Why are bloody teachers striking AGAIN?

[noblegiraffe]

Because, dear hearts, the government, when they offered us a pay rise of 4.5%, mostly unfunded for next September and all 4 teaching unions thoroughly rejected it, Gillian Keegan said that teachers would then have to take their chances with the independent pay review body and that there would be no further negotiations.

So teachers did. And the independent pay review body, who seem to have rather more of a handle on the current crisis in teaching than the government, recommended that teachers should get a 6.5% pay rise to introduce some stability into the system.

We only know this because the independent pay review body findings have not been published, but this figure was leaked.

Calls for the government to publish the report have been ignored. Most recently, a freedom of information act request to the DfE for the report was rejected, because the DfE says it's "not in the public interest".

Why is it not in the public interest to know what the independent pay review body has recommended? This report is published every year.

In the meantime, Rishi is briefing the press that he will reject the independent pay review body's recommendations, after making a huge fuss about how he always accepts independent pay review body recommendations.

Why should this matter to parents? Because headteachers are currently trying to write their budgets for September. The end of term is approaching. This job is currently impossible because headteachers don't know how much more they are expected to pay teachers next year, (6.5%? 5?% 4.5%?) and they have no idea how much extra money their school will be given to account for the pay rise (all? some? None??). This makes a massive difference as staffing costs account for the vast majority of school budgets. Should they be planning to cut GCSE subjects? Make staff redundant? Or will they actually be able to plan in some literacy support? That they don't know is intolerable.

A senior government advisor said that school budgets last year weren't worth the paper they were written on because of this same issue, and that it shouldn't be allowed to happen again.

Yet here we are.

The government are trying to drag this out to the summer before they make their pay announcement because then they'll be on their holidays and the 4 teaching unions' ballots will have closed.

Shut as in no Y11 or 13 in school. No vulnerable kids in school. No keyworker kids in school. These are being supported by non striking teachers, pastoral staff and SLT.

You are absolutely correct that conditions need to be improved as well as paying existing teachers what they're worth.
Yes we want behaviour to be better, but actually that takes funding social services, mental health services, opening more special schools for the children where mainstream is too much, etc. Reducing workload requires more teachers (who obviously need to be paid as well) so exciting teachers can have more PPA time or smaller classes.
But, even if conditions improve, that doesn't mean I would be happy to be able to afford less than I could when I reached my current pay point. It doesn't help teachers who are in expensive areas afford a house to live in (buying or renting are both expensive)

The pay is good but the conditions are not. That's why they can't get young people in.

The pay is not good, particularly for graduates with sought-after degrees. There’s also the pay penalty for having to work out of the home 5 days a week, unlike many other graduate professions. Commuting is expensive.

Is classroom behaviour in primary schools a massive problem? I always think of bad behaviour as mainly a secondary school problem but I'm aware that things are getting worse at primary level also. Is behaviour among one of the main problems you face as a teacher?*

I've been in class for almost 30 years.
I've had children lash out before, but very rarely.
This year I was attacked by a Y6 pupil, had bruising for a few weeks, the largest was bigger than my hand. I am not the only member of staff who has been hurt this year, what was once a rare occurrence has become almost weekly in someone's class.
I teach in an outstanding school in what is regarded as a 'nice middle class area'.
It is not uncommon for parents to challenge staff on what they did to cause these scenario's. Often these children do have additional needs and we are accused of not accommodating these needs. The reality is often that a busy primary school can be very triggering for these children and we have neither the space nor the staff to give these children the specialised environment that they need.
It is also very difficult to find alternative provision. Last June we were able to get our LEA to agree we were unable to meet a child's needs in our mainstream setting. It has taken just over a year to get a space in a specialist provision.
Add in to this an increase in parents who believe their children over staff (I recently had a parent barge into my class to inform me her child didn't swear at a member of staff - when I pointed out that I and the deputy head witnessed it, the parent said we were all lying!) it becomes almost impossible.

You can't have it all I'm afraid. There just isn't the money for train drivers, carers, junior doctors etc. we can't make an endless pot of cash.

It just isn't going to happen with any government. There is so much wrong with this country. From potholes to the fact that my town doesn't even have a decent hospital or enough places for all the kids at school.

I think the pay off for working in public sector has always been fabulous pension and job security/opportunities for career progression if you want it. Plus I find them to be more flexible with hours worked. They are open to part time. It's always been that way.

