The removal of mandatory performance-related pay (PRP) for teachers marks a significant shift in education policy and school management.
As of September 2024, schools in England no longer have to link teacher pay progression to performance outcomes. This is a change formalised in the latest School Teachers’ Pay and Conditions Document (STPCD) and supported by non-statutory guidance from the Department for Education.
Why was performance-related pay removed?
People have long criticised performance-related pay for its administrative burden, questionable impact on teaching quality, and the stress it places on staff.
The Workload Reduction Taskforce and subsequent government reviews concluded that PRP often failed to deliver its intended outcomes and contributed to teacher dissatisfaction and attrition.
What changes now?
While performance-related pay is no longer mandatory, schools still have the discretion to retain it in full or in part. Crucially, the statutory requirement to appraise teachers remains.
Pay decisions must still follow the completion of the annual appraisal cycle. Schools must also ensure that their pay policies clearly outline how they’ll make progression decisions, whether or not they are linked to performance.
Risks and opportunities
Removing performance-related pay does not mean abandoning accountability. In fact, it presents an opportunity to reimagine performance management in a way that is more supportive, developmental and equitable.
However, without careful planning, schools risk creating systems that are either too lax, leading to automatic pay progression without merit, or too opaque, which could invite challenges from staff and unions.
What should schools be thinking about?
Redefining appraisal systems
Schools must ensure their appraisal processes remain robust, fair, and focused on professional growth. This includes:
- Setting clear, measurable objectives aligned with school priorities.
- Ensuring appraisals are evidence-informed but not overly bureaucratic.
- Maintaining a consistent process across departments and roles.
Clarifying pay progression criteria
Even without performance-related pay, schools must define how teachers move through pay scales. This could include:
- Annual progression unless they have documented performance concerns.
- Use of half-points or staggered increments to manage budget and reward sustained excellence.
- Transparent criteria for upper pay range applications and progression.
Strengthening professional development
With the shift away from performance-related pay, schools should double down on:
- CPD tailored to individual and school needs.
- Peer reviews, coaching, and mentoring to foster a culture of collaboration and improvement.
Maintaining accountability without punishment
Schools should avoid replacing performance-related pay with punitive systems. Instead, they should:
- Use appraisal outcomes to identify support needs early.
- Ensure capability procedures are a last resort, not a default.
Engaging stakeholders
It’s important to clearly communicate policy changes to staff and unions. Schools should:
- Consult on changes to pay policies.
- Provide training for appraisers and governors on the new framework.
Conclusion
The end of mandatory PRP is not the end of performance management. Rather, it is a chance to build systems that are fairer, more supportive and better aligned with the realities of teaching.
By focusing on clarity, consistency and development, schools can ensure that they maintain and even enhance standards in this new era.
Lirette Mill is head of HR Advisory at HR Connect, a company that specialises in supporting the education and public sectors.
