Aspect has written to MPs Ed Balls, Tim Loughton and Annette Brooke asking them to set out how they will maintain and develop the EYP programme and whether they will make it a statutory requirement for every setting to have an EYP. The letter asks whether the politicians are committed to working with the children's workforce to develop career paths and boost salaries for EYPs, and how they plan to deliver parity between Qualified Teacher Status and EYPS in terms of remuneration, status and public awareness.
The letter says, 'The EYPS project has been successful in both bringing a new cadre of graduate professionals into the sector, and in providing development routes and recognition for experienced professionals already within the sector.'
It goes on to say, 'Despite its importance, however, the EYPS project remains fragile. EYPS are often in vulnerable positions without permanent roles or permanent funding. Job opportunities, career paths, access to ongoing professional development, and levels of pay are all problematic. Despite being graduate professional leaders, pay for many EYPS remains only a little above the minimum wage. In return for those skills and their commitment and leadership, EYPs deserve professional respect, support and salary arrangements.'
Rosie Bloomfield, chair of the Aspect Early Years Professionals national committee, said, 'We want to know what plans they have to develop effective professional registration mechanisms and the funding and infrastructure for Continuous Professional Development for EYPs, to ensure equity and parity with comparative professionals.'
Labour said they were keen to explore parity between EYPS and Qualified Teacher Status.
A Labour spokesperson said, ‘We are committed to the EYPS programme and we hope to hit both the 2010 and 2015 targets. We are committed to working with professional bodies to develop effective and sustainable career paths and salary arrangements for early years professionals. Subject to resources going forward, we would be keen to talk to stakeholders about ways in which parity between Qualified Teacher Status and Early Years Professional Status could be managed as well as transferability between Qualified Teacher Status and Early Years Professional Status.’
The Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties have yet to respond to the letter.
