A pay rise of 6.5% has been accepted by a major teaching union.
Members of the National Education Union (NEU) voted to accept the deal, which was made based on recommendations by the independent School Teachers’ Review Body (STRB).
The NEU had advised its members to accept the deal, which also includes an extra £900m in funding for schools per year.
“Members have spoken very clearly and in great numbers,” Dr Mary Bousted and Kevin Courtney, joint general secretaries of the NEU, said.
The union said an electronic ballot of its teacher members saw 86% vote to accept the offer and end industrial action, with turnout of 60%.
A ballot of the union’s support staff members in England also saw 85% accept the pay offer, with a turnout of 46%.
More on Strikes
Related Topics:
Members of the NEU staged eight days of strike action in state schools in England since February in a dispute over pay.
The NEU is one of the largest education unions in Europe and represents more than 450,000 teachers, lecturers, education support staff and leaders.
Advertisement
Members of the Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL) in England have already voted to accept the pay rise from September.
Meanwhile, the NASUWT teachers’ union and the National Association of Head Teachers (NAHT) are expected to announce their members’ responses to the pay offer on Monday.
The Government has said the 6.5% pay award for teachers will be “fully funded”, with £525m of additional funding for schools in 2023-24 and a further £900m in 2024-25.
A re-ballot of NEU teacher members in England on strike action, which opened in May before the pay offer was made, saw 95% vote to renewing the union’s strike mandate for a further six months, with a turnout of 53%.
But the NEU has said the electronic ballot result on the Government’s 6.5% pay offer for 2023-24 means that further strike action over pay will now not go ahead in the autumn term.
Dr Bousted and Mr Courtney said: “As a democratic union, the NEU leadership promised members that any pay and funding offer given by Government that warranted their consideration would be put to them.
“The NEU submissions to the STRB went a long way towards changing the Government’s position on pay and funding. The strike action taken by our members also shifted the dial, securing the highest pay award for over thirty years. Members should be proud they have also secured extra funding for schools.”
They added: “The Government should be in no doubt that we will hold its feet to the fire on delivering for teachers and support staff on workload and funding and continue to represent the profession in future STRB consultations.
“It remains the view of the NEU that school and college funding is far from adequate. It remains a commitment of the NEU to campaign for further increases in teacher pay.
“Everyone in the school and colleges community deserves an education system that attracts and keeps teaching staff, and one that ensures every child gets the attention and support they deserve. Our campaign for a better-funded education system will not go away.”
A US judge has granted prediction markets platform Kalshi a temporary reprieve from enforcement after the state of Connecticut sent it a cease and desist order last week for allegedly conducting unlicensed gambling.
The Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection (DCP) sent Kalshi, along with Robinhood and Crypto.com, cease and desist orders on Dec. 2, accusing them of “conducting unlicensed online gambling, more specifically sports wagering, in Connecticut through its online sports event contracts.”
Kalshi sued the DCP a day later, arguing its event contracts “are lawful under federal law” and its platform was subject to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s “exclusive jurisdiction,” and filed a motion on Friday to temporarily stop the DCP’s action.
An excerpt from Kalshi’s preliminary injunction motion arguing that the DCP’s action violates federal commodities laws. Source: CourtListener
Connecticut federal court judge Vernon Oliver said in an order on Monday that the DCP must “refrain from taking enforcement action against Kalshi” as the court considers the company’s bid to temporarily stop the regulator.
The order adds that the DCP should file a response to the company by Jan. 9 and Kalshi should file further support for its motion by Jan. 30, with oral arguments for the case to be held in mid-February.
Kalshi does battle with multiple US states
Kalshi is a federally regulated designated contract maker under the CFTC and, in January, began offering contracts nationally that allow bets on the outcome of events such as sports and politics.
Its platform has become hugely popular this year and saw a record $4.54 billion monthly trading volume in November, attracting billions in investments, with Kalshi closing a $1 billion funding round earlier this month at a valuation of $11 billion.
However, multiple US state regulators have taken issue with Kalshi’s offerings, which have led to the company being embroiled in lawsuits over whether it is subject to state-level gambling laws.
Kalshi sued the New York State Gaming Commission in October after the regulator sent a cease and desist order claiming it offered a platform for sports wagering without a license.
In September, Massachusetts’ state attorney general sued Kalshi in state court, which the company asked to be tossed. So far this year, Kalshi has sued state regulators in New Jersey, Nevada, Maryland and Ohio, accusing each of regulatory overreach.
Sir Keir Starmer has called for a tougher approach to policing Europe’s borders ahead of a meeting between leaders to discuss a potential shake-up of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
The prime minister said the way in which the ECHR is interpreted in courts must be modernised, with critics long claiming the charter is a major barrier to deportations of illegal migrants.
His deputy, David Lammy, will today be in Strasbourg, France, with fellow European ministers to discuss reforms of how the agreement is interpreted in law across the continent.
In an opinion piece for The Guardian, Sir Keir and his Danish counterpart, Mette Frederiksen, said the change was necessary to prevent voters from turning to populist political opponents.
