Is it lazy for supply teachers not to work in the school holidays?

[strwmofthebnak]

If someone is in their early 20's, graduated from uni last year as a qualified primary school teacher, moved back home with parents and is currently looking for a contracted teaching job. So applying and going to interviews but has so far been unsuccessful in securing a job. Therefore since they qualified they have been working for an agency doing supply work. This means they have 12 weeks a year they do not get paid in. Would you expect them to find alternative employment in the school holidays as it's not on to have 3 months of year not working and not being paid?

I wouldn't say they are lazy.

But whether they should be finding alternative ways of making money during the holidays depends upon their financial situation.

They will always have that time off work in permanent contracted employment so the difference will just be the pay being spread across 12 months and no gaps in pay.

If money is a struggle due to the unpredictable nature of supply teaching pay, perhaps look into private tutoring during the holidays? It won't be easy to find any old job just for school holidays.

Why do you ask?

I don’t see how it’s any lazier for a supply teacher not to look for work during school holidays than it would be for a teacher on a full time contract. I thought one of the attractions of teaching to a lot of people was the longer than average holidays.

The issue that should push whether they need to look for additional work would be whether they earn enough to cover their financial obligations.

And any additional work shouldn’t need to be during the holidays - don’t lots of teachers pick up exam marking and tutoring to supplement income? That’s presumably more term time based than holiday? Wouldn’t make them lazy if they preferred that to trying to find somewhere to hire them for 6 weeks a year.

When I needed holiday nanny cover, I always used to look for local DipEd students.

No teaching is exhausting, particularly for NQTs who meet a lot of firsts in their first year. Besides the supply teachers daily rate of pay is worked out to include a percentage allocated for holidays.

It’s one of the perks of being a teacher, I would think. Let them enjoy the long break if they can afford to.

To me this depends.

1. Have they been doing 'odd bits of supply when they can get it', or have they been working FT, just not on a permanent contract.

2. Are they financially independent, or expecting to be subsidised ?

Are they paying their way? If so then it's no one's business. If not then yes, it's their responsibility to find ways to finance themselves.

I had to do this years ago. It was completely shit, because I never got a break.

It's not like that now in most cases, in my experience (using agencies). Last year I got £130/day on supply before tax and that included holiday pay but didn't include any pension. It worked out to around £1,600 a month if I worked supply every day for 4 weeks, so obviously less in months where there were holidays (and nothing in August). As a permanent teacher, my monthly take-home full-time is £2,400 every month and I had pension paid as well.

Supply teacher pay is not even the same as permanent, never mind better!

wonder how this can be, and if there’s anything that can be done about it. Agency worker in NHS is like supply teacher in that there is no job security, pension, sick leave etc. And it’s paid according to supply and demand, so you can ask for (significantly) more than permanent staff and if the workplace is that stuck for staff, they pay it.

Why is this not the same for supply teaching?

I don’t see how it’s any lazier for a supply teacher not to look for work during school holidays than it would be for a teacher on a full time contract. I thought one of the attractions of teaching to a lot of people was the longer than average holidays.

Supply work is way easier than actual teaching.

With supply you don’t usually need to plan lessons, do before or after school meetings, parents evenings, reports, observations etc.

I was supply for a while but it was £100 a day which worked out considerably less when I took out the holidays than what I would get teaching properly.

It is good money when you consider how many extra hours permanent teachers put in which supply don’t need to do but the 2 main reasons teachers don’t do supply more often IME is because of the irregular work and because you’re not paid for your holidays.

Because if you don’t have qualified people on a hospital ward people could die, plus hospital cover also has to be done at unsocial hours so attracts a premium rate. Schools barely have enough money to pay their permanent staff. Calling in a supply teacher is the last resort once you have exhausted every other possibility from within the school and called in every favour from part time staff on their days off.

viques

thanks for explanation- it’s just a shame for the supply teachers

Supply work is way easier than actual teaching.

It’s a different skill set so not really comparable.

Yep!

I do supply and for each day I work I receive a portion of the day rate as “holiday pay”. I mean, it’s a terrible rate and would never actually cover the holidays, but it’s paid to you in theory!

It's up to them, no? If they're paying their way and choose to enjoy their time off then why not? It's probably not a great financial move - early 20s are a great time to build up savings and contribute to pensions but that's up to them.

Depends if they've got enough to live on. If yes, then their choice.

It’s probably not financially viable. You’d need decent savings. If you are fully self sufficient then crack on. If you are being subsidised by parents then you need to pick up some work.
Holiday clubs often recruit staff or look at tutoring.

Most graduate teachers I know in that position take summer jobs in summer schemes for more experience.

Would you expect them to find alternative employment in the school holidays as it's not on to have 3 months of year not working and not being paid?

I am guessing it's the OPs adult child who is the supply teacher living at home and not paying rent in the holidays due to lack of work. If this is the specifically the case I can see why OP would want them to find work in the holidays. Otherwise no, if supply teachers have enough money to fund themselves until term starts again then they should be able to enjoy their time off.

No because even supply teachers are entitled to take a holiday now and again.

When I did supply I was a single parent and universal credit expected me to look for work during the summer holidays.

So I guess it’s expected to get a job unless there is reason why you don’t need to work like you can cover your bills.

Of course it is not lazy.
Ideally, they could fill 6-7 of those weeks if they needed the income but it's not like it's just possible to magic work out of a hat, it may make more sense to devote that time in looking for permanent work.

There's no one single rule for all, but to call someone in that position lazy is mean and says more about the person saying it than the person not in work for 12 weeks a year.

I’m guessing from your phrasing of ‘it’s not on’ that you’re the parent and your daughter has moved back in and you think she’s lazy to be sitting around in the holidays? Not sure what sort of job you think she can pick up for two weeks here and there. Supply wages are usually decent and supply teachers put some aside for times when there’s no work. She could work in summer but again it won’t be easy picking up work for 6 weeks when students also look for summer work and will probably work for less. How about her doing 11+ tuition over the hols to make a bit extra?