A middle school teacher who was receiving several hundred euros in monthly supplements thanks to the Pact missions finds themselves, at the start of the 2026 school year, with a payslip aligned solely with their base salary. The system launched in 2023 to compensate for voluntary additional missions (short-term replacements, “Devoirs faits” support, educational projects) sees its funding reduced by two-thirds in the 2026 finance bill.
We are indeed talking about a net loss on the payslip, without the base salary moving by a single cent.
Short-term replacements and “Devoirs faits”: the missions that disappear first
On the ground, the elimination of the teacher Pact does not manifest the same way across institutions. The short-term replacement missions, which represented a significant part of the system, are the first to be affected. Without dedicated compensation, few teachers are willing to cover for an absent colleague during their free time.
The “Devoirs faits” system, which offered homework support in middle schools, also loses its financial lever. School leaders who had structured their organization around these slots must find other solutions, often by relying on already overburdened educational assistants.
To better understand the consequences of the end of the teacher pact 2026, we can observe that the flash mission conducted in technical agricultural education already pointed out the risks of questioning the Pact for public education, particularly regarding the goals of increasing student numbers and renewing generations.
In concrete terms, teaching teams lose an internal organizational tool. Feedback on this point varies across academies, but the observation is consistent everywhere: the workload remains, the associated compensation disappears.
Decrease in overtime hours: a signal that preceded the end of the Pact
The elimination of the Pact does not occur in a vacuum. According to an analysis by the DEPP relayed by Weka for the 2024-2025 school year, the number of teachers performing actual overtime hours had already dropped by 17% compared to the previous year. The total volume of HSE had decreased by about 22%, with a 6% drop in the average number of HSE per teacher.
This decline shows that the appetite for paid extra work was already in sharp decline even before the official end of the system. One cannot rely on a simple transfer of the Pact missions to regular overtime. Teachers who were already refusing HSE will not accept unpaid missions.
The SNALC, in its press release for the 2026 school year, reminds us that the bonuses related to the Pact were based on missions conditioned to additional work. These bonuses “do not constitute any guarantee of sustainable remuneration” and remain vulnerable to budgetary arbitrations, including for 2027.
Teacher salary 2026: a concrete loss on the payslip
The Pact was not a revaluation of the base salary. It was a supplement, paid only in exchange for voluntarily accepted additional missions. Its end does not change the base salary, but removes a lever that allowed some teachers to significantly supplement their income.
The profiles most affected are those who accumulated several “functional parts” over the school year. For them, the loss can represent several hundred euros per month. Contract teachers and non-permanent staff, often in more financially strained situations, experience a proportionally greater impact.
The DEPP published a study on teacher remuneration that the SNALC commented on vigorously, emphasizing that highlighting the average remuneration masks very different realities depending on seniority, status, and type of teaching. The results of internal surveys on salary satisfaction remain particularly low.
- The base salary is not modified by the end of the Pact, but no compensatory measures are announced for 2026.
- Teachers who did not subscribe to the Pact see no changes on their payslip.
- Additional missions (replacement, support, projects) do not disappear from the needs of institutions, but they lose their remuneration framework.
Attractiveness of the teaching profession: an additional decline to be expected
The question of the attractiveness of the teaching profession arises every school year. The end of the teacher Pact adds a negative argument in an already difficult context. The Café pédagogique mentioned, at the start of the 2026 school year, a “strange political return stuck between a lackluster end of a five-year term and a major presidential election,” according to terms echoed by Le Monde.
Removing a salary supplement without offering an alternative sends a clear signal to potential candidates. Political proposals abound: Édouard Philippe mentioned a 20% increase in teachers’ salaries, and Raphaël Glucksmann has also turned to this profession. But these announcements remain campaign promises, not budgetary measures inscribed.
The FSU-SNUipp reminds us that “the school must be a bastion of the Republic” and that revaluation cannot rely on optional systems subject to budgetary uncertainties. The Pact embodied exactly this precarious model: a conditional bonus, removable with a stroke of the pen in a finance law.
For institutions, the 2026 school year is managed with less flexibility. School leaders who had integrated the Pact missions into their regular operations must reorganize without dedicated funding, all while maintaining pedagogical continuity in the face of absences and the needs for student support. The profession loses a remuneration lever, institutions lose a management tool, and nothing in the 2026 budget compensates for either.
