to a professional conduct panel. Its remit currently covers schools and sixth form colleges.

Existing guidance says serious misconduct can include sexual misconduct, violent behaviour, serious safeguarding failures, alcohol or drug misuse, fraud or serious dishonesty, discrimination or harassment, and promoting extreme political or religious views.

The system is not designed to handle ordinary capability issues, underperformance or less serious misconduct, which remain the responsibility of employers.

The TRA’s referrals can come from employers, police, the public or the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS). Under the new act, DfE officials will also be able to refer cases directly for the first time.

Caseworkers assess whether allegations should progress to a three-person professional conduct panel, which typically include someone with recent teaching experience and a lay member.

Panels examine whether a teacher’s actions amount to unacceptable professional conduct, conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute, or a conviction for a relevant offence.

Panel members then recommend whether a prohibition order is appropriate, and a senior TRA official decides whether to make the order on behalf of the education secretary.

If a prohibition order is recommended and signed off by the secretary of state, the individual is barred from teaching. Depending on the seriousness of the offence, some teachers are allowed to apply to have their prohibition order reviewed after a set period.

Closing loopholes

The act will require FE providers to consider making a TRA referral where someone has been dismissed for serious misconduct. They must also not employ prohibited teachers.

Colleges, special post-16 institutions and training providers are already prevented from employing prohibited teachers through funding agreements. But ministers concluded the measure was insufficient since the TRA had no remit to investigate serious misconduct committed by staff in those settings.

The TRA currently covers teaching work in schools, sixth-form colleges, 16-to-19 academies, children’s homes and relevant youth accommodation. The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act adds FE colleges, special post-16 institutions, ITPs, online education providers and independent educational institutions that are not schools.

It makes clear the TRA can consider serious misconduct regardless of whether the person was employed or engaged to carry out teaching work at the time.

That means it covers conduct by someone before they became a teacher, when they were between teaching jobs, or working outside an education setting.

The DfE said the reforms would uphold standards of conduct, maintain public confidence in the teaching profession, and “extend parity of treatment” so children receive the same protection regardless of where they learn.

Exempting the smallest providers from the new requirements was considered but rejected because it would “permit small settings to employ teachers we consider to be suitable or unsafe”.

Sector leaders broadly welcomed the closure of safeguarding gaps, while warning that providers needed clear guidance before the new duties begin.

‘Extension of HR process’

Janet Curtis-Broni, chief people officer at Elevare Civic Education Group, which runs London South East Colleges, said: “It might be more work for the TRA but ultimately, it’s an extension of an HR process.

“It’s another measure to make sure we are closing all those gaps so we don’t have people who aren’t suitable to work with children.”

Cath Sezen, the Association of Colleges’ director of education policy, said it was right that colleges come under the same system as schools on these “very rare” occasions.

David Welch, principal of Green Corridor specialist college and who has previously overseen TRA referrals, said the change clarified expectations of employers and added: “If we’re referring to the DBS, we refer to the TRA. I’m confident on that threshold.”

Welch explained prohibition orders add a permanence that DBS checks and employer references cannot always provide.

“With a reference, you’re only chasing the most recent employer, and that institutional memory might fade,” he said. “What would be great is to make sure the TRA has that permanence around it.”

But Simon Ashworth, deputy chief executive and director of policy at the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, warned that providers need clear communication.

“Awareness across the sector of the impending changes, and what that means for providers’ responsibilities for reporting and compliance, remains limited,” he said.

Existing FE situation

The expansion has raised questions about how a regime designed around schools will apply to FE’s broader teaching workforce.

The TRA uses “teachers’ standards” when considering serious misconduct. The standards were written for schools, although references to pupils include post-16 learners, while references to schools should be read as the educational setting where the standards are applied.

FE teachers also have voluntary professional standards overseen by the Education and Training Foundation, covering occupational expertise and pedagogical practice.

Vikki Smith, ETF’s chief professionalism officer, said practitioners who hold qualified teacher learning and skills (QTLS) status are already subject to professional conduct processes.

