To think this could solve teachers' problems

[NovemberRains]

Teachers want higher pay.

Their employers currently pay a whopping ~24% into a defined benefit pension scheme!

AIBU to think that a lot of their problems could be solved if they were just given the option to either continue as they are, or get a 20% pay increase and have a 4% employer contribution to a standard defined contribution pension scheme like the vast majority of the population get!

I respect teachers, but based on my knowledge when overall remuneration is considered including pension and holidays, they really aren't underpaid compared to other professions!

It's a similar story for other public sector professions!

How are you well aware? Are you a teacher?

Teachers whinge so much.. every job is stressful! Just don't be a teacher then..

Well yes, that's precisely the issue. Nobody wants to be a teacher. You see?

I know so many teachers who don't lift a pen during the holidays.

You can go above and beyond with any job. Just choose not to!

No, it wouldn't because the governments pension contributions don't go into a pot waiting for teachers to claim it. Most of the teacher pension claims are covered by the employee contributions and "topped up" by employer contributions by government if it's needed. A chunk of the money they claim is paid by the employer just ends up back in the treasury so it would still cost more to the treasury to reduce contributions and raise wages.

Well they are holidays so actually they shouldn't have to...

Ridiculous comment.

@Janedoe82 You are wrong on nearly everything you say.
Step away.

We have to balance the books in an independent school. If too may parents can’t afford a big fee increase then with less pupils would need fewer teachers, so some might lose their jobs.
We will probably have to withdraw from the TPS if the employer contribution goes up again.

@PyjamaFan my point is they don't have to. If some don't, then none need to

@NovemberRains are you a parent?

Teachers are "only contracted for 32.5 hours".

Oh my! I'd laugh if only it were funny.

How can you possibly know that.

Different roles, Key Stages, management responsibilities, subject leadership, SEN, etc.

The job is not exactly the same for all teachers.

I used to work my 32.5 hours a week!

But I was only contracted to work two days a week...

😆

Although of course it isn't funny.

I am a teacher but have worked outside of teaching and the employer contribution was 18%. Salary was higher and worked 8-4 with 30 min lunch break (30 mins longer than I get now in a 8-6.20 day). Salary similar. I came back to teaching as I love it but sadly I can’t stay as I want a life. Ps did 9-4 today on first day of my ‘holidays’….

@Iamnotthe1 that is incorrect. The average teacher pays about 9.2% into the TPS as an employer contribution- the employer currently pays 23.68%, so nearly 3 times more than the teacher.

Oops * as an employer contribution

Why???

You're essentially saying "I'm pissed off about the pay and conditions in my /another area/sector, but rather than do anything about it I'm going to get angry at any other profession that tries to better their position."

I genuinely can't understand how some people can walk around with this mindset.

*employee - my phone keep’s autocorrecting

Exactly: your business model would no longer be viable. You'd have to look at a mix of increasing ratios, increasing fees, reducing spending elsewhere, refusing to raise wages or withdrawing from the pension scheme. All of which would have implications for your business.

Oh gosh. Not this. I’m contracted 16hrs as a part-timer over 3 days. My actual hours are 32hrs in the building over 3 days, plus at least another 6 on a quiet week which are completed in the evenings/days off. There is no option not to do these hours. I would never get my job done if I didn’t. When I was full time I did 50-55hrs a week in the building and at least another 2-3 each evening at home. I refused to work weekends, but many do. 32.5hrs is complete nonsense. Teachers are contracted to be paid for 32.5hrs. I’m yet to find a teacher who could get anywhere near that.

I have been in education 21 years, in a leadership role for 9 years and still would not hit the 45,000 you mention as a full time equivalent. I would if I wanted to become deputy or headteacher, but I do not want that and many teachers don’t. My partner is a headteacher and on £50,000. Meanwhile, my relatives in leadership roles with less responsive in the private sector are getting £60,000, £90,000, £120,000 etc…!

As others have mentioned, many are not striking for more pay, but work load and pay to be properly funded by the government instead of coming out of school budgets which are already hugely struggling.

'Where is the money coming from'

'We can't afford it'

Blah, blah, blah.

The government can choose to spend their budget anyway they like. They make priorities. They can find money for whatever they like.

This is not a household budget where spending on fuel means you have to cut back on food.

They can afford whatever they prioritise.

Children are not their priority. The NHS is not their priority (because they want it privatised, so it falling to shit it in their interests).

You should be shouting about that. They absolutely SHOULD be affording to get the best possible teachers into schools and keeping them there. Showing them they are valued. Same for nurses. Same for social workers. They could, but they CHOOSE not to.

People vote Tory and then moan that essential workers in public services go on strike. Join up the bloody dots.

They don't give a crap. Their behaviour around this issue shouts it from the roof tops.

Lots of people agree with you which is why there is a huge recruitment and retention crisis.

Which is why lots of those remaining teachers are striking.

I actually think they should just work to what they think best, no need to shut the door to ofsted like that head did the other week, but just decide collectively they don’t care what grade their school gets in ofsted. Teachers say they want to just get on and teach, so they would have my support to do that.

The government cannot afford to run education into the ground. It's a false economy and will lead to greater costs to fix the problems down the line.

Not spending money on education is a political decision, and a stupid one.

No, they don't. Within the state sector (including academies), it's a paper exercise. The money never actually goes anywhere, it's just numbers on a spreadsheet. There is no pot: it just goes back to the treasury and the treasury pays the pension. The current total pension being paid out is less than the total contributions so all remaining money stays with the treasury.

It's why the IMF said that teacher pensions were actually self-funding.

The only sector the employer contributions actually affect is the independent one.