To think Teaching Assistants are vastly underpaid for their role?

[altoran]

When the role of Teaching Assistant was created, the idea was that they would help with basic tasks like photocopying, wall displays, etc. It was a very basic role with no real responsibility.
Now Teaching Assistants have a lot of responsibility and are very involved in children's education, although under the supervision of a teacher. But they receive very little over minimim wage for this.
AIBU to think they are vastly underpaid?

Yes and no. I'm a qualified teacher but working as a TA and HLTA.

As a TA I get paid £9 something an hour, and assist in class, plan and run intervention groups and help the teacher. I feel this is quite fair.

As an HLTA I cover classes for absent teachers, often with no planning provided. Deal with discipline issues, speak with parents etc etc. Normally don't have a TA in because, they're short staffed. I do this role 1 whole day per week during which time I don't get a break as there is no-one to cover me (as in, I eat in the classroom with the kids and then go out to supervise then while they play). The other days I am hlta for mornings.

HLTA garners approx £11 per hour. This I feel is too low.

Most wages below around £27k are low for the work put in though. This is the level that wage stagnation has hit hardest. So yes of course £9.57 is low in terms of aptitude required but then £9.57 is also low for eg hospitality staff required to work long hours and changing shifts and have endless amounts of people skills. TAs are paid ok I think looking at other jobs that pay the same which yes may not have the same amount of responsibility but which are much worse in terms of working patterns and autonomy over task flow etc.

If wages for the lowest paid deciles had kept up with inflation then TAs would be paid more. But then so would lots of people. But that hasn't happened so here we are.

Agreed op totally. I was a ta for 3 years and the pay was bullshit for what i was doing. Literally i was teaching whole classes from time to time whilst the teacher did other things. I would have to mark work books, teach phonics and spelling, numeracy, science and art. I would have to talk to parents about things, do lunch time duties and deal with substitute teachers regularly. Yet the pay was so poor and you get zero respect because you're not a real teacher.

Oh, prior to this I was a 1-1 ta with a child with significant SEN. This was at the lower rate of £9 something.

I had a degree allready when I signed up to be a TA
I still had to do level 2 and level 3 LSA qualifications I also work with SEN so there is a lot more training there, Considering how strenuous/and demanding a role it is .... its very much underpaid.

I very much agree they are underpaid. I think their pay is an insult tbh.

@Stompythedinosaur

I very much agree they are underpaid. I think their pay is an insult tbh.

But supply and demand means there are still long queues of people who will do it at that pay so it never improves.

But supply and demand means there are still long queues of people who will do it at that pay so it never improves.

This!! The only way pay improves in a market economy is if people refuse to do the job at the wage offered.

TAs will complain about the pay, but horses apply for these jobs every year. Because actually there are hardly any jobs that fit around school hours if you are determined that little Jimmy never set foot in wraparound care. So there is clearly a substantial value to the working pattern available to TAs and that is a factor in the low pay accepted by staff in these roles.

hordes not horses....

I can see this from two sides as I was an LSA before becoming a teacher. My husband is also an LSA. Yes, LSAs are underpaid. My husband works in an alternative provision centre for excluded children and is on £14,000 take home. This is a place where drugs and knives are brought in, fights break out and staff have frequent verbal abuse. Nature of the job but so underpaid for the type of work and environment.

For me, I was happy with my LSA pay initially as it was my first proper job out of uni and it was the most I'd ever earnt. However, I soon realised it wasn't great.

What I would say though, a starting salary for a teacher (in my opinion) is worse. For many teachers they will have paid out a lot of money to train. Then there's the ultimate class responsibility, the hours, the pressure, the workload, the grilling on progress, the accountability. LSAs don't have those things although I know their performance is more scrutinised now than ever before.

In my first and second years of teaching, I had a nursery nurse as my LSA because it was reception. She was earning a lot more than me both those years because of the grade she was on even though I was doing more work. She was excellent at her job so deserved her money but my point is, NQT wage is shit basically!

One big bonus to being an LSA is leaving school work at school, despite the crap salary. With teaching, your evenings and weekends are not your own. There's always work to catch up on. I'm on mat leave at the moment but I'm seriously considering going back into an LSA role. Big salary drop, especially from m6, but you get more of a life.

A few people have mentioned male LSAs which is really interesting. My husband is an LSA and is applying for other LSA roles at the moment. He seems to get interviews really easily and I said to him, it's possibly because he's a man. Especially popular in primary. And to be fair, I think having a man in a support or nurture role is really good for the children to see.

@altoran

The average secondary school teacher earns £39,000 a year.

And?

@cardibach

The same as a teacher there is no minimum standard Rubbish *@Fitforforty* . Teachers in the state sector have to have a degree and postgrad teaching qualification.

No Micheal Gove got rid of this requirement. As a teacher I was rather annoyed by this.

@Fitforforty yes but the majority of schools want QTS. I was recently job hunting and all the state schools wanted QTS. It was actually only the private ones that were advertising for unqualified, oh and one state primary school that wanted PPA cover. I'm sure some are asking for unqualified due to cost but it's few and far between

The words 'no minimum standard' implies anyone can get a teaching job, when in reality without QTS you would struggle to find roles.

