Scottish teachers pay offer

[GneissGuysFinishLast]

AIBU to think that it’s not really an improved offer, and that 12% over 2 years is overall a worse deal than 10% in one year, and that they are only making this offer to delay strikes?

(reported on BBC News here: www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-64642699)

All teachers in Scotland are “subject specialists” in the secondary sector. The bare minimum you can teach with is a four year degree course, which is only available for limited subjects.

www.gtcs.org.uk/registration/secondary-teaching/

Nursing degrees are three years here. Obviously some might have more, but we are speaking about minimum competency.

www.careers.nhs.scot/careers/explore-our-careers/nursing/adult-nurse/

Make sure you are speaking about the correct country before you comment.

@GneissGuysFinishLast You need to compare teachers to more specialised nurse roles which also require a masters/postgraduate qualification, and then you’ll find that their pay is comparable.

Lol, no... Teachers always think they're highly intelligent but I see little evidence of that in general. A teacher on this thread couldn't spell Bachelors for heaven's sake - hint, it's not a Cup a Soup branded degree. Also many nurses with a Masters and prescribing postgrad are paid band 6, generally less than teachers, and almost always less than band 5 staff nurses due to shift allowance. So there is little (if any) incentive for a nurse to do a postgrad. Also, it's not just level of education you need to consider, it's level of responsibility. Nurses have a higher level of responsibility, any teachers who disagree truly don't understand what the NHS is like right now.

Also re hours worked, nurses aren't getting proper breaks. It's got even worse since covid. Sometimes there can be one trained nurse on a ward overnight for 12.5 hours. One at least three occasions in the past month I'm aware of nightshift nurses staying on 3 /4 hours after their shift as the dayshift didn't turn up. And on top of that, ward work is not comparable with marking/designing displays on your couch in front of the telly.

I'm not a nurse.

@GneissGuysFinishLast

See, you're doing it again. Trying to make out that teachers deserve more pay than other professionals.

Saying teachers should only be compared to more specialised roles is saying non specialised teachers deserve more.

Teaching does not always require a post grad or masters

You asked us to discuss the pay offer? Didn't you?

Do you not want opinions on it?

I live in Scotland.

I care because it's relevant to me and my children.

And obviously there's a typo... Muphry's Law!

This is why the strikes were always going to be problematic, because there are so many contradictory points and arguments.

It isn’t about pay, only it is about pay.

Teachers are leaving in droves, only they aren’t.

Recruitment is proving difficult, except where theres a surplus, which is nearly everywhere.

Teachers work more hours than they are contracted for, except their contract is for 36 hours during term time.

And I know that may sound as if I’m being goady, and I’m not. But if no one really knows what the purposes of the strikes are then they are never going to work.

@FuckingHateRats I think that you hit the nail on the head.

You are confusing the strikes in England with the strikes in Scotland. Two completely different but simultaneous strikes.

The Scottish campaign is purely a campaign in pay and I’ve provided a link to the campaign with its aims a few pages back.
The English campaign is about pay and conditions, because they aren’t able to strike over pay.

There is a surplus of teachers in Scotland overall, but a lack of recruitment of teachers, instead they are recruiting teachers on nil hour supply contracts. There is a deficit of teachers in rural areas, because most teacher training places are in the central belt, and most people don’t want to move to rural Aberdeenshire in the vain hope they might get a job. Teachers aren’t “leaving” in Scotland. That’s England. They are working, they just don’t have contracts for the work they do.

Teachers are paid for 36 hours but work for 50+. In England, teachers don’t have contracted hours - they have class contact time and work however many hours it takes to get that done.

It’s important that you are clear exactly which strike you are referencing. Education is a devolved matter.

My question is why does it need to be about nurses or teachers? Why every time there is a post about teachers pay and conditions is it full of nurses with whataboutisms? There are undoubtedly issues in both education and health. Fortunately they are both funded completely independent of each other, so they don’t need to be in competition.

(Teachers also don’t get breaks, by the way, last week I nearly peed myself in class because I didn’t have time to go to the toilet all day - I had to leave the children unattended to use the bathroom)

Every teacher on here supports nurses also striking over pay/conditions/whatever.

Thanks - I know it’s devolved. But there have been a few threads, including one longish one on Scotsnet, where it was insisted the strikes weren’t really about pay by quite a few teachers, which obviously echoes what’s happening in England.

As I said earlier in the thread, if there’s a surplus of teachers, it makes negotiating pay harder.

Where are there non specialised teachers being employed?
Teachers pay is not relevant to you, or your children, is it? How does me getting an extra few percent impact you directly?