“Where serious breaches are upheld, professional membership and QTLS status may be reviewed and withdrawn – and this feeds through to the TRA,” she said.

“Professionalism in FE and skills should continue to be defined by the sector’s professional standards. The role of regulation is to safeguard public confidence when those standards are seriously breached, not to define professional excellence.”

David Murray, a teacher of English at Stoke-on-Trent Sixth Form College, which is already in scope of the TRA regime, said lawmakers have not always appreciated the differences between FE and schools.

“It would seem wise to shape guidance and standards to the specific needs of the sector, and also to keep the safety and wellbeing of educators in mind in the process,” he said.

“That may take more time and more work, but it would surely be worth it to get it right.

“Violence from adult students directed towards staff who then defend themselves is very different in nature from any aggression at all directed against a minor, but such a situation could still fall into the same disciplinary area of teacher standards.”

Texting driver and OnlyFans

TRA decisions when no prohibition order is made are published and sometimes make headlines in local and national newspapers.

Published school-sector decisions show the prohibition orders can be made for behaviour beyond the classroom, and cover social media posts, dishonesty, sexual misconduct, discriminatory messages and behaviour outside work.

One teacher was found texting whilst driving a minibus of school children, but received no ban since “no doubt” had been cast on his teaching abilities.

Another posted “highly offensive” comments on social media about the Israel/Palestine conflict but did not receive a ban due to his remorse and the low risk of repetition.

A third was not banned over faking sickness to attend a stag do and removing pages from his passport as his dishonesty was not at the “most serious end of the spectrum”.

In contrast, a male teacher received a ban for being in a WhatsApp group containing racist, homophobic and misogynistic messages.

A two-year minimum ban was also handed to a woman who admitted having a “granny schoolteacher” themed OnlyFans page, and a male teacher who failed to use a transgender pupil’s preferred pronouns on live television.

University and College Union head of FE Paul Bridge said: “A lifetime prohibition order is an extremely blunt instrument and it is concerning that the secretary of state has ultimate responsibility for both the investigation of cases and the sanction imposed.”

Day in the life: ‘No young person is bad – you just have to listen to them’

After surviving cancer, West Thames College’s senior student experience coordinator Jazz Sidhu returned to the job she loves with a renewed sense of purpose. From organising sports days, fairs and cultural celebrations, to mentoring vulnerable learners, she spends her days making sure their college is about so much more than classroom learning.

She explains what a typical day looks like for her.

5.45am

I start my day with prayers of gratitude because I’m very thankful to be here living the life that I do. I’m Sikh, but they’re not necessarily Sikh prayers – they’re simply a way of saying thank you.

Two years ago, I was diagnosed with renal cancer. I was supposed to be off work for two years while I underwent treatment, but I returned last year because my job makes me happy. I needed to come back.

Having cancer changed my perspective on life. There were complications following surgery, which meant I needed immunotherapy that left scars and dark blotches on my face and body.

To me, they don’t define me. They’re my battle scars and I’m not ashamed of them. I’m just grateful the treatment affected my skin, rather than my lungs or heart.

I’m happy because I’m alive, I’m kicking, and I’m here. Life is short, and when I see students who don’t want to engage, it makes me even more determined to go over and ask, “Come on, guys, what’s going on? Talk to me.”

They have so much life ahead of them. I want to help them become the best versions of themselves. I’m lucky. One of my colleagues had cancer at the same time as me and sadly passed away. Before she died, she messaged me and said: “Jazz, don’t lose who you are; just be yourself, whatever happens.” I always remember those words.

7am

I say goodbye to my children. I had my daughter when I was 18 after I got married, and she’s now my best friend.

My first job involved helping to organise music events ranging from reggae and Punjabi bhangra nights to Notting Hill Carnival parties for a recording studio. I loved the buzz of those events.

After a spell working in a secondary school and then as a learning support assistant in the college’s library, I jumped at the chance to apply when this role came up six years ago.

