More than 85 per cent of Ofsted employees received performance-related pay increases, new figures show - some as much as £5,000.
That compares to around 75 per cent getting bonuses in the two previous years, according to the latest figures showing non-consolidated performance-related payments (NCPRP) published today.
The data for 2018-19 follows warnings from school leaders’ unions earlier this year that the PRP system has “failed” for teachers because it has created “significant equalities concerns” and worsened recruitment and retention problems.
Exclusive: Heads turn away from teacher performance pay
News: Performance-related teacher pay: it simply does not work
Read: DfE probing ’unintended impact’ of teacher pay deal
The figures show that the total Ofsted wage bill rose from around £89 million in 2017 to £101 million in 2018-19. It was a year when staff numbers increased from 1,529 to 1,653 and 85 per cent of them shared PRP bonuses of more than £1 million.
Figures also show that 55 per cent of around 6,000 Department for Education staff received PRP last year also, compared to 50 per cent in 2017-18.
However, staff at exam regulator Ofqual staff received no PRP at all in those two years.
Earlier this year, a survey by the NASUWT teaching union found that a fifth of teachers had still not received a decision as to whether they would receive performance-related pay at the end of 2018, despite DfE recommendations that teachers should be notified by the end of October.
Four teaching unions have since urged government to remove the PRP system for teachers “as a matter of urgency”.
The NEU teaching union, NAHT school leaders’ union, the Voice and the Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL) said: “It creates needless additional workload and bureaucracy and reduces the scope for positive and open appraisal discussions.
“The imposition of PRP, without any equality impact assessment or credible evidence that it is appropriate for teaching, has created significant equalities concerns. Its impact on pay progression and the denial or reduction of cost of living awards has worsened the recruitment and retention problems.”
