Industrial Action

comelately

Wild Horses
lots at my workplace

Fair enough. We're talking about the Upper Pay Scale presumably. By my reckoning, they've been teaching 10-12 years? Fair play, we probably should do more to keep them teaching and I'd be in favour of adding a couple of scale points to the upper list.

But the majority of teachers are still getting increases through other mechanisms and even those at the top of the scale have benefitted from going up the pay spine in previous years.

In Inner London, M6 (top of the normal scale) - M1 = £9768. That's a gain of almost £2000 a year. That's averages out at over 6.5% a year, I think. And it's not like there's no other way to get more money.
 

vimothy

yurp
Having said that, public sector workers sometimes seem to think that the world revolves around them. Can the government afford to increase pay in line with inflation? Will it have to reappropriate funds from other needy projects to do so? Will it have to increase its debt?

New Labour has poured money into education. Has it been worth it?
 

jenks

thread death
Fair enough. We're talking about the Upper Pay Scale presumably. By my reckoning, they've been teaching 10-12 years? Fair play, we probably should do more to keep them teaching and I'd be in favour of adding a couple of scale points to the upper list.

But the majority of teachers are still getting increases through other mechanisms and even those at the top of the scale have benefitted from going up the pay spine in previous years.

In Inner London, M6 (top of the normal scale) - M1 = £9768. That's a gain of almost £2000 a year. That's averages out at over 6.5% a year, I think. And it's not like there's no other way to get more money.

There's plenty of us who are at the top of the Upper Pay Spine who are looking at a below inflation pay rise from now until 65.

I think if you look around similarly qualified people in their thirties and forties the pay differential becomes quite marked. I agree that in your twenties (or when you first start teaching) the pay is ok in comparison and it does have these incremental increases, mainly because retention has become such a major issue in the secondary sector in particular.

To move off UPS then you have to become a Senior Leader - which inevitably means a move out of the classroom - usually the reason you wanted to join the profession in the first place.

Vimothy - should the world revolve around us? No, but you and your children are fucked without us and the implicit contract of accepting worse pay for the rewards of a decent pension at retirement have been shown to be a false promise. I do not want to be flogged half to death, having spent 40 years in front of a class to see the paltry pension I am currently being offered (and on top of that have you seen the appalling mortality rate of male teachers who go on to 65 in comparison with those who retire at 60? Shocking)
 

matt b

Indexing all opinion
I would genuinely love to know what it has spent it on - precious little seems to have made it in to my department.

it's gone on the horribly inefficient ppp, pfi, bsf and academy schemes- building contractors, solicitors, elected officials etc have made ££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££
 

vimothy

yurp
Vimothy - should the world revolve around us? No, but you and your children are fucked without us and the implicit contract of accepting worse pay for the rewards of a decent pension at retirement have been shown to be a false promise. I do not want to be flogged half to death, having spent 40 years in front of a class to see the paltry pension I am currently being offered (and on top of that have you seen the appalling mortality rate of male teachers who go on to 65 in comparison with those who retire at 60? Shocking)

Eh?

Everyone's pensions are in deep shit. The problem is that the country is ageing, and therefore there are less young people working to pay for the old to retire. The situation will get worse before it gets better.

What implicit contract are you talking about? Were you previously willing to accept 2% because you thought you would get a good pension?

"You and your children are fucked without us". Leave it out.

Seems to me that all public sector workers are in the same position. No? Why is that?
 

crackerjack

Well-known member
Eh?

Everyone's pensions are in deep shit. The problem is that the country is ageing, and therefore there are less young people working to pay for the old to retire. The situation will get worse before it gets better.

Got to agree with Vim here. Pensions were intended to cover the last decade or so of someone's life. Now it's closer to two. The old status quo was unsustainable and i can't see that it's anyone's fault, except that the problem might have been adressed earlier.
 

jenks

thread death
I think a number of public sector workers were encouraged to work for lower salaries than they may otherwise have got in the private sector because of issues like a good pension at the end,job security, a sense of doing something worthwhile etc and i do think this country is going to be fucked if people do not want to come in to these kinds of jobs, you can't keep on relying canadians and australians on one year contracts to fill the gaps left by the fact that people cannot be recruited to do the job properly.

They are not an easy option and what little perks that people may perceive we have are all being eroded and yet we still have to stomach below inflation pay rises.

As i have said beofre I don't notice people queuing up to do my job
 

vimothy

yurp
I would genuinely love to know what it has spent it on - precious little seems to have made it in to my department.

One million pupils 'failed by Labour exam policy' -- The Guardian:

The report also highlighted the fact that spending on each pupil had risen dramatically since Labour came to power, from £2,910 in 1997 to £5,080 last year. 'While spending per pupil has increased by £2,170 - an increase of 75 per cent since 1997/98, the percentage of pupils obtaining five good GCSEs including English and maths has only increased by 9 per cent,' the report states. 'The cost to the taxpayer of funding pupils who then failed to gain five good GCSEs including in English and maths is extremely high.'​

Still looking for an exact breakdown, but I know they spent a lot on building stock.
 

vimothy

yurp
As i have said beofre I don't notice people queuing up to do my job

I agree with you, you should be getting a pay rise in line with inflation. It's entirely possible that inflation is understated for political reasons and that you should therefore be getting a pay rise in excess of inflation as measured in the RPI.

However, it's not necessarily the case that the government can afford to tie public sector pay rises into inflation. Perhaps the level of government spending is unsustainable.

