To think teachers are quite well paid?

[Newyearnewnameforme]

Not intended goadily but my salary is more than most of my graduate friends.

Obviously, it isn’t Rockefeller standards but AIBU to think it’s actually OK?

'Report' ffs grow up

I think I’m on a good salary, and so I’m a bitch to struggling staff?

You are on a good salary and the vast majority of teachers are earning much less, you are unreasonable to suggest otherwise. The mention of struggling staff, I think, was to suggest that as you seem incapable of understanding that simple fact you might also be incapable of understanding any other problems staff might have. That is my understanding of it.

Teaching salaries are difficult to assess because, as past posters have said, you can be stuck in a role and school because of external factors. I stayed in one school for years instead of going for promotion because of family issues (couldn’t afford to move away from partner’s job) and that wasn’t lack of ambition but a decision that took all our family into account.

Something that helped me at the time was the AST programme which was intended to keep keen teachers in the classroom without having to go for HOD or SLT posts—you could get on leadership scale by working one day a week with other schools. Now, of course, that doesn’t exist—one of the many short sighted cuts. Teachers coming into the profession now really do have fewer options and its little surprise that retention is such an issue.

So, I'm going to preface what I say with the caveat that I'm not a teacher or a public sector worker so I've only got a vague idea of pay scales work etc.

But in the private sector, you get more money by gaining experience in the industry and then taking on more responsibilities - no one gives it to you for free. So this argument that teachers who don't take on any more responsibility won't get any more money is surely a spurious one? I mean, if I still had the same role and scope that I did when I first graduated then I'd still be earning the same or similar money too.

I do recognise that there's no way of rewarding experience and longevity in long standing teachers and that's a problem with the pay structure (and to some extent the profession full stop) and that should be addressed. And of course, there are a whole load of industry wide problems that I really don't know enough about to even touch upon so I'm not going to go there. But addressing the basic premise - in every job I've done, you do 'more', you take on more and you get more money. That's how it works.

To rephrase (again) my objection to your post is not that I think teachers' pay is poor in relation to others (a different question) but that teachers do not earn £47k.

As mentioned up thread there’s a lot of comparisons to wages in the city.

However, In Manchester / Birmingham etc the professions do not pay as highly (think £45k - £55k for qualified accountant, Big4 manager, maybe a bit more for a solicitor).

These professions have less in the way of pensions and holidays than teaching, plus day to day stress and long hours akin to teaching. So overall, teaching is not out of sync salary wise and holds up well if you are head of department etc (probably comparable to a qualified professional more so than a classroom teacher).

probably comparable to a qualified professional more so than a classroom teacher

You don't think a classroom teacher is a qualified professional?

That’s what I’m wondering too LBOC, it’s absolutely none of my business what people choose to do but it stands to reason that without taking on additional responsibilities you often won’t get additional pay. This is one of the reasons I’m glad it’s not in the staffroom.

What a lovely HoD you must be judging by the way you speak about those who 'simply choose to stay as teachers'. Who would teach the students if everyone went in to Middle Leadership or above? So yeah YABU - NQTs are paid a pittance and work ridiculous hours. As a deputy head, if I got a whiff of your 'them and us' attitude I'd have serious concerns about your ability to lead staff.

Those of us who have been teaching for a while are better off in my area - I'm in my 20th year but chose to work in FE in more recent years so my salary dropped.

I earn £36k. Top of the scale so no more to come.

However those just starting have no fucking chance of earning that. They start on £23k ish and only get an increase if they hit achievement and attendance targets... English and Maths department so teaching kids who failed one or both at school and don't want to re-sit.

Out of interest, do university lecturers follow the same pay and structure as school teachers?

In a word, no. Zero hour contracts and part-time contracts with a full-time working week are rife. Very rare to get a job these days without further publications (usually unfunded) on top of your PhD. I have many colleagues who are still on hourly contracts in their 50s. Keeping an academic job is expensive as there is usually no funding for the kind of activity you are expected to pursue and conference fees in particular are very high. Someone mentioned having to buy green biros: we have to pay for our own research materials (academic books usually cost in excess of £50) and the cost of attending even one conference a year for me is around £500, which most years is half a monthly salary.

But of course what everybody sees is the vastly overpaid senior management.

Suspect this may be the same in many jobs.

For comparison, dh is in the private sector, handles multi-million contracts and is responsible for the safety of his staff on site, has 40 years experience in the field, and earns just over £30k. So not exactly overinflated salary either. But at least he doesn't have to pay for the equipment.

Blimey you lot are very rude to the OP. It is a goady post but so what. You are all coming across as a little sensitive. £47k is a good salary and well done to the OP for getting that in their 30s. If you were my child or partner I would be very proud. Lot of jealousy on this post.