7.30am

I spend my drive to work singing along to some tunes to get myself energised for the day.

We have GCSE exams this morning, so last night I went shopping for croissants and fruit for the students. When the gates open at 8am, everything is laid out in the canteen before they head into the sports hall.

It’s a free service we provide to make sure they’ve eaten before the exam. We have a large cohort of looked-after children, including unaccompanied asylum-seeking ESOL students without family in the UK. Providing food for everyone also helps create a sense of belonging.

We’re lucky to have the grade II-listed Spring Grove House on our Isleworth campus. It was once home to the botanist Sir Joseph Banks, who sailed with Captain Cook. It’s a lovely old building with stained-glass windows, fireplaces and a conservatory. The only downside is that it gets very hot in summer.

The stained glass window at West Thames College

8.30am

The teachers start collecting up students’ phones and helping them get settled into the exam room.

I also oversee sports enrichment. On match days, I make sure fixtures are running on time and that staff know where they’re supposed to be. I also check that students have their kit because dry cleaners don’t always return everything when they’re supposed to.

At Isleworth, our students can play basketball, football, volleyball, badminton, and do boxing, fitness and yoga. We also have a skills centre in Feltham specialising in construction trades and motor vehicle maintenance.

In March, we held our first cross-college sports day. Students from the skills centre came to Isleworth for the first time. We were nervous about how they would react, because some of them lacked confidence. We spoke to them beforehand to reassure them that they were just as much a part of West Thames College as anyone else.

Many learners arrive from schools where extracurricular sport has been reduced in recent years, so joining clubs doesn’t come naturally to them. This year we deliberately targeted students who usually sit on the sidelines and don’t take part in activities, encouraging them to get involved.

Many were shy and rarely even entered the common room. Now some of those same students have joined volleyball and basketball clubs.

The sports day went brilliantly and the skills centre students won the trophy. They were absolutely delighted. Since then, some of them have come to Isleworth to play football and badminton. It has made a real difference.

Jaz Sidhi (far left) with students at West Thames College

10am

If I’m organising an event that day, I’ll first check that all the risk assessments have been approved. If they haven’t, the event can’t go ahead. Then comes the practical side: moving chairs and tables. Chairs always seem to be stacked in a way that makes them impossible to separate! The estates team are amazing.

I also organise Freshers’, Christmas, Valentine’s and summer fairs, as well as Black History Month celebrations. And this year our higher education fair was one of the biggest we’ve ever hosted, with around 30 universities attending.

My favourite day of the year is culture day because it’s about celebrating each and every one of our students for who they are. We do a fashion show, and they parade down the stairs with their flags, wearing their cultural attire – the atmosphere is buzzing.

It’s so important for their sense of belonging. Before, we used to hold Commonwealth Day, but it doesn’t resonate with everyone in the same way.

We ask local restaurants to donate food, and some staff also cook for the occasion. Last year, Oscar from South America brought in an amazing milk pudding, Myra brought in her Philippine dish, Dion brought in her Caribbean food, Pal brought in his Indian food and Pakistani kebabs, and all the staff dressed up – although not me, as I’m the one running around! The event has become so popular we even get people trying to sneak in from other colleges!

Jaz Sidhu playing pool with students in the common room

12pm

I open our common room, which quickly fills up with students.

I studied business at this college myself as a teenager, but it was a very different place back then. We only had a small hut as a common room and not much else. The student experience is much richer now.

Whenever I’m thinking about facilities or activities, I try to put myself in the students’ shoes. What would I have wanted when I was their age?

We try to make the space inclusive for everyone.

On Tuesdays, we black out the sports hall windows so girls who wear hijabs can remove them while playing volleyball, badminton or football.

We’ve also introduced girls’ tea and tell sessions in which we close off part of the common room and provide tea, games and a relaxed space where the girls can spend time together.

We reserve slots for supported-learning students too. They particularly enjoy singing and dancing. One student, Selena, sings at the top of her lungs and fills the room with energy.