New Labour has already spent lots on education, for questionable results. While it's unfortunate that teachers pay should be falling in real terms (basically, this is a pay cut. If your wage doesn't rise with inflation you lose pay in real terms), the pot of public money is not bottomless given increasing government obligations (for things like pensions). I think that the whole system is in need of an overhaul.

And as I said upthread, I work in education as well and am in the same boat.
 

comelately

Wild Horses
There's plenty of us who are at the top of the Upper Pay Spine who are looking at a below inflation pay rise from now until 65.

I think if you look around similarly qualified people in their thirties and forties the pay differential becomes quite marked. I agree that in your twenties (or when you first start teaching) the pay is ok in comparison and it does have these incremental increases, mainly because retention has become such a major issue in the secondary sector in particular.

Yeah, I have probably significantly underestimated the amount of teachers at the top of the upper scale. Sorry about that. As I say, I think there's definitely a solid argument to be made for adding a 4th and 5th point to the Upper Payscale. Nonetheless....

To move off UPS then you have to become a Senior Leader - which inevitably means a move out of the classroom - usually the reason you wanted to join the profession in the first place.

It's not that I'm not deeply sympathetic to teachers wanting to remain in the classroom, but I can't help feeling that in most professions you become more senior by moving into more "strategic" roles and by moving away from performing the core functions of the organisation. While I do appreciate that teaching is a calling in a sense that, for example, Human Resources is not, I think it's often the case that people in their 30s and 40s take promotions to jobs that they will find less enjoyable and satisfying. Some people love serving customers, some people love making sandwiches.

Ultimately it's a complex argument and not my call to a point, I support the Teachers' right to strike and I'm for strikes in general.
 

matt b

Indexing all opinion
It's not that I'm not deeply sympathetic to teachers wanting to remain in the classroom, but I can't help feeling that in most professions you become more senior by moving into more "strategic" roles and by moving away from performing the core functions of the organisation.

in a lot of schools/ colleges, staff take on 'strategic' roles without pay increases, simply because those aspects of the job need doing and the organisation isn't willing/able to pay a proper rate. and even if you do get more money, often the pay increase is risible compared to the mountains of paperwork that need to be dealt with.
 

jenks

thread death
Also just cos you are good at teaching, why does that make you good at putting a timetable together or working out the school budget?

If you are an excellent teacher, shouldn't you stay in the classroom? And if you are an excellent administrator you are better off working in the private sector where they pay a much better wage for these 'strategic' roles.

Off to make the kids sandwiches for tomorrow's packed lunch.
 

mistersloane

heavy heavy monster sound
There are some very rich GPs who might disagree with you there.

I think you'll find that there's been a zero percent increase in funding for GPs over the past three years, the GPs staff have had all had pay rises and all costs have gone up - the money GPs have had to pay for this hasn't increased, in real terms doctors have had a 5 pay cut each year for the past 3 years.

The combined income for every GP in the UK is 2.5 billion, city bonuses last year were 14 billion, the total budget for NHS is 80 billion, people really need to cop on as to why the GPs are being blamed, who is blaming them and just who is trying to force this issue, and why.
 

comelately

Wild Horses
in a lot of schools/ colleges, staff take on 'strategic' roles without pay increases, simply because those aspects of the job need doing and the organisation isn't willing/able to pay a proper rate. and even if you do get more money, often the pay increase is risible compared to the mountains of paperwork that need to be dealt with.

Then don't take these roles on. There's plenty of teachers who won't touch anything to do with "administration", even if it means creating ludicrous amounts of extra work. While I'm not going to pretend I've never been irked by some teacher refusing to do very basic things that would reduce administrative burden considerably, I think there are teachers (and people in other professions) who like to play the martyr-role, who like to live in a world that would "fall apart" if it wasn't for their *massive generousity of spirit*. Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of genuinely passionate very hard-working teachers who are genuinely exploited by the system, I just find it odd to complain about taking on what is essentially voluntary work. Also plenty of schools have 4 or 5 Assistant Headteachers in addition to 2 Deputies, so the strategic roles are clearly out there for people who want to move into Leadership.
 

comelately

Wild Horses
Also just cos you are good at teaching, why does that make you good at putting a timetable together or working out the school budget?

If you are an excellent teacher, shouldn't you stay in the classroom? And if you are an excellent administrator you are better off working in the private sector where they pay a much better wage for these 'strategic' roles.

Many people who work in the public sector do so because they are better suited to it and in many cases wouldn't last 5 minutes in a commercial environment. I think there's a tendency for Teachers to think that simply everybody is earning more money than them, but my understanding is that an income of £45,000 puts you in the top 10% of UK earners - a Teacher outside of London could, at least in theory, earn £45,000 without moving into leadership and a teacher at the top of the scale in Inner London's basic is over £40,000.

While of course there are people out there earning funny money for undemanding jobs, a lot of people who are earning £50,000+ annual salaries are performing very tedious and very demanding roles. This is all just another case of people watching property programmes and thinking that everybody else is a millionaire.

As for the argument that excellent teachers should stay in the classroom, there's probably some truth in that and I have proposed adding to the Upper pay scale. But as I have said, it isn't particularly unusual in organisations for people performing core functions to be moved into managerial positions. People generally complain when management functions are being performed solely by people with no/little experience at ground level.
 

matt b

Indexing all opinion
well, you know us teachers, we can't last 5 minutes in a discussion board environment and i'm too busy refusing to do paperwork to chat right now.
 
Top