To dislike the way unions push for big payrises only at the bottom?

[WillitFit]

I work in school. The lowest paid teachers are to get c.9% and everyone else 5% (if they accept it).

Support staff have been offered a fixed sum, just under £2000 on all points. Which is more than 10% for some, about 3% for me!

Everyone works hard and everyone deserves payrises that keep pace with inflation, surely? The more senior people have worked hard to get to where they are, often over many years, why is it OK to see their pay eroded?

Top of the teacher pay scale is £41,604

General expectation is 12 years of teaching to reach that. Then that's it for the rest of your teaching career unless you take on management responsibilities.

I can see both sides and understand the argument that lower paid workers are more affected by price rises. Upper pay scale teachers have seen a 25% cut in real term to their pay since 2010 (I think it was), much more than main scale teachers. It means the career progression is not what they thought it would be when they entered the profession. If they were earning big bucks that'd be more understandable, but we're not talking higher rate tax payers here. I don't begrudge TAs any pay rise they're offered as it's a scandal that they earn so little (and near enough impossible to recruit to our beautiful village school full of well behaved children where I am) but I'm not sure I agree with higher percentages being applied lower down the teaching scale.

Yes, I think you could argue that in most areas c. £26k (and £30k proposed) for a 22/23 yo graduate, straight out of college is a decent salary. £41k for a career professional, not so much.

It's the government that are pushing this 'tiered' pay rise system so the press can report 10% pay rise for school staff, when the truth is a pretty large real terms cut for the majority of staff.
You are right to dislike the strategy, but direct your anger towards the government.

You would love where I work then, the higher grades get higher % pay rise than lower grades for the same performance rating.

So someone awarded an 'Excellent' rating at Grade 1 would get say, 5% (In the past not now!) on a salary of £25K they would get an additional £1.25K. Someone at Grade 5 awarded the same Excellent rating gets an increase of 10% but their salary was already £60K so they get an additional £6K even though 5% would have been a higher amount for them anyway. Everyone thinks its wildly unfair.

Go back a few decades when your hypothetical teacher was on £6k and the TA (on a third of that) was on £2k, and maybe the head teacher was on £7k. If they had received the same monetary increase in pay, then today the teacher would be on £30k, the TA on £26k and the head on £31k. Would a teacher want promotion to head the school for just £20/week more?

The bigger issue is that, yet again, these pay rises are unfunded. So, for the privilege of taking a real terms cut in pay yet again, I have to deprive my pupils of a portion of their paltry funding.

But people in higher bands are already earning lots more then they’re still getting a pay rise so earning even more. The people in lower bands start off earning much less so even after a pay rise they’ll still be on much less money. I don’t really get your point tbh. Also TA’s have never earned enough. They didn’t go to uni so are somehow deemed inferior to teachers when they often do the same amount of work, certainly in primary schools.

If £2k represents 3% of your salary then you earn something like £65k?

I know that the crisis affects everyone but it’s disingenuous to pretend that someone on your salary isn’t better able to cope with the situation that someone on £20k.

DH and I are not ‘high’ earners but above average and whilst we feel the increases we can absorb it. I’d rather know my colleagues on less are less likely to be cold.

Yabu. Student teachers come out of uni about 80k in debt and not even earning enough to begin repayments. They need the money more.

I think with cost of living people at the bottom end are disproportionally affected, so it is reasonable to give a higher pay rise.
but - they might want to consider retention premiums for shortage jobs (as some may be attracted away by alternatives)

A TA does nothing like the same amount of work as a teacher. I'm honestly gob-smacked anyone could think they do.

They really don’t (I’ve been both).

Tas are extremely valuable but their workload, accountability and legal responsibilities are not the same.

It's a bit of a shame to see Teachers complaining about TAs getting a better payrise as unfortunately we'll still be earning a pittance that's it's impossible to live on unless you've got some kind of additional income in place! I work as a TA and the job has definitely got a lot more intense over the last few years. I'm now regularly left alone in charge of classes and working 1-1 we're often the first to get kicked or punched if a child gets overwhelmed. When our Teachers last went on strike I took a day off unpaid to support them. I was prepared to do that again this time even when it looked like TAs weren't going to get a payrise at all, as I appreciate how hard they work. With the money for payrises coming out of school budgets I would imagine that a fair few TAs will lose their jobs anyway. We're usually the first to be culled in times of cutbacks, so I wouldn't get too het up about any perceived special treatment you think we're receiving!

There seems to be, on this thread, people putting forward the argument that because people nearer the top of the pay scale can afford to eat, they deserve a pay cut.

Why would anyone deserve a pay cut?

Top of the teacher pay scale is £41,604

In London it's 50k for UPS3 & most will have a TLR with that so at least another 2k.

And that's because prices in London are way more expensive than the rest of the country. What's your point?

I think it's fair to give lower bands more personally, as they tend to be younger & young people obviously have it tough when it comes to housing. It's difficult as we need to retain experienced staff too

plus uni costs

@noblegiraffe my point was clear as I was replying to a post. apologies if it confused you.

It was my post you were replying to.

Except, go back few decades, and the (hypothetical) numbers were teacher 6k, TA 3.5k.

Over the years the teachers have, rightly, been identified as a group who are underpaid for their skills. Support staff salaries have not been increased to the same extent - and usually teaching and support staff are on different pay rise amounts, it's not a "school" payrise percent.
This one off flat amount is a way to help start correcting this.
Teachers pay scale increases have been out for a while. The numbers here are not news to them. It is the support scale payrises which have caused the "waaa, not fair" response.

The idea is broadly to create a situation in which nobody is working flat out and still on the breadline, so of course those on criminally low pay - which is many, many workers - are a priority.

I really dislike this line that's so often trotted out that "senior people have worked hard to get where they are". It misses the point, perhaps wilfully - many of those on the lowest pay are also working hard. There have always been people working incredibly hard, often in the most back-breaking and unrewarding jobs, who don't have the opportunity to rise through the system and access better pay and a higher standard of living. If you're a middle manager or a teacher or whatever, don't assume you've worked harder than those 'under' you, those who empty your bins and care for your sick and elderly relatives. It's bollocks, and it's an assumption that underpins and justifies inequality and chronic poverty.

It’s not that anyone deserves a pay cut, but in many industries pay rises are not in line with inflation at this time. If companies can help it, it would be better to prioritise the lower paid workers to help them meet more basic needs. Of course there are market forces at play as well, so companies will probably pay a premium for in-demand roles.

For schools specifically you have to factor in the fact that TAs are now doing much more demanding jobs than they were, for no extra wages. Many TAs are now effectively being junior teachers, but paid well below the teacher wage scale. Regarding the main teacher pay scale, I have no idea why it is so large in comparison to every other sector anyway. Other sectors’ job roles usually cover a 5k or 10k range, not nearly 20. You’re still doing the same job: you can’t expect increases forever for that.

Nationally percentage increases have been one of the factors increasing income inequality, in that annual 5% increases on 50k are double that on 20k, so corrections are needed.

The increases I find annoying is those that have resulted in low skill jobs such as retail or cleaning now being paid the same or higher than jobs requiring education.