Teacher salary pro rata?

[JackSheepskin]

So I might be an idiot… but I’ve seen a lot recently about how teachers aren’t paid for the holiday periods, their salary is pro rata and paid equally over 12 months.

Therefore if I saw a job advert for £60k, does that mean you don’t actually get £60k but whatever remains from that salary after the additional 6 weeks holiday is taken off? Or is the salary advertised already pro rata?

Don't engage. This is a 'subtle' dig at teachers and the strike.

I used £60k as an example, however, I have looked at it
doesn’t seem an unreasonable figure to use. I’m Scotland that is the new salary for a lead teacher level 2. Whilst I’m
sure that doesn’t happen straight out of university, it doesn’t seem like it would be unrealistic a level to reach for most teachers over their career.

Now I’m clear that that is the actual salary received, and not the figure before deductions - I do, honestly, think that teaching seems a pretty reasonably paid career.

My DD’s Godfather is an Army officer for example and a £60k salary is on step 20 of his pay scale. Just using as an example as they are both public sector with better than average pensions - only the Army doesn’t have the same holiday allowance.

but I’m afraid teachers’ insisting that they don’t get paid for holidays looks rather like creative accounting now in view of the difference. What they see is what they get

Yes, what I see is what I get. What I see is the salary I get paid. It is calculated on the basis of paying me for the 195 days I am contracted to work. How is that creative accounting? If you paid a gardener to do 10 days work in your garden, Mon-Fri one week and Mon-Fri the following week, and paid her £50 a day, would you say that her £500 was paying her for the weekend as well?

Get into teaching.

Despite being an amazing deal - there is a critical shortage. Sign up link for the amazing deal is above.

Teachers aren't paid for holidays. It's in the Governments own paperwork that they are paid to work 195 days. The other days aren't classed as anything.

Anyone on a salaried job with an expected working week of 5 days is able to say they are expected to work for 260 days (52x5) minus their leave entitlement (say 28 days) But they are still paid as if they have worked 260 days and their salary is spread over 12 months.

The difference is that teachers don't have "holiday" that can be chosen, hence its "non working time".

Yes it's maybe confusing but when teachers say they aren't paid for holidays it's because it's true and embedded in their contracts and terms

Goady rubbish.

I'm a UPS3 teacher with a TLR and I don't get anywhere near 60k!

Where is there a teacher job for £60k?!

definitely in London

Surely you could say that about the pay in any career though? At same point as you work your way up your pay will get decent. Doesn’t mean it’s not shit for the majority, or that that isn’t an issue.

There are typically only a couple of leadership roles per school, so no, not every teacher will reach that in their career.

Also take into account those who may have to work part time due to caring responsibilities etc, that unfortunately can delay or entirely eliminate progression.

At this rate there won’t be enough teachers left for them to work up to leadership ranges anyway.

If a job is advertised at 60k it's 60k for 38 weeks of the yr (unless it's part time)

How is it goady?

I had a similar conversation with my sister. She was looking at a job in education for £56k. And I was saying that's a good salary because it's roughly 0.75 full time equivalent. If you were comparing it to a job not in education the salary would be more like £74k for full time. If you chose to work term time you would get roughly £56k plus 13 non working weeks. She wouldn't agree with me because she has never worked in a role where she didn't get all the holidays.

Get into teaching.

Now I’m clear that that is the actual salary received, and not the figure before deductions - I do, honestly, think that teaching seems a pretty reasonably paid career.

That's nice. I'm sure the teaching profession will be enthralled to hear your opinion. Shame that recruitment rates for teaching don't seem to back up your no doubt meticulously researched conclusions.

And yes - teachers don't earn £60k! Heads do, but not normal scale teachers.

That's not true, depends on if it's secondary, private & location.

And yes with an additional allowance eg HOD

I work in local government in a fairly senior position, and my salary is entirely decent. That doesn’t mean I don’t think many other local government workers aren’t underpaid. Many of the team members in my department, and elsewhere, deserve more pay.

I’m not just looking at my own higher salary and thinking the rejection of the pay deal is ridiculous because local government workers are all paid fine, just because I am.

Oh I see. You're in Scotland it's a definite difference as a teacher at the top of the scale without going into upper pay scale is paid £8000 more in Scotland than England.
Can't equally compare nurse and teacher salaries, both under paid in my opinion for key roles. But there are many who love to bash key roles I know!!

Hmm. Teachers on average work 47 hours a week. (New teachers often work more)

So at 10hours per week overtime that's 390 a year. Divide that by 37 hours and gives over 10 weeks of owed overtime

So teachers actually don't get their full holiday provision as it is.

I was wondering - are people paid to start these posts? Does the gov have people that do this when pr is bad ?

What might be helpful is looking at why teachers are striking and why conditions are bad, why children's education is being g failed?

Depends on how many hours they do out-of-school-hours (including those holidays). Lessons for 30 kids can take a lot of planning.

But nurses get overtime, right? Teachers do hours and hours of unpaid overtime every week and during every holiday.

It depends, my sibling gets paid for revision sessions through holidays.

Teachers in England are not on those kind of figures.

It takes usually at least a decade to reach UPS3.

Because the majority of teachers are paid on MAIN/UPPER (and upper takes awhile to reach).

There are a limited number of leadership roles in a school.

https://neu.org.uk/pay-scales

I think a teachers work and responsibilities warrants more than the average wage of the country.

The reason it's creative accounting is you can't say both. Either teachers don't get holiday pay but discussions around salary should be based on the (higher) FTE salary not their actual salary, or you say that this is the salary and drop the 'we're not paid for holidays' point. Personally I'd go with the latter as it's less confusing for non-teachers to understand. I have a real dislike of people saying they don't get paid for holidays but not then grossing up their salary to FTE (which makes it a far more attractive salary) - it's misleading.

I'm not arguing that teachers are paid enough, or that their conditions are good. Clearly people are leaving the profession in droves and so they aren't paid enough for the job that they have to do! I just really don't like the creative accounting and I think it detracts from the core argument about pay and conditions.

Ok but even a “normal scale” teacher seems to be on £45k after 5 years. Using the Army again (as it’s publicly available!) the same point seems to be after 11 years. And again, without all the holiday!

I’m not saying that teaching is incredibly well paid, but it seems like it’s actually significantly higher than other public sector jobs, and has greats perks.

Whether teaching salaries are 'reasonable' or not is a matter of opinion and perspective. However, as has already been mentioned, most teachers (in England at least) do a ton of unpaid overtime every single week in term time and work some if their unpaid holidays. If you think that's a good deal, then may I suggest retraining as a teacher? I believe they need a few more...