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?

@Loics my sister is SLT & they are looking at similar.

Everyone at this level earns £100k+, we don't need a pay rise, especially at the moment when that budget can go to increasing the amount going to those on lower pay scales.

If you're on £100k+ then sure.

I don't want people thinking that teachers at the top of the pay scale who are currently in line for a hefty pay cut deserve that because they earn so much they don't have to worry about their bills.

£41k is not Scrooge McDuck diving into a pool of banknotes sort of money.

I'd never dispute that teacher experience isn't valuable, but you can't just keep climbing up a never ending scale ad infinitum based upon how many years you've been in a particular job. Everyone in the country could claim that due to their years of experience, they should continue to benefit from a pay rise every year. It just can't work like that.

Anyway, YABU. It's the people on the lowest paid wages who are dealing with the worst circumstances. Your anger should be directed towards the government who have robbed Peter to pay Paul once again. The 'squeezed middle' wouldn't be anywhere near as compromised if it weren't for the disastrous furlough policy (and the subsequent total lack of action to recapture monies claimed fraudulently) which I believe is partially responsible for the equally disgraceful NI tax hike.

Your anger should be directed towards the government

My anger is regularly directed at the government but I reserve the right to be pissed off at people suggesting that I deserve a pay cut because I earn more than someone with 17 years less experience than me.

And yes, my pay should go up every year, because the cost of everything goes up every year. It used to be called the cost of living pay increase.

I don't disagree about the stealth cuts over the years. It's been absolutely pants and no surprise why there's and issue with teacher numbers.

But.....whilst there's limited money on the pot, it needs to go to those who are at the bottom end first. Later on, the rates can catch up elsewhere.

That said as it's all coming out of school budgets lord only knows how schools are going to fund it. It's bonkers to award this after budgets are done.

Once again, as is often the case on MN threads, the existence of primary schools seems to be being forgotten. There are few TLRs in primaries - in fact not one in mine.

The trouble is that if everyone who works in the public sector and in large organizations gets a 'cost of living' pay rise, this will increase inflation even further, which is unfair to everyone else.

Later on, the rates can catch up elsewhere.

Rates have been decreasing in real terms for UPS holders for years. Retention of good teachers is a huge problem, although working conditions rather than pay are usually the problem.

In the current circumstances, it is the people with lower wages who needs it more due to the ever increasing cost of living. So it makes sense to me today.

In other conditions, I do agree with you. But I think that in today's circumstances there is just not money enough.

Wait... I am aTA in SEN school and I didn't realise support staff were getting a payrise along with the teachers. We are getting an increase of £2000 p a?, Tbh, I'm happy with that.

When I started teaching about 18 years ago, my starting salary was around £18.5k. Now, I've been promoted several times and reached UPS3 and on about £45k.
But if the top isn't rising and starting salary is at £30k, then I don't see the incentive for promotion and all the extra stress tbh.

I have a slightly different argument as I'm a single parent. My household income is just my salary (if I have my salary to represent a two parent family it is far less than the average isn't it?) I run out of money about half way through the month. I haven't had a holiday in years and I live in a run down house and bloody struggling. I don't think it's right given my 'job title' and experience etc that I can't afford to do basic stuff with my children. Plus I am working all hours too! My kids have been living on basic food at least one week a month for the last few months as I can't afford it after all the rising costs (again, I appreciate this is across the board for everyone so please don't jump on me for that). Their dad doesn't want to know.
If you take away my TLR I'd only be on just over £10k from someone without the 18 years experience and I'd be expected to mentor them and do more (upper pay scale have different standards to abide by).

The post by the pp saying that she isn't having a payrise on her current £100k salary to support her lower paid colleagues nearly made me spit my tea out! Talk about missing the point spectacularly! Clearly not in education.

