A teaching union has said actions by the chief executive of education has further undermined its confidence in the department.

Professor Ronald Barr wrote to all head teachers, at their home addresses, over the Christmas holiday, outlining the Department of Education, Sport and Culture’s position in the dispute over pay.

The letter, dated January 2, criticised the teaching unions’ reasons for considering strike action and also included a copy of each head’s contract, which outlines the process for pay increases.

In a statement, the National Association of Head Teachers said the letter was a tactic by the department, which it has accused of trying to undermine the unions as they ballot for industrial action this week.

A union spokesman said: ’We are clear that this tactic by the employer is nothing but a "red herring" and indicative of an employer who is attempting to undermine the ballot of our members regarding industrial action.’

Three unions are balloting for industrial action - NASUWT, NAHT and ASCL . They are contesting the decision not to implement a 3.5% increase in pay by England, which meant it also wasn’t introduced in the island.

In both instances this was in opposition to the advice by the School Teachers’ Review Body (STRB) with the UK and the Isle of Man both implementing the 2019 school teachers’ pay and conditions document 2019 (STPCD) instead.

Professor Barr said: ’The department has implemented the STPCD award every year since 1992 ie for 27 years, including in those years when the STPCD was different to the STRB. The department’s collectively-agreed pay policy makes this agreement clear in the relevant heading which states ’Pay Increases Arising from Changes to the STPCD.

’The individual employment contracts explicitly state this contractual arrangement clear.’

The NAHT called this ’misleading’ and told members ’precedence was set by the department to break away from the STPCD in 2015, when the department attempted to not award the full pay recommendation by STRB’.

Professor Barr added that the ’department considers it has met its contractual obligations’.

He added: ’It is not clear why ASCL and NAHT still seem to consider that the STRB should have been implemented in 2018/19 rather than the STPCD, nor why this arrangement is in dispute.’

The letter was shared with MHKs and the media by the department itself, a move which further displeased the unions.

In a letter to members, the NAHT executive council in the island said that the ’content of the letter, together with these subsequent actions, serve to further undermine our confidence in the department to fulfil their stated commitment to putting a business case to Treasury on our behalf’.

A statement from NAHT also rejected Professor Barr’s claims over a lack of clarity regarding the ballot for industrial action and that the union is ’bitterly disappointed that rather than sit down to negotiate a settlement with the teaching unions DESC seem intent on communicating misinformation’.

It added: ’This letter from Ronald Barr in effect changes nothing regarding our dispute which is absolutely clear in that DESC failed to implement the recommendation of the independent STRB.

’Our dispute with DESC was raised in March 2019 and indeed was the sole reason that members of NAHT took action in September.

’ In good faith NAHT and its members suspended industrial action in order to enter into meaningful negotiations which unfortunately has led to no successful resolution to date.’