I watched as his finger traced the line from left to right across the screen, in its steely Excel glow, wincing as it settled on the final column: “That’s a luxury position. She could go.”
These cold words were uttered by a chief finance officer we’d invited to review our standing.
The so-called ‘luxury’ was our pastoral manager: a trained counsellor, safeguarding lead and an emotional lifeline for dozens of families and vulnerable children, all rolled into one vital person.
With a single swipe, the complex needs of an entire school community were disregarded — replaced by the illusion of headline savings on a morbid spreadsheet.
With news this week that the government will not fund the difference between the 2.8 per cent pay rise it has budgeted for and the 4 per cent pay rise the school teachers’ review body (STRB) has recommended, this grim scenario will be played out across the country. Again.
For years now, those who stand on the frontline of education — teachers, support staff, and school leaders — have been pitted against those who manage the bottom line. More often than not, the bottom line wins.
In grey rooms far removed from the classroom, faceless figures populate hungry databases and fuel insensitive algorithms. Budgets are squeezed, cuts are made and ‘efficiencies’ are celebrated.
Yet every number in those cells represents a potentially vital role: a teaching assistant calming an anxious child; a pastoral leader preventing a crisis; a lunchtime supervisor building relationships with vulnerable students. Every ‘cost-saving’ decision risks cutting away at the beating heart and bedrock of education.
Support staff are often the first to face the financial scalpel. They’re seen as non-essential, an easy line to strike through when budgets are tight.
Teaching assistants, behaviour mentors, safeguarding officers, site managers, counsellors — all fall under the label of ‘support’, yet they are the foundations that keep schools standing strong. When they are lost, the impact ripples far wider and deeper than any budget forecast can predict.
When they are lost, the impact ripples far wider and deeper than any budget forecast can predict
A child struggling with speech and language delay, once supported by a specialist TA, falls behind permanently in the absence of early intervention.
A pupil at risk of exclusion finds no consistent adult to de-escalate a brewing situation.
An overstretched pastoral team finds itself unable to notice or act on safeguarding red flags before they become serious incidents.
A teacher without classroom support decides the workload is simply unmanageable, and burnout and exit from the profession ensue.
Short-term savings create long-term costs: financial, human, and societal. What is saved on today’s spreadsheet could cost millions later in alternative provision placements, mental health services, youth justice interventions, prisons or lost economic contribution.
Support staff are not ‘luxuries or ‘add-ons’. They are specialist practitioners, nurturers, protectors, motivators and crucial links between students, families and teachers. Their work underpins every headline attainment statistic and every Ofsted judgement. Without them, the system is hollowed out from the inside.
Yet time and again, key stakeholders fail to see the real economy of investing in people. They demand better attendance, better outcomes, better behaviour while stripping away the very support networks that make those achievements possible.
If decision-makers stood for one day in a busy school foyer, a social, emotional and mental health (SEMH) base, or a year one phonics lesson, they would see it clearly: success in education is not about cutting costs; it’s about building capacity.
And failing to do that only costs more in the long term, because the tragic loss of expertise, trust and stability that results from staffing cuts takes years – and massive investment – to rebuild.
In the meantime, children suffer, families lose faith and schools, already stretched thin, buckle under the weight of impossible expectations.
If education is to thrive, we must stop viewing its people as expendable.
Protecting the frontline workforce is not a luxury; it is a necessity for building a strong, fair and sustainable education system.
Staffing is not a line-item. It is the future. And it deserves a better chance.
As someone who wields the steely excel data do you honestly think we enjoy it. I have worked in schools and local authorities since 1998 and my experience is part of trying to ensure schools continue to have the staff needed, the resources that are vital and supporting leaders and governors with those difficult decisions. Do not tar us with the brush of indifference, we have our responsibilities too which include attempting to mitigate as best we can the vastly ineffective funding mechanisms for your school.
Completely agree with Joy – I am a CFO for a medium sized trust and can assure you that no ‘efficiencies’ are celebrated and all of these incredibly difficult decisions are made together with headteachers and educational leaders within our trust.
The reason why it is support staff being looked at is because classes need qualified teachers and everything else has already been cut. The government funding over the past few years has boxed schools in – more often than not cutting support staff is sadly the only option left, but never an easy one.
Excellent article and very well written. My own school, also in the South West, is having to ‘save’ money somehow…and that somehow is support staff. The impact of this on the children and community is going to be huge. Government funding is not good enough
Rather than blaming who has to make the decision, and of course it’s not a decision anyone likes, I feel the bigger picture could be far higher than any trust CEO or trust finance officer. Schools are expected to continue to make ‘efficiencies’ and that has come from central government, this one and the last, and we all know what efficiencies means because all that is left to reduce now is the payroll.
From a LA maintained school headteacher
Well written article “Interesting insights—it’s concerning to see funding decisions potentially impacting frontline staff. Prioritizing quality education should always come before financial savings.”