My police officer friend (started right at bottom) earns close to £100k now and is counting down the days til they retire... they are going to buy a holiday home in Spain. Its hardly poverty is it?!

Of course they can't make an endless pot of cash, but they could certainly manage to do a lot of it if they tighten up tax loopholes for large companies.
Train drivers aren't paid by the government so their pay disputes are with the train companies.
I would have thought most people would consider health and education to be priorities when it comes to spending. Maybe not though 🤷

My personal view is that teachers, along with other public sector workers - junior doctors, nurses, police etc are underpaid and need to be paid a fair salary.

In terms of fair salary and overall benefit package - this should take into account total reward including all benefits. For teachers the benefit of a pension where the employer puts in about 24% of salary in and also where the pension itself is based on defined benefit as opposed to defined contribution. The former is significantly more valuable than the latter which is standard in the private sector.

I have never seen the analysis over the working life and average retirement how public and private sector total reward packages compare. Research has shown how the NHS pension scheme was the best in the country, with workers getting up to £10.00 for each pound they save. But many private-sector workers with a basic pension scheme are getting just £3.00 per pound saved. Figures from the Office for National Statistics - 2021 I think - show that the average public sector employee now earns considerably more per week than someone in the private sector and therefore there is an argument that you are better off in the public sector.

I assume the above will have been factored into the independent pay review body (if not the report is inherently not fit for purpose as salary only forms part of the total reward package). If that report says a 6.5% pay rise is fair then I cannot see how that can challenged.

However, there is a funding issue for all public sector salaries. If you give one group a payrise - all groups should be reviewed and if needed be awarded a payrise. I expect that the concern is the government are "seen to give into" one group this will open the doors for everyone else. (No I don't agree with that at all but that is a counter argument to giving one group a payrise) And as a county - there aren't the funds to meet all payrise demands. Give with one hand, take away with the other.

The solution is not to tax the rich even more. The top 3% of taxpayers accounted for more than 30% of the UK tax take. Tax them more - they leave the UK and along with them their tax.If 1% were to leave and for argument's sake the UK was down 10% of that tax - the burden would fall on ordinary people to make up that difference. We are a highly taxed country as it is. If we wanted to close the budget deficit (and save the cost of interest on the borrowings) all taxes would have to be raised.

This doesn't mean I don't think teachers should have a payrise according to a fair independent review of total reward package, I just don't know how you could justify giving teachers a payrise and say no to NHS workers for example. Therefore it's always a question of how to fund these payrises - though the teachers who will be paid more will pay more tax, that's a drop in the ocean.

If anyone can solve the funding issue - that would be the holy grail to end all pay disputes.

Everyone wants more money, and everyone wants better conditions.

The teachers who are choosing to deliberately inconvenience the children they pretend to care about on a daily basis will achieve neither of the above, but will certainly reveal their true colours.

It’s very simple; If you’re not happy with your salary, and your employer won’t offer you any more, you always have the option of going elsewhere to earn more. Unless you’re unable to ? … In which case you’re already being paid your worth.

I don't think this helps either, the constant "teachers and doctors are a priority"... so are carers for people with dementia or 1:1 TAs. So are paramedics. So are the people that provide mental health provision for young people. So are social services. So are my colleagues that are biomedical scientists or are working hard on new therapies to treat cancer.

The country doesn't just run on drs and teachers. There is a whole host of other people that we need to keep happy.

It’s very simple; If you’re not happy with your salary, and your employer won’t offer you any more, you always have the option of going elsewhere to earn more.

Thats exactly what 9% of teachers did last year.

I think you'll find I said health and education, NOT doctors and teachers. All the people you listed fall under my umbrella of health and education.

I hear you @MsAwesomeDragon but junior doctors and teachers are the ones causing most damage to this country right now for no apparent resolution. We don't seem to be any closer to getting it sorted.

@Pinkprescription probably the most sensible post on the thread.

It's absolutely true that the whole of the public sector is on it's knees, but it's also true that teachers have seen more of a real terms reduction in pay than the average for the public sector, which is significantly behind private sector earnings. TA recruitment is also dreadful and needs an urgent solution.
Teachers and all the other professionals you listed I'm sure have other options and aren't choosing to do the jobs we need them to do, whether that is because they are going abroad or into the private sector. The answer can't be to continue to cut wages in real terms while talking about 'record levels of investment' that only stand up if you ignore inflation. We've got record taxes and no prospect of tax bands being adjusted for inflation either so where is the money going? We have 10% of the population on NHS waiting lists and hundreds of thousands of children in schools at risk of collapse and without regular teachers. It simply can't continue like this.

