...to think teachers DO get paid over the holidays?

[MasterBeth]

It doesn't make sense to me.

