The new Trade Union bill passing through Parliament could mean that in the event of a strike, employers would be allowed to pay agency staff to break the strike. I'm sure there will be a division of opinion on the part of supply teachers. What do you think the consequences of this could be, bearing in mind that even the head of policy for the REC has stated that she thinks it is a bad idea? In the last ten years, the number of days that schools have had to close due to strike action, can be counted out on one hand. Even the moderate NASUWT balloted to strike over workload issues. There have been no all out strikes of longer than one day since the 1980s. Why legislate now? Would you accept strike breaking work for your usual pay rate if offered a placement? I think it is reasonable to expect that many people who don't get placed regularly would have no choice. Bearing in mind that a majority of teachers (nearly 90%) polled by Nicky Morgan's survey replied that workload and Ofsted pressure were making the job untenable in some subject and age group areas and that on top of that, it is now acknowledged that there are regional and subject specific shortages of teachers and trainee teachers. Are union demands reasonable? i.e. for teachers to be considered professionals, for schools to be evaluated on a much wider set of criteria, for public sector employees' pay to keep pace with the cost of living, for collective bargaining to agree a fair and equitable pay structure. The policies of all three unions support these aims. I might put this post up on the Opinion Forum too. Crucial to forming any union's response to this pending legislation is the voice of supply teachers. Make sure that your union knows what you think as this is likely to be divisive.