Image: Small boat crossings have risen this year. File pic: PA
What’s the issue with the ECHR?
The ECHR, which is the foundation of Britain’s Human Rights Act, includes the right to family life in its Article 8.
That is often used as grounds to prevent deportations of illegal migrants from the UK.
More on Asylum
Related Topics:
There has also been a rise in cases where Article 3 rights, prohibiting torture, were used to halt deportations over claims migrants’ healthcare needs could not be met in their home country, according to the Home Office.
The Conservatives and Reform UK have both said they would leave the ECHR if in power, while the Labour government has insisted it will remain a member of the treaty.
But Sir Keir admitted in his joint op-ed that the “current asylum framework was created for another era”.
“In a world with mass mobility, yesterday’s answers do not work. We will always protect those fleeing war and terror – but the world has changed, and asylum systems must change with it,” the two prime ministers wrote, as they push for a “modernisation of the interpretation” of the ECHR.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:16
System ‘more than broken’, says asylum seeker
What is happening today?
Mr Lammy is attending an informal summit of the Council of Europe.
He is expected to say: “We must strike a careful balance between individual rights and the public’s interest.
“The definition of ‘family life’ can’t be stretched to prevent the removal of people with no right to remain in the country [and] the threshold of ‘inhuman and degrading treatment’ must be constrained to the most serious issues.”
It is understood that a political declaration signed by the gathered ministers could carry enough weight to directly influence how the European Court of Human Rights interprets the treaty.
The UK government is expected to bring forward its own legislation to change how Article 8 is interpreted in UK courts, and is also considering a re-evaluation of the threshold for Article 3 rights.
Image: David Lammy will swap Westminster for Strasbourg today
The plans have been criticised by Amnesty International UK, which described them as weakening protections.
“Human rights were never meant to be optional or reserved for comfortable and secure times. They were designed to be a compass, our conscience, when the politics of fear and division try to steer us wrong,” Steve Valdez-Symonds, the organisation’s refugee and migrant rights programme director, said.
Sir Keir’s government has already adopted several hardline immigration measures – modelled on those introduced by Ms Federiksen’s Danish government – to decrease the number of migrants crossing the Channel via small boats.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:40
Beth Rigby: The two big problems with Labour’s asylum plan
Starmer-Macron deal ‘a sticking plaster’
Meanwhile, French far-right leader Jordan Bardella told The Daily Telegraph he would rewrite his country’s border policy to allow British patrol boats to push back small vessels carrying migrants into France’s waters if he were elected.
The National Rally leader called Sir Keir’s “one-in, one-out” agreement with Emmanuel Macron, which includes Britain returning illegal arrivals in exchange for accepting a matching number of legitimate asylum seekers, a “sticking plaster” and “smokescreen”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
4:02
Far-right, 30, and France’s most popular politician
He said that only a complete overhaul of French immigration policy would stop the Channel crossings.
Mr Bardella is currently leading in opinion polls to win the first round of France’s next presidential election, expected to happen in 2027, to replace Mr Macron.
The race for the new US Federal Reserve chair is nearing the finish line, with US President Donald Trump reportedly set to begin interviewing finalists for the top job this week.
According to a report from the Financial Times on Tuesday, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has presented a list of four names to the White House.
One of these is former Fed governor Kevin Warsh, whom Bessent is scheduled to meet with on Wednesday. Another is National Economic Council director Kevin Hassett, who is seen as the frontrunner for the role.
Another two names would be picked from a list of other finalists, which includes Fed governors Christopher Waller and Michelle Bowman, and BlackRock chief investment officer Rick Rieder.
Trump and Bessent are expected to hold at least one interview next week, as a decision looks likely to be announced in January.
However, Trump has revealed he already has his eye on one particular candidate.
“We’re going to be looking at a couple different people, but I have a pretty good idea of who I want,” Trump said to journalists on Air Force One on Tuesday.
Kevin Hassett is a frontrunner for Fed chair role
The upcoming round of interviews suggests that Hassett may not be the clear lock in for the role as previously thought, though he is seen as the favorite.
Earlier this month, prediction market odds on Kalshi and Polymarket shot up for Hassett significantly following comments from Trump at the White House on Dec. 2.
While welcoming guests, Trump labeled Hassett as “potential Fed chair” leading many to assume the president had let a major hint slip.
With Hassett’s odds spiking to 85% after Trump’s comments last week, they have since declined to around 73% for Hassett, while Warsh’s odds sit at 13% on Kalshi at the time of writing, which has floated around this range over December.
Regardless of who ends up taking over as chair, the move is bound to impact crypto markets under the new leadership.
If elected, Hassett has asserted that he will be apolitical in terms of running the Fed, despite his close ties to Trump. Speaking with The Wall Street Journal this week, Hassett said that “You just do the right thing” when asked if he would blindly follow orders from Trump.
“Suppose that inflation has gotten from, say, 2.5% to 4%. You can’t cut,” Hassett said, adding that he would rely on his own “judgment, which I think the president trusts.”