Good for them ! … Surprising to learn that at least 9% of last years flock actually had some kind of ambition and initiative !

Don't you think that leaving a teaching job inconveniences children, when there is no one to replace you?

Why do you only care about the kids who are missing out on their teacher because of strike days and not the ones who are missing out on having teachers for far longer because there aren't enough teachers to go around?

Why are you trying to increase the number of children going without teachers by telling teachers to quit their job?

Do you think that is a sensible, logical strategy?

The pay is terrible by comparison for other specialists. In 2006 i was on £50k aas a newly qualified solicitor (ie one that has a hodgepodge of skills (and and has learned how to fix the photocopier just from the amount of time spent there) and to become decent needs oversight and support).

Teachers should be paid much more. Teaching should be a massively competitive degree course that only the best get onto, and excellent pay should reward their skills.

Conditions also need improving - from supportive SLT to real power to discipline pupils.

Therefore it's always a question of how to fund these payrises

How long can the country go on without enough teachers? Saving pennies now while causing a long term impact is a false economy.

Governments need to invest in education. It's an investment, not a spend.

I read on twitter that the money saved by the government in scrapping the Building Schools for the Future fund in 2010 is now dwarfed by the billions needed in the cost of repairs to school buildings that are now structurally unsafe.

I’ve got one child at an academy school, this school and the other schools within the academy trust all currently have 10 head and deputy head teachers - how can they justify paying these salaries? I do support the strikes and hold the government responsible but I just can’t get my head around a school paying head teacher salaries x 10 per school and then complaining about money… not to mention the huge salaries the academy pays their CEO.

Academy CEO pay should be capped, not doing so was a huge mistake, as Lord Adonis admits. Some CEOs, like Dan Moynihan are blatantly taking the piss. Many others are not.

However, teachers, unlike academy CEOs, are generally paid to a national pay scale and are in dispute with the government.

Schools need heads and deputies. They have more responsibility than ever and are leaving posts quicker than ever too.

The tories got rid of LAs and replaced them with MATs.

That may well be an issue in some schools/MATs. We've got 1 head and 3 deputies at my secondary school, where we teach 1,500 pupils. I'm sure they'd like to have more assistant heads but they've put their priorities for the budget into keeping classes small for the lowest attaining pupils, and employing as many TAs as we can get to apply.

Yes, people saying 'these jobs in schools didn't exist 10 years ago' are missing the point that the jobs still needed doing, but were done by LA staff, not MAT staff.

I have two children in a small primary, with one about to move to a small secondary. I absolutely support teachers. It’s not enough to offer a pay rise, it needs to be funded by the government in order for schools to be able to support their students and pay their staff.

they also need to look at how they (govt) are failing teachers with an overly burdensome reporting and tracking expectation.

This is not the teachers’ fault. I lay the blame firmly at our government’s door. If they had gradually increased salaries year on year in line with inflation they wouldn’t be in such a mess as it’s easier to absorb a smaller increase. Same with all public sector pay. It’s no wonder the public sector is struggling.

I'm a teacher and a mother to 2 in secondary, it's my children's educational experience that is motivating me to strike. My dd in year 1 has had:
6 English teachers in years 7-9
3 Spanish teachers in year 10 (so she hasn't yet, at the end of year 10 had any real feedback on her expected progress in this subject)
3 RE teachers in year 10 and the current one leaving at the end of this year, so will be at least 4 across GCSE
2 Food Teach teachers, currently they can't recuit so they have a food tech specialist who isn't a teacher and a teacher that isn't a tech specialist.
1 teacher for triple science
Has been told by her current English teacher that they will be short next year and this might mean cover teachers for some lessons next year
Current Maths teacher leaving at the end of this year - no idea what will happen next but almost every school in Hampshire was advertising for Maths in May.

And talking to colleagues with kids in other local school this isnt' an unusual experience, at the school we have some classes without a science teacher because we can't recruit, we've struggled with so many subjects, we've also had GCSE tech classes without a teacher. Lack of staff is far more disruptive than the strike action. What else can we do when the government clearly has no care for the sector? What else can be done to improve schools for kids? I'd love to do something that doesn't involve striking, but I don't know what. I've written to my MP, who was briefly Ed Sec, but that's not provoked any response.