(Finance) – Majority amendments tabled with a replacement text with respect to the one approved by the Government in Law Decree 36/2022 with some substantial changes to the text published in the Official Gazette on 30 April last, but with still as many omissions the result of evident evaluation errors.
The vote for the reform? A rejection for Anief
Anief had already challenged the decree proposing interventions on compulsory training and additional hours to be included in collective bargaining. Anief also expressed a negative opinion on the evident redundancy of tests and exams, since the proposed path risks transforming access to the role into an obstacle course with an uncertain outcome for precarious staff who will have to bear the costs of training and risk of not having so easily access to the role. But above all the union has definitely contested that training is financed by cuts in staff and the teacher’s charter which, precisely to encourage training, was established. Anief has asked for a double channel of recruitment for the precarious of the GPSa transitional solution for temporary IRC teachers and educators and administrative staff, as well as certain rules for mobility.
Some of the proposed amendments are the result of the requests of our union, according to an Anief note: recognition of the validity of the 24 ECTS without prejudice to the 10 ECTS of direct internship; access for the first three cycles of the initial training course for those serving in state or party schools within the limits of the indicated reserve of places; for ITP maintenance of the requirements referred to in Legislative Decree 59 of 2017 for access to competitions.
Yet green disk a: request to defer to national bargaining the incentive referred to national bargaining; elimination of staff cuts; elimination of cuts to the teacher’s card; the return to the bargaining channel of the definition of the number of additional hours; access to specialization on support for those who are three years old.
The proposed amendments also concern the Training Incentive Fund to be determined following the lower staff costs following the demographic trend and the first application of the salary incentive decided by the evaluation committee in the new composition defined by the proposed amendments and defining that the salary incentive is equal to the achievement of the seniority step.
However, in the proposed amendments, the impossibility of practicing staff rotation for the award of the incentive remains firm.