We’ve got table football, pool, table tennis and board games, and we’re always looking at adding more, and hoping to get funding to redecorate and make it a brighter space.

The PlayStation is particularly popular. Students form teams and socialise together. I love the noise and excitement when they’re competing. We’ve arranged the sofas so it’s difficult for anyone to sit completely alone. They naturally end up talking to one another.

West Thames College main campus building

2pm

I have a meeting with the students’ union. Normally, I’m not a fan of meetings – I’m more of a doer – but I enjoy working with our student ambassadors and course representatives.

Recently they organised an esports event entirely by themselves that attracted around 50 students. And when the Lord Mayor held a curry lunch, we only needed 15 volunteers and were overwhelmed by the response.

We have many ESOL learners, some of whom arrive with little or no English. One of our student ambassadors is Ako, who arrived from Kurdistan as a shy teenager with no English at all. He worked his way up through ESOL, completed GCSEs, and progressed onto a Brentford FC community sports course.

Today, he often helps interpret for our parents who only speak Arabic. Watching his confidence grow has been incredible.

We want to involve more ESOL students in wider college life, whether that’s becoming ambassadors, attending meetings or supporting parents’ evenings.

3pm

On Fridays, I help mentor a group of foundation-level students.

There are around 17 learners in the class, and they spend an hour straight with the same teacher, so I try to bring in activities that keep them engaged.

A few weeks ago, we played a consent and boundaries game using “yes” and “no” cards placed around the room. It sparked some really thoughtful discussions.

I grew up in Southall as one of six sisters. We had plenty of arguments, but we always loved one another. I spent a lot of time helping one of my more rebellious younger sisters with her education, and I think that’s partly why I enjoy mentoring young people so much now.

4pm

I finish my reports and admin, which might involve arranging a workshop for our learners on knife crime or gang culture.

We’re not in a crime-ridden area, but we do have students coming from other areas who face being pulled into criminal behaviour by peer pressure.

A specialist youth worker from the charity Redthread, which is focused on breaking cycles of violence among young people, came in to speak to students on our Brentford Football Club sports course.

Some of these footballers see themselves as the bee’s knees, with the girls flocking around them. But only 1 per cent of them might make it as professional footballers, and mental health issues can arise for those who don’t.

The youth worker told these boys to make sure they get another skill. It was a really inspiring talk, and the students were all nodding along to what he was saying.

We also have Hounslow Council in, giving out free condoms and helping to support students around sexual health. We have STI kits we can discreetly offer too.

Our students are really affected by the cost-of-living crisis, so we’ve signed up for a fair share scheme that provides free food. We also work with hygiene business PHS, who provide toiletries for those that need them.

5pm

I drive home and catch up on whatever TV drama series I’m watching, although I have a bad habit of checking my work emails when I shouldn’t.

Most evenings we eat with my mum, either at her house or ours. She often brings Indian dishes or fish and chips. My favourite meal is quinoa with chicken curry on top.

I try to be asleep by around 10.30pm, usually after reminding my son to keep the noise down on his PlayStation.

I’m incredibly proud of our students. No young person is bad. If you take the time to understand them, listen to them and show that you care, it can make an enormous difference.

The most rewarding part of my job is seeing the change in them and hearing from staff about how well they’ve done. That’s what makes everything worthwhile.

Union stands down after City & Guilds offshoring assurances

Union officials have called off a workforce redundancy dispute with City & Guilds bosses that threatened to boil over into legal and industrial action.

Unite the Union said the awarding businesses’ management had provided “guarantees” that plans for mass redundancies and offshoring to Greece “will not go ahead”.

Unite is understood to have accepted terms offered by new owner PeopleCert that included voluntary redundancy for all 75 roles that were at risk, an additional payment equivalent to one month’s basic salary, payment in lieu of notice, positive references and “outplacement” support worth £500.

Employees will be asked to sign a “standard” settlement agreement with up to £500 plus VAT each available towards legal advice.

