Private school headteacher salaries - pure greed?

In other news on Eton College we were listening to Classic FM this morning and one of their pupils, an extraordinary pianist, has just won BBC Young Musician of the Year. He is called Ryan Wang and is quite phenomenal. Well worth a listen and watch.

As regards private schools - it seems only parents on very top salaries or with big inheritances/wealth can now afford private school. Maybe the governors feel they won’t respect a head on a low ish salary?

As regards the PM of the UK, they always end up making millions and millions after office so I don’t think we need to feel sorry for them. Especially not given all the perks they happily use as well, across the political spectrum.

YABU. You've obviously got an axe to grind OP but I don't think you've made a valid point. These individuals are running huge organisations with very large workforces and large estates with valuable assets, not to mention being ultimately responsible for the welfare and education of over 1000 young people (in Etons case). They're also managing very large budgets and complex balance sheets. The salary seems to me to be absolutely commensurate and in any case, is set by a board, consisting of a large number of governors, with wide ranging life experience. Anyone can apply. Why does it make them greedy?! Very odd viewpoint.

Agree it's a uniquely British thing to hate on the concept of capitalism and anyone doing well and how they should be punished for it and know their place.

It's also a total load of bullshit.

Even if they are charities (not all are), charities pay their CEOs often 6 figure salaries. It’s what it takes to get the best people. They know their worth.

Many, many salaries are benchmarked. It’s common practice. The entire NHS salary system is based on it.

The head of Eton College has 4 DCs and not all boys so he will have to pay school fees out of his salary. If it were co-ed he would not need such a big salary. He was paid less than a lot of Academy heads in the past.

Heads of boarding schools have far more responsibility than heads of day schools so they should be paid more. The head of Highgate gets more?

Does it matter? Parents may be incredibly happy with the teachers and their salaries, the VAT is a separate issue - the school doesn’t keep that money and use it on salaries.

The VAT exemption has nothing to do with charitable status. Half of private schools aren’t charities.

They are exempt from VAT in the same way as universities, private nurseries, and private healthcare (who are also free to pay their staff as they wish).

Private school parent here (x 3)

Absolutely don’t begrudge the VAT (although I do think it could have been gradually applied to minimise impact on the children of those who were on the edge of affordability) - I believe that my children are getting an absolutely magic education - I think that every child should have access to that - and if the VAT rise is going to do that it’s a good thing.

Do I think that somehow, because of the VAT rise the management at our children’s schools should get a pay cut to offset the impact on the parents? Over 750 parents - that isn’t going to make any meaningful difference.

Do I think these hard working experts-in-their-fields who are stewarding educational institutions through a period of flux should somehow have their salaries pegged to civil servants…? Why?!

I just can’t understand the rational behind this outrage!

Salary is never about how hard someone works. It's about how valuable they are to the organisation they are, and for a role like this, that will be a mixture of their education, experience, results and reputation.

They are private businesses operating in a free market. They can pay their staff whatever they want.
They therefore absolutely should not be getting tax breaks under the guise of "charitable status".
This vindicates Labour's policy perfectly.

I agree. I think many underestimate how hard staff in many private schools work, especially boarding schools. During term time they get very little downtime.

Totally agree with this! I doubt those on 10x the average salary are actually working 10x harder than ordinary workers.

Genevive24 · Today 15:09
I completely agree with you OP. Salaries of that kind are immoral in my opinion, it is ridiculous that the leader of a school should earn double the leader of the whole country.

@Genevive24 what’s your view on university Vice-Chancellors’ wages?

Are you offended by other heads of companies' salaries or just in the Education sector?

They might well have free housing if it's a boarding school, too.

It's difficult to compare somewhere like Eton with a small local dayschool, I think. It's a bit like saying the corner shop is directly comparable with JP Morgan. They are both private sector... but that's it.

I've a friend who works in a top boarding school (not Eton; he rejected them - and also not a HT salary, but certainly comfortable,) and he gets very little free time in term time - he does earn his money. They do in state schools, too, but for the most part, they won't have weekend or night duties. And as people say, it's market forces. People are prepared to pay £45k+ a year to send their children to schools like this, so it would be weird if the teachers weren't paid more than average.

You can use that argument about any organisation. NHS heads are on multiples of a nurse’s salary for example.

I’m a teacher (public sector) and I actually love that heads salaries can reach such dizzy heights! It’s a thankless job which really isn’t rewarded financially at all by the state, so it’s good to see we can earn well somewhere!

What I will say though is there are many many private schools and most won’t pay anywhere near this. A lot of teachers at these schools will be paid less than those in the public sector.

I love that people can earn seemingly endless amounts - I find it aspirational!

And the bit I really don’t understand is that, in this context, the heads’ salaries are going up.

You have picked one school, which has one of the highest profiles in the world. Many of the public schools are increasingly looking at, or already have, an international presence. Of course they need to attract the best people to run their schools. They are not, however, typical of the private sector as a whole. Not all heads are receiving large pay rises.

I completely agree with you OP. Salaries of that kind are immoral in my opinion, it is ridiculous that the leader of a school should earn double the leader of the whole country.

The fact that private companies have amassed the sort of wealth that makes these sort of salaries possible is a problem with capitalism I think, I don’t pretend to be an expert or have the answer unfortunately, but while people are shameless enough to accept 10x the average salary of their fellows, the issue continues.

I don’t care how many mumsnetters jump on me now to say that people have “worked hard” and “deserve” their wealth. If you believe the money and power of the super-rich is fully deserved and reflects their value to society, then you also believe that abject poverty also reflects the value of many and that their situation is also fully deserved. They are the two sides of the same coin, and I refuse to accept it.

I am trying to work out the logic in the existence of this thread.

Redtoothbrush as I’m sure you know - as I think I’m right in saying you have been a mn regular for sometime now - nothing mn enjoys more than having a go at Eton. See Pyroleus’s spiteful little comment above - there will be quite a few more like that.
Have we had ‘Boris went to Eton. It’s obviously a useless school’ yet?

Same, struggle to work out the logic of this thread. Thing is, this is the dominant mindset in growing poorer by the minute Britain.

You don’t hear these conversations much outside of this country. Oh the outrage “man makes money in capitalist economy!”

I am trying to work out the logic in the existence of this thread.

Supply and demand in a capitalist society means that if someone is paid in line with what people are willing to pay.

In the case of the most prestigious school in the UK (and one of the most prestigious in the world), the going rate for the person running it is x amount. Meanwhile for a job paid for by taxpayers it's less because taxpayers are not willing to spend as much.

Greed has nothing to do with either.

If there was money in being a postman, then postmen would be paid more.

I don't get what you don't grasp about any of this and why you see it as being about greed rather than supply and demand.