What @NoIDontWatchLoveIsland said. Yes, the pay is awful but with no childcare costs you are saving a lot, not just financially but the stress involved in trying to get cover for all the holidays. Not to mention that often people are local to the school they're based at, so travel costs are low. The trouble is that it's seen as a fallback job for mums rather than a proper career that people aspire to. There are just no other jobs out there that give you so much time off - even a part-time role elsewhere will require you to work holidays, and the AL is pro-rata'd so you'd almost be worse off.

notanothertakeaway

I'm not a TA, I'm a Pastoral Lead, middle-management in a school.

I am surprised that a non teaching pastoral lead is managing teachers. Why are the teachers in your school not line managed by their head of department/ head of faculty? How do you support their line management in their subject areas?

@NoIDontWatchLoveIsland

But supply and demand means there are still long queues of people who will do it at that pay so it never improves.

This!! The only way pay improves in a market economy is if people refuse to do the job at the wage offered.

TAs will complain about the pay, but horses apply for these jobs every year. Because actually there are hardly any jobs that fit around school hours if you are determined that little Jimmy never set foot in wraparound care. So there is clearly a substantial value to the working pattern available to TAs and that is a factor in the low pay accepted by staff in these roles.

Just to say - some TAs still have to use wraparound care. My other half is a TA and finishes at 4.30pm (only half an hour before me in a normal 9-5 job). Primary school kicks out at 3.10pm.

@Sweak I think it depends on the school to be honest. Many will do whatever to cut costs. In my last school, there were several LSAs that did cover and were then asked to become the class 'teacher'. Parents were known the wiser to this, not sure if they would have cared anyway. I know their salaries would have been capped at the unqualified pay, and the individuals I'm thinking of are excellent in their roles. However, having been through a degree and teacher training myself, with the costs involved, I feel like that QTS should mean something. But at my last school it felt like saving money meant more than having the right qualification for the role. Seemed unfair in many ways.
So if you want an unqualified teaching role, I think it might be more about getting known and in a school that does that first.

Edit *none the wiser

@mag2305 are you primary or secondary? I've actually not seen a TA do cover or teach lessons in the secondary schools I've taught at. I think it's more common in primary schools? We have cover supervisors to cover classes. Lessons pre planned by the teacher.

Could partly be down to needing the specific knowledge to deliver content at GCSE and A level perhaps. Or at primary sometimes I'm assuming it's better to have a great TA who knows the kids covering than external supply who has no relationship..probably true of special needs schools too. That's not to say that's fair on those TAs though. Especially if it's a long term thing where they need to plan rather than just deliver pre prepared lessons.

I totally agree QTS should mean something. But like I say I rarely see external roles advertised for unqualified.

Maybe you are right it's about getting established first...I do wonder if it's more common in primaries though.

Just to say - some TAs still have to use wraparound care. My other half is a TA and finishes at 4.30pm (only half an hour before me in a normal 9-5 job). Primary school kicks out at 3.10pm.

This.

Plus even if you finish bang on the school bell time that only works if you work in your child’s school.

When I worked in schools people always commented how “lucky” I was that I didn’t need childcare when I still did as even if I finished in school A at 3.15 I couldn’t be at my child’s school at 3.15.

I have seen HLTAs cover classes, in secondary schools and also be timetabled for classes in order to fill gaps in the tt. It 100% should not be happen but it does. It really is down to poor management, lack of funding and parents either not being aware or not caring enough to raise concerns.

Schools have (or at least to my knowledge should have) insurance which covers them for the costs of supply for long term absence so HTLAs should only be used for day to day cover when teachers are off sick for a couple of days. But, again, I have seen HTLAs/ cover supervisors used to cover long term.

To the poster who claimed that teachers need no qualifications - I have never seen an advert for a teacher without QTS (in secondary school that requires a 3 year degree and one year post grad course, plus one year NQT). There may be academies that appoint non qualified teachers but I have no experience of them.

I don't know why this thread seems to have developed into a teachers v LSA debate. They are different jobs, different qualifications and different pay scales. Many LSAs deserve to be paid more than they are - what teachers earn is not relevant. If LSAs and HTLAs are being asked to do more that the role requires then they are being exploited.

If someone without QTS is managing teachers who are paid more than them then that is a very odd management structure. I am still struggling to see how someone can be in middle management and yet be less qualified and be paid less than the people they manage.

@MojoMoon

Starting salary for a teacher is 25k - and that is for considerably more hours, stress and responsibility than a TA and after completing a degree and post grad qualification.

So relative to a teacher, I am not sure I would say they are vastly underpaid.

But relative to their merits in society, I would say both were underpaid.

Most TAs only get paid for the hours they work though, not for all the holidays, so they don't earn anywhere near the published salary. - I believe most earn about £11k a year.. TAs I know find other work to top up their earnings, earning more per hour in retail/bar work than in a school.