Unite general secretary Sharon Graham said: “City & Guilds workers will be breathing a small sigh of relief now that these guarantees have been given and a financial settlement reached.”

A spokesperson for the union confirmed that all threats of legal and industrial action had been called off following the settlement.

City & Guilds has about 1,300 staff in the UK, with many of the roles at risk of redundancy understood to be in the company’s business central support functions.

The agreement follows public criticism from union bosses that the firm allegedly advertised for jobs in Greece during negotiations, and failed to involve staff early enough in the redundancy process.

Awarding and training giant City & Guilds was bought by Greek-owned PeopleCert last October, after 148 years as a not-for-profit operation owned by the City & Guilds of London Institute, now known as the City & Guilds Foundation.

Details of PeopleCert’s plans to shed around one third of City & Guilds’ workforce were outlined in a presentation for investors published last year that appeared to have been accidentally published online.

The presentation suggested plans to relocate some staff roles to Greece, where personnel costs are “up to 50 per cent lower”, through “natural employee churn”.

Unite said bosses had now provided assurances that staff offshoring was off the table.

Unite regional officer Peter Storey said: “Unite will remain vigilant of the future direction of travel at City & Guilds under PeopleCert.

“Protecting the long-term security of City & Guilds staff is our top priority and I urge all workers that are still not members to join Unite: Strong unionised workplaces deliver stronger outcomes for workers.”

A spokesperson for City & Guilds Limited said: “Measures have been agreed to minimise the impact on affected colleagues, maximise opportunities for redeployment and voluntary redundancy, and provide enhanced financial and practical support for those whose roles are ultimately confirmed as redundant.

“Together, these measures represent a generous and supportive package that delivers a positive outcome for affected colleagues while supporting the organisation’s long-term needs.”

City & Guild Foundation starts own probe into PeopleCert deal

City & Guilds Foundation has agreed to hold an independent inquiry into the controversial sale of its City & Guilds awarding business.

The probe will seek a “clear, evidence-based understanding” of the charity’s decision to sell its business to privately owned PeopleCert for £166 million last year, including the rationale and governance processes trustees followed.

Findings from the inquiry, which will be led by a senior barrister, are expected to be shared with the charity’s advisory “council” this autumn and published publicly.

It will be separate from the Charity Commission’s ongoing inquiry into the sale, which is probing trustee decision-making and bonuses paid to senior executives after the deal went through.

Trustees sold the vocational and technical awarding operation, established 150 years ago, to the for-profit PeopleCert awarding business owned by Greek businessman Byron Nicolaides last October.

The charity has since faced intense scrutiny over leaked details of million-pound bonuses for senior executives involved in the deal, prompting the ongoing statutory Charity Commission investigation.

This week, PeopleCert concluded its own probe into the conduct of the senior executives, which accused the now-dismissed CEO Kirstie Donnelly and chief financial officer Abid Ismail of paying themselves bonuses of £1.7 million and £1.2 million respectively “without authorisation”.

Demand for answers

The charity’s announcement to hold an inquiry follows pressure from an action group made up of members of its advisory council, fellows and senior leaders, who demanded an investigation into how and why trustees agreed to sell the historic awarding and training business after 30 months of secret bidding and negotiations.

The advisory council, which includes representatives of historic City of London livery companies that co-founded the charity more than a century ago, is understood to have only been informed two weeks before the sale.

A spokesperson for the City & Guilds of London Institute, now known as the City & Guilds Foundation, said: “We’re really pleased to have been able to find a constructive way forward with representatives of our members and counsellors regarding the resolution at our yearly meeting.

“An independent inquiry, led by a King’s Counsel, will go ahead with the aim to establish a clear, evidence-based understanding of the factors behind the strategic decision to sell the charity’s awarding, assessment and training businesses, and to include the rationale and the governance processes involved.

“The independent inquiry will also identify lessons for strategic renewal that will strengthen future governance, transparency, and accountability consistent with our emergent strategy.”