Not all teachers work 50 hours + and they definitely don't work 50+ year round.

It's a difficult job with some tough (behavioral) really stressful elements. They deserve the pay rise.

Every thread about public sector pay ends up in comparison to other roles.

Threads about nursing pay ends up a race to the bottom about poor private sector workers

It's almost impossible to discuss job worth and value (especially in the public sector) without comparison to other roles.

Im also not sure every teacher does support better pay for other roles

Of course teachers striking for pay affects me directly!

The increase (which I support) will need to be paid for. It could come from any part of the devolved budget. Who knows where they will cut from?

Even if it didn't, am I not allowed to comment? Why start the thread if you don't want people to answer?

Primary school teachers aren't specialised?

Or do they not count?

It could depend on the union - there are several. I’m in EIS and our strike is about pay.

Why every time there is a post about teachers pay and conditions is it full of nurses with whataboutisms?

Its an easy comparison to make given they’re both public sector, especially just now when both are striking.

Teachers pay is not relevant to you, or your children, is it? How does me getting an extra few percent impact you directly?

As a public sector worker it does impact me, because the money to pay for it comes out of the public purse and potentially means cuts to overstretched health and social care services to fund the higher wage bill. It also affects me because striking teachers means my kids aren’t in school, which means I’m taking time out of my work to care for children who should be in school. So when teachers complain about losing money through strikes that they’ve voted for I have absolutely no sympathy, when they are debating 0.5% in a proposed pay rise which is still higher than most public sector workers will get, I have even less.

I do support the right to strike, but thinking the whole pay dispute/resolution impacts no one else is a nonsense.

I have more sympathy for colleagues south of the border who are concerned for the wider conditions for kids in school, lack of teaching staff and difficulties in retention, supporting ASN students etc than I have for someone purely wanting to line their own pockets and doing so at others expense.

The offer has been rejected by the EIS, my rep emailed me

Pay deal unanimously rejected by the committee.

@GneissGuysFinishLast (Teachers also don’t get breaks, by the way, last week I nearly peed myself in class because I didn’t have time to go to the toilet all day - I had to leave the children unattended to use the bathroom)

Yeah but those children were incredibly unlikely to keel over and die while you left the room. You cannot leave patients unattended on a ward in case one does. You must on paper at least get breaks, due to WTD. What are your breaks meant to be, and why do you not get them? Genuinely curious, I know the children will get breaks so unless you're supervising the lunch hall or something every day why do you not get breaks?

And they're not independently funded though, are they? It's all coming out of a finite amount of money.

We get two breaks per day - a 15 minute morning interval and a 35 minute lunch break. In that time we need to clear the class from previous lessons and set up for the next ones, check emails (since you can’t do that during class), do photocopying, help pupils with homework, get ICT provisions into class (these are shared across the whole school)

Im not complaining about lack of breaks though, but if your argument is “nurses don’t get breaks” then neither do teachers.

I’m the first to agree that the teaching day is incredibly rushed and frantic. But … they are breaks.

Yeah, those are breaks... This is why people find it so difficult to take teachers seriously, there's so much exaggeration and dramatising. I also think lots aren't aware of other jobs because their life has been school to uni to school. When I say nurses aren't getting breaks I mean they genuinely continually provide patient care and supervision, not they they had to check an email while they sat down for 35 minutes. If you didn't manage to take a toilet break all day due to photocopying and instead had to leave your class unattended I have to question your time management and prioritisation.

Really? So if a nurse is clearing equipment from an operating theatre after one operation and getting the stuff ready for the next, they would call that time a break?
And checking and replying to emails (one, haha! More like 30) is also a break? Office workers must be on one long break in that case.

I worked in the private sector for 15 years before I went into teaching.

Checking emails is an active part of my daily duties - equivalent of reading patients records. I need to know pastoral updates on pupils (there are several each day) I also need to log their “behaviour cards” via email, plus log each kid that asked out to the toilet, and to keep track of what additional classes I’ll be teaching - the email thing probably only takes 5 minutes.

If a nurse was working through their lunch completing their admin, would this still be considered “work”? - of course it would. They are working. Similarly, teachers are working when they are conducting their admin tasks. And often, this can only be done on their lunch break.

Photocopying a class set of workbooks easily takes 15 minutes and again, this is a key part of my job role.

Not getting time to pee is a fairly rare occurrence, not having time to eat happens several times a week.

I think I might love you

Ah, the "real world" bingo has come out. I've had several jobs outside teaching as have many other teachers. Does a nurse have to have done another job outside of nursing?