But addressing the basic premise - in every job I've done, you do 'more', you take on more and you get more money. That's how it works.
I don't disagree with that and I don't think anyone else has but the majority of teachers go into the profession to teach not necessarily to climb the greasy pole. I was not 'stuck in my role', it was the role I wanted to be in and I was not alone in that. I was earning 37k after 30 years (MPS and UPS) 47k is not a normal teacher salary. We can't all be in high earning management roles even if we wanted to.

I left teaching a few years ago, after a varied career. My last full time post was in a small secondary school as SENCo and assistant head. I e also been a classroom teacher, advisory teacher for SpLD and for behaviour management, with post graduate qualifications in SpLD and ASD. If I worked out my salary in terms of actual hours worked, it equates to less than £10 per hour.

I accept that the OP intended to open a debate, but I think that attitudes to teachers can be very polarised, with the ancient idea that there are
short days and long holidays, still apparent in some people’s thinking, although less so than was the norm when I started. I don’t think it’s surprising that teachers can become defensive, when there is such an unrealistic view of the profession.

I think that the starting salary for teachers is low for the level of responsibility and that opportunities for progression and increase in salary can be less to do with ability, competence and slur and more to do with dwindling school finances. I would regard £45,000 as a reasonable salary, but I don’t think it will be necessarily reflective of the majority of teaching staff.

Blimey you lot are very rude to the OP. It is a goady post but so what. You are all coming across as a little sensitive. £47k is a good salary and well done to the OP for getting that in their 30s. If you were my child or partner I would be very proud. Lot of jealousy on this post.
Completely missing the point of most posters. It is nothing to do with jealousy - it is not a normal teacher salary.

A lot of professionals have to do a 3 year post grad qualification after their degree. For example an accountant will study for a further 3 years whilst working to become qualified. I’m assuming the OP has done the same?

@WaterSheep sorry badly worded. They absolutely are, but I was looking at manager grade in the private sector as a comparator, so someone with lots of post qualification experience and managerial responsibilities, so head of department seemed the equivalent?

WHY would you post this???
The most anyone can earn as a classroom teacher- after more than 10 years experience and 3 'threshold' applications is 40K. In reality; most teachers I work with are on about 30K as threshold applications are increasingly being refused for spurious reasons [ due to financial pressures]. Yes; the holidays are great; but most secondary teachers work 50-60 hours per week during term-time.

I think it depends on your subject as to how you view other professions - I have a degree in a science subject and I do know people who've gone on to work for big pharmacy companies or who work in the energy sector who do appear to earn more for less. It's worth bearing in mind that most teachers have a postgraduate qualification too.

However, if I was an arts graduate, this might not be the case.

I also am lucky enough to be able to live in a lovely part of the world, which I probably couldn't do if I worked in a different sector.

I do agree that money is not the issue though, and there are other issues in teaching, and salaries do sometimes trap people in the profession.

There is evidence to suggest the all vs nothing nature of the workload is more stressful than if it were more evenly spread through the year.

Can't say I have enough recent experience of teaching (used to be supply). But my suspicion from other workplaces is that the phrase "taking on additional responsibilities" often entails "leaving ordinary non-promotion-worthy responsibilities to be covered by others who won't get remunerated for the extra work".

I can think of so many colleagues over the years (very often male) who have been able to demonstrate their willingness to take on extra responsibilities because some other colleague (very often female) has stepped in and covered the work that won't lead to promotion: offered support to the suicidal student, answered queries, sorted out paperwork, sorted out rows that could easily have wrecked the department. The ambitious ones never notice it.

If the OP is actually a teacher and in a leadership role then she is the sort of leader that because of her manner, staff will have no respect for.

To rephrase (again) my objection to your post is not that I think teachers' pay is poor in relation to others (a different question) but that teachers do not earn £47k

Agreed. I’m 22 years in and on £40k. I’m the only one in the school not on the MPS though, other than the head so this is v unusual.

The average UK salary is around 29k but the most common salary is lower - around 22k. And one in five people earn under the living wage.

I don’t think the the OP‘s salary is representative of most teachers.

If I was just a ‘normal teacher’, though, I’d be on 40k, which is still fine.

I've been teaching 18 years. I'm at the top of my pay scale. I'm a single parent and I have an unreliable ex who doesn't pay what he should for his children. I need to get promoted or I'll have to leave teaching. I've taken on more and more and more responsibility above my remit, and I don't have an annual performance review where I can get moved up a grade or level. My results are great, even with low ability pupils and I present more kids than is ever predicted when they arrive in my classes. And I have maybe two jobs a year that come up in my field that I can apply for, which I then compete with half the teachers in the Region for. It's not a question of hard work equalling rewards. I suspect the OP is incredibly condescending to her staff. She is here.