It's a complex situation and everyone feels they deserves more. I'm actually happy to receive 5% as it feels like the first proper rise in years. However, the arguement that new teachers have higher costs because of uni fees and housing etc just isn't true. I qualified 18 years ago and we had student loans too and most teachers who are on the top of the main pay scale will still have loans to pay back.

I don't begrudge TAs a decent payrise at all. I know they've been shafted many times when it come to teacher payrises over the last two decades.

That wasn't supposed to be as long. Apologies 😉

The issue is it all has to come out of the budgets and it hasn’t been accounted for. That will mean redundancies especially in primary where lower numbers are coming in (that’s coming to you secondary in the next few years).

A blanket percentage will leave the lower ends worse off and the higher ends costing the school more. Schools already don’t have the budget for it. No one is saying really terms pay cuts are right.

Personally, I do think the biggest increase needs to go further down the scales for reasons already stated. A blanket percentage is hugely detrimental to ECTs and massively beneficial to those on UPS. With ITT failing to hit targets that’s not what they want. Teaching needs experience, it also needs fresh blood.

yes the drop in pupil numbers is really concerning. A borough in London has more than a dozen schools in financial difficulty due to reduced budgets.

However, the arguement that new teachers have higher costs because of uni fees and housing etc just isn't true

I said that, why do you think it's not true? I went to uni but my loan was tiny compared to today's kids & there's no way I could buy my house now. The gulf between housing & salaries has widened & uni does cost more.

Well this is it isn’t it. Older teachers haven’t left with 80k of debt and no chance of getting on the housing ladder. They are one of the lowest paid graduate jobs going. It’s why ITT is in crisis. Teaching needs experience and fresh blood.

Problem is, it is the newer teachers who are putting their money where their mouth is and leaving. Not the ones who have a better pension and are marking time. It’s called the pension trap in the military. Younger graduates are leaving teaching en masse.

hasn't the pension scheme changed too?

Yes, so for younger people in the here and now aren’t getting the deal that those who have marked 20 odd years will. Another reason that teaching is losing the new recruits to the profession. If they don’t make it more attractive to graduates, there will be no teachers when all those on UPS leave with their lump sums.

The pay gap between the lowest paid and the highest paid in all organisations needs to decrease. Making the pay gap smaller is the only real way to reach a fairer pay scale.

What you're not taking into account is that many of the lowest paid support staff will be reliant upon Universal Credit. Once the 65% deduction has come off, they're only getting a maximum of £700. Which is probably nearer 1.5% than it is your 3%.

The pay gap between the lowest paid and the highest paid in all organisations needs to decrease

This is usually used in arguments against CEOs pulling in huge six figure salaries while the bottom end are on minimum wage.

Teachers on the top of the pay scale are not on huge six figure salaries. They are on £41k, and will be expected to train the new teachers coming in.

People saying that recruitment is an issue and schools are full of teachers marking the last few years till they cash in their fat pension - this isn’t true. England has one of the youngest teaching workforces in the OECD. It’s losing teachers at both ends, and not just due to retirement. Retention is also a massive issue.

aren’t getting the deal that those who have marked 20 odd years will.

Those who have marked 20 years will have spent the majority of that on a much crapper pension deal than the one they started with.

I think in the current circumstances, sharing the pot out equally, like 2k for everyone is fairer. A 'standard' grocery shop, a litre of petrol, school uniform for a particular school, will have gone up the same whether you are on 20k or 50k, not by a percentage of your income. The lowest paid are hardest hit.

That’s the point. There is no pot.

Thats how I feel.

Also minimum wage just went up to 9.50 so there were a lot of roles that were just above minimum wage that suddenly became minimum wage.

The reason TAs are so stretched is due to constant 'restructuring' / redundancies. This also puts pressure on teachers and negatively impacts children.
I feel, as a TA, undervalued. However, if this pay rise happens, will it be across the board/ all schools? And, how on earth will it be paid for?
Off to Google as this 2000 pounds is news to me...
[Also, PP mentioned TAs do not have degrees. Many do, and more].