To be a bit confused and a bit annoyed that I earn less

[MrsKravitz]

As a senior lecturer at a University than an A level teacher.
Seriously considering changing.

I think the hourly rate of a lecturer is between £15 - £20 per hour.

The other difference between lecturing and teaching - although teachers tend to do more hours, there tends to be time within each lesson for tasks (from my limited experience of FE teaching). Lecturing - you have to prepare an hour of talking at them.

I think a lof of lecturers went into HE because the perks were considered worth it. Ok so you were never going to earn the same as in industry / vocation but it was flexible, family friendly, not much teaching involved, lots of academic freedom and creativity.

It is however turning more and more into a teaching based job unless you bring the big money in and unless you have time to do that (eg no teaching) then you cant.

I am salaried and teach every month of the year. Sept- sept with postgrad and undergrad.

Yes, I have a friend who is a personal trainer. The course required to qualify as one costs around £1500 and lasts 6 weeks. His standard rate, which he always charges, is £40 per hour.

IMHO universities pay managerial level admin staff far too much at the expense of lecturers. Many of them start on 50k plus and progress upwards to 80 or 90k for what is generally very 9 til 5 work.

actually I tell a lie, I dont think I have anything booked in for august yet

peppa I do 2hrs to full day lecturing

That's fine MrsK, my comment was in reference to Nijinsky and the fact that she felt it not right for personal trainers to be paid the same as a visiting lecturer. I'm just highlighting the way that we can all compare ourselves to another profession and come out lacking.

I am salaried and teach every month of the year. Sept- sept with postgrad and undergrad.

That is quite a lot MrsKravitz. Might you be better off going ad hoc?

Both of the universities I've taught at had the full-time permanent lecturers teaching in term time only with a lot of leeway as to whether they worked from home when not specifically teaching. Around 16 hours per week teaching time on average I'd say with admin duties and preferably some research on top, although it wasn't pressed.

Fontsnob That's fine MrsK, my comment was in reference to Nijinsky and the fact that she felt it not right for personal trainers to be paid the same as a visiting lecturer. I'm just highlighting the way that we can all compare ourselves to another profession and come out lacking.

Oops I've met someone with a chip on their shoulder. How dare I compare someone with a higher degree to someone with a qualification from a 6 week course which is not, by the way, a profession.

Hush my lips.

Actually you have just projected that chip onto my shoulder. Like I said, we all make our own choices. Mine is to teach. You were comparing lecturing to personal training. Not me, I joked about getting my plimsoles out!

We have a 48 hr week regulation with a max teaching time cap at 30 hrs a week . We are also scheduled from 9-7 pm

We also dont get protected lunch breaks -one day I did 9-11 lecture, 11-12 seminar, 12-2 lecture then 2-4 seminar That was fun.

In fact your last post makes little sense.

I needed skates to get from one end of the campus to another lol

Maybe looking for another university would be the way to go, MrsK. Your terms and conditions sound particularly poor.

Actually, Im not comparing I hope you realise...just letting people know what our days are like sometimes :)

Neither did your earlier one comprised thus Fontsnob:-

Do you see where this thread could go... We all have cause to complain about others getting paid more than we do. We all, however, make our own choices.

And what do you think we base those choices upon? Knowledge of what other people earn!

Are you at a post-92 university? SL/Readers at "old" universities are on grade 9, which starts at £46k. At the post-92 universities, SL are actually grade 8 (i.e. the same as a "standard" lecturer at an old university), which is around £35-43k, depending on where you are on the scale.

We have a policy of not being allowed to work from home.

I must say though, whether I'm paid less or not than school teachers, it still wouldn't encourage me to go into teaching. I'd rather stick hot pins in my eyes than teach reluctant 14-year olds!

Yes we cant wfh either. Yes Im a post 92

I think that's the point though. None of our jobs compare like for like. If you really hated it, you'd look elsewhere, as would I. Education, at all levels it seems, does not pay a comparable wage to other graduate posts (or personal trainers...plummers...electricians....etc).

Ninjiski, I genuinely can't see what your problem is with me or what I have been saying, I'm also not sure why you think I have a chip on my shoulder. If everyone went into their jobs thinking about what others got paid then there would be very few teachers, nurses, paramedics etc.

Sorry for spelling your name wrong btw!

If everyone went into their jobs thinking about what others got paid then there would be very few teachers, nurses, paramedics etc.

For the life of me, I cannot see what is wrong with comparing yourself with what others get paid! How on earth do you make judgements as to what to study and where to take your career otherwise?!

The Equal Pay Act 1970 has proved the foundation for a lot of equal pay at work actions where the concept of "like work" is challenged - the classic example is where predominately female cooks, cleaners, etc working for local authorities were paid traditionally less than predomintely male painters, decorators, etc.. Yet years ago such thoughts would have been taboo!

I don't see any point in making this a sexist issue, but lecturers are underpaid for what they do, and simply keeping silent and accepting it isn't going to get them anywhere.

I also don't see what is wrong with people thinking about what they earn and how it compares to others.

I know how much I earn, I know how much others earn, I still teach. Most teachers know what they are getting into.

I have to admit I went into teaching not caring a fig how much I would earn, which was not very wise. But it reflected the fact that at that time money did not matter to me, money is not a huge motivator for everyone.

I took a massive pay-cut when I moved from industry to academia, but at the time thought it was worth it for more freedom in terms of research area. I don't think academia is particularly badly paid, but most people will reach the £40-50k range quite easily and then get stuck there, whereas depending on your field, outside of academia that might be fairly modest, for someone qualified to the same level as most academics. Even those who make it to prof level (usually around £60k), then find that at that level you don't get incremental pay rises each year.

I don't think it's unreasonable for the OP to be 'confused' because I have often come across the assumption that academics earn huge amounts and do relatively little work. I think that's a real problem, actually.

Personally, teaching at school is not for me and I have enormous respect for those who do it, so this doesn't seem to me to be a 'who's more valuable?' game. But it always surprises me that people often think of teachers as poorly paid and very hard-working, and think lecturers are rich and lazy. Not on this thread, but I've often seen people assume that lecturers who 'only' teach 20 hours contact time are lazy because they don't understand what else those lecturers are paid to do. And a MNer who shall remain nameless once expressed the opinion that you 'can't' research subjects like English so all English academics do is teach. I think this is quite a common misconception, actually!

My supervisor, I happen to know, works from 7am and doesn't leave the building until 6-7pm - she's not teaching all that time but she is always working, and she still answers my email at 11pm or midnight often because she is still up marking essays or doing - yes - the huge amount of pastoral care that's required. I don't know if she deserves more than a teacher, but bear in mind she has spent several more years training, and is required to use her own salary to do things like conferences that are a requirement of the job - so her actual salary is not so very high when you take those into account!

I don't think there is anything wrong with it either, I just don't think that everyone bases their choice of job on what they will get paid compared to others. I don't think that that puts a chip on my shoulder, or does it?