Asking teachers & doctors...

[PolkaDotMankini]

Would you rather:

a) Be paid more
b) Have your working environment fully resourced, with enough time to do everything well in standard hours, the right number of staff, decent equipment, computer systems etc.

The rules on strikes seem to force strikes to be about pay when actually pay would be ok if it wasn't for the awful conditions. Conversely, IMHO no amount of dosh is going to make up for a terrible working environment and ridiculous hours.

Obviously both would be best, but am I right?

Surgeon.

Both.

The conditions are mainly related to staffing. Staffing won't improve until the pay does.

Also, it's completely unreasonable that my career remuneration is 40% worse than I was expecting when I went into it.

I'm perfectly happy if (?when) the consultant strikes happen to be pushing for a perfectly justifiable 40% pay rise to restore parity, knowing it's a pretty big and simple stick to start negotiating over what I really want which is for the pensions debacle to be sorted, and for my workplace to be properly resourced.

Incidentally, we can't strike over the pensions issue as it relates to quirks of the Finance Act, and falls under general taxation laws, and therefore not legal to strike over.

B for me but there is a recruitment crisis and apparently research shows that it's the pay putting people off joining the profession so A also needed

I've left teaching now, but B. I would actually have taken a small pay cut to make B happen.

B but I won't get B without A.

Most of the reason my work can be miserable is the lack of staff. In doctoring this is largely due to huge numbers leaving either the profession or the country in search of better pay and working conditions. I imagine the other HCPs are doing the same.

We need better pay to get better conditions.

Teacher, B but A would help.

I'm a teacher. We mostly want B but we aren't allowed to strike about that so we are striking for A, but emphasising the need for pay increases to be funded by the government, not taken out of already non-existent school budgets so that a pay rise effectively makes our job harder.

However, speaking as a parent rather than a teacher, I also need the job to pay enough to attract people to the role so that my child doesn't have to sit through endless cover lessons as they can't recruit for some subjects.

Doctor - B for definite.

100% B. If B was the reality you wouldn't have so many teachers leaving the profession and so many children being failed by the government because their needs would be able to be met.

B (teacher)

100% B

You can't say this is either or, because if you don't pay people enough, you will never have the fully resourced workplace you describe in B.

If you don't pay people enough, you will never recruit the people you need to make B happen.

You literally say "the right number of staff"- but a large part of the reason we don't have the right number of staff in schools is that pay is not equivalent with the private sector, especially in STEM. I would imagine this is a factor for junior doctors too.

Why do an extra year of uni (teachers) or two years (doctors) which is really intense and difficult, when you can walk into a job with a £30k plus starting salary easily with a range of STEM degrees? And you wage will continue to increase.

Yes, the benefits in terms of pensions may be better, but given new entrants will likely have to work into their 70s, it's a big consideration that one may never actually see the pension. Personally, I know young teachers who are opting out because a) the deductions are unaffordable and b) they think they will never see the pension anyway.

Also, this!

As others have said B. However B is not a criteria for going on strike, otherwise teachers would have done so for the past 10 years. Thus we have to strike because of pay, which hasn't kept up with our equally qualified, experienced and hard working private sector counterparts.

I can honestly say that all my friends & family who are equivalent to me in those areas are outstripping my earnings significantly and yes even with holidays factored in.

BTW, we absolutely can strike about working conditions- but everyone would have to agree what we wanted e.g. 20% PPA etc, and whenever you put these things to teachers, no-one can agree what would actually improve things.

We can't strike directly about school funding, or short staffing (although striking about pay is about short staffing).

B
The curriculum is ridiculous (primary), I constantly feel like I'm catching up, even though I work long hours.
I have nothing left in me for my own family at the end of each day. No flexibility to meet their needs, or the responsibility of running a home (no possibility to have week day delivery for example). The glorious holidays that everyone is so envious of teachers for don't compensate- I'm so exhausted that I'm just becoming human after 10 days.
I realised yesterday that the worst is that I trained because I want to work with children, but when I'm in the classroom the needs of the curriculum and the expectations of Ofsted take over - I'm not as present for the children as I'd like to be.
I've tried part time (4 days). It didn't work at all as I did the full job (planning, displays, meetings, reports) for less money with less PPA.
I'm going to give it 1 more year after this one, and if I can't find a way to teach and live (rather than teach and stagger around as an exhausted husk of a human) then I'll be looking for a job in my previous industry - even a 15% pay rise won't keep me.

B. Teacher.

B!! Absolutely knackered primary teacher here...under so much work related stress I cry daily! And I'm a tough nut to crack normally! 😥

All of those saying B, how do you achieve fully staffed secondary schools without offering competitive pay?

A is necessary to achieve B in secondary.

Possibly not in primary for teachers, but certainly for TAs?

B. Teacher.

Having said that, I am currently on mat leave and don’t think I want to go back permanently so have been looking at alternative careers and I am amazed at how much I could earn for what, on paper at least, seems like a job I could do without any additional training (although I wouldn’t get them without experience). I’m at the top of my pay scale and we are looking at take home pay (for me) of less than £10k after nursery fees. I just don’t think the level of burn out is worth it for that.

B

B. I am single, no dependents and dropped to 0.8 this year. Am onli 53 but I am exhausted. Been doin it 28y. It shocking the workload. The conditions for staff and kids are awful,behaviour is sometimes shockin and SEND provision is patchy at best. Initiatives ignore the fact that without discipline learning cannot take place. More money.would be nice but B would make more difference to.me and the pupils. I like my job,the daily interaction with the pupils etc but just don't want to work so hard.

In the short term B, but A is a necessity in the long term.
I teach in London and we are struggling to keep teachers, teachers now cannot afford to live in London unless they are in flat shares. That's fine when your in your 20s, but once you're older it's not as appealing.

Teacher - B.

Teacher here, most definitely B

B is so important - a massive part of teacher stress is not having the right resources and environment - IT and buildings which aren't fit for purpose, lack of AP & SEN places, lack of TAs, teachers doing jobs which would be better done by support staff... Better funding and better support staff pay would help to resolve many of these issues and help to keep teachers.