The spokesperson added that the KC leading the inquiry was yet to be appointed and that the charity intended to publish his or her findings.

The move comes two months after the charity’s advisory council passed a resolution calling for an independent inquiry into “all aspects” of the sale.

Council member Neil Bates, who is also a member of the City & Guilds action group, said the group strongly welcomes the inquiry announcement.

He added: “I want to acknowledge the positive and collaborative leadership shown by the new chair, Jessica Leigh Jones, and her team in working with us to reach this point.

“Their commitment to an inquiry of genuine independence, led at the highest level, has been important in enabling this constructive way forward.

“This inquiry is not only about understanding what happened — it is a necessary foundation for rebuilding public trust and confidence as City & Guilds develops its future strategy and renews its role as a national institution.”

It also follows the appointment of chair Jessica Leigh Jones, who took over the charity’s trustee leadership role from Baroness Ann Limb in April.

Limb stepped down in January as she prepared to enter the Lords amid a controversy over inaccurately claiming she had a PhD.

Ringfencing post-16 SEND funding not ‘right approach’, says DfE

Ringfencing funding dedicated to college learners with SEND would create significant administrative burdens and risk fragmenting provision, the government has said.

The response follows recommendations made by the education select committee last year, which urged policymakers to create a ringfenced funding stream for special educational needs in FE after its inquiry found post-16 SEND students were “rarely seen” as a funding priority.

The committee said: “The Department for Education should introduce a dedicated and ring-fenced funding stream for SEN support beyond the age of 16. This would enable further education providers to recruit and retain specialist staff, provide tailored learning resources, and make the reasonable adjustments necessary to meet the diverse needs of learners with SEND.”

In its response, the Department for Education partially accepted the recommendation but said a separate funding pot was not the “right approach” as it would bring significant administrative burdens and reduce provider flexibility.

Officials explained: “Ringfenced funding risks fragmenting provision in ways that do not support the holistic, responsive support we want for young people with SEND and other young people with wider needs.”

The government said funding in the SEND system is already “too confusing” and “too tightly linked” to bureaucratic processes.

The DfE said colleges should have the flexibility to use core budgets to support learners with additional needs.

DfE also restated its intention to redirect more money into mainstream budgets from high needs block funding.

The reforms were proposed in its SEND consultation proposals in February, which committed £1.6 billion over the next three years to make mainstream settings more inclusive.

Officials also flagged to the education committee that more than 300 providers received a share of £73 million from the government’s inclusive mainstream fund, announced last week.

DfE is also reviewing the 16 to 19 funding formula, as previously indicated in the post-16 white paper in October, but explicitly said the assessment would support inclusive provision for all learners, including those with SEND.

Don’t expect statutory transport any time soon

Today’s report forms the government’s official response to the education select committee’s ‘solving the SEND crisis’ inquiry, which opened 18 months ago.

Committee chair Helen Hayes pushed for government investment in a universal free bus pass for under-22s and a review into home-to-school and college transport.

Councils are not obliged to fund transport for learners over the age of 16, but some continue to provide it with the addition of a financial contribution from families.

The committee has previously called for an extension of the statutory duty to FE SEND students aged 16 to 25 in their FE and skills inquiry.

DfE partially accepted the recommendation to review post-16 SEND transport.

But the department ruled out the idea of setting statutory criteria for post-16 transport as it would be “undeliverable” for councils without additional funding.

The report said: “We do not have current plans to [provide additional funding] because we do not think setting statutory criteria is the best route to sufficiently targeting those most in need or would further enhance the delivery of existing duties.”

Local authorities have a duty to publish and implement a transport policy outlining provisions to help over-16s to attend education and arrangements for financial assistance.

The department added that it was collecting voluntary data from local councils to “build” its understanding of current transport provision and costs, which it plans to publish this summer.

Susan Acland-Hood, permanent secretary in the DfE, previously told the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) that a “blanket” would be difficult due to the widespread provision across the country.