The Week College Funding Became a Staff Pay Problem
- 2 days ago
- 3 min read
College pay is back in the hard part of the conversation. This week, FE Week reported that the Association of Colleges, UCU and UNISON have jointly warned ministers that college staff could be facing a very low pay award, possibly even zero, unless there is a material change in funding. That is not a normal sector posture. Employers and unions do not often stand shoulder to shoulder on pay. When they do, it usually means the spreadsheet has run out of room.
A zero offer would land badly
The first National Joint Forum meeting for the 2026–27 pay round has already started with a grim signal: without extra money, colleges may not be able to afford much of anything.
Five unions are seeking 10% or £3,000, alongside a move towards schoolteacher starting salaries and binding national pay. College leaders are not pretending the workforce issue has gone away. They are saying they cannot solve it from within current allocations, especially after a 0.5% rise in the 16-to-19 national funding rate and frozen adult and apprenticeship rates.
That matters because this is not an abstract national row. It is the curriculum manager trying to staff September with two vacancies, a deputy principal juggling cover, and an HR team watching good lecturers drift into schools or industry. Warm words about skills do not cover a timetable.
There was one glimmer for finance teams. Skills minister Jacqui Smith said employer contributions to the Teachers' Pension Scheme are highly likely to fall from the current 28.6% after revaluation, with any change due from April 2027. Helpful, yes. But not immediate. And probably not enough to settle a pay round happening now.
SEND flexibility, but no ringfence
The DfE also rejected the idea of a dedicated ringfenced post-16 SEND funding stream. Its argument is that separate funding would add admin, reduce flexibility and risk fragmenting support.
Colleges will understand part of that. Nobody needs another narrow pot with its own evidence trail and audit fear. Still, the problem is not only flexibility. It is whether the money in the core budget can stretch far enough for learners who need specialist staff, adapted resources, transport support and time.
The department also ruled out statutory post-16 transport criteria for now, saying that would not be deliverable for councils without extra funding. For families, that will feel familiar. For colleges, it keeps one of the messiest access issues sitting at the edge of the campus rather than inside a neat policy box.
Small corrections still count
Free college meals funding was corrected after sector backlash, with the 2026–27 rate lifted to £2.66 per meal so colleges are no longer below schools. It is only 5p. But 5p was the point.
The detail also confirms the extension of eligibility to students from households receiving Universal Credit. For student services teams, that is practical. More eligible learners, a clearer rate, and less of the odd feeling that college students were being valued slightly differently at lunchtime.
Meanwhile, the new enrichment framework gives schools and colleges benchmarks across civic engagement, arts and culture, outdoor activity, life and future skills, and sport. The government has linked it to a £132.5 million Every Child Can programme, though the delivery detail still needs watching.
The question for colleges is not whether enrichment is good. It is. The question is how much of it becomes expectation without capacity.
Adult and apprenticeship rules are shifting too
Adult skills rules for 2026–27 bring a few useful changes: the low-wage threshold rises to £26,800, CSCS card costs can be covered for eligible construction learners, and adult apprentices without grade 4 English or maths can be funded up to level 2 where employers will not pay.
But the base rates stay frozen for a third year. That is the bit adult provision managers will notice when they get past the headline.
On apprenticeships, DWP has launched a review of subcontracting rules, with reforms expected from January 2027. Providers now have a July to August review window to watch, especially if subcontracting definitions and evidence requirements affect delivery models.
The pay round will be the one to keep closest. If there is no funding movement before the next NJF stage, the sector could be heading into autumn with a workforce dispute already baked in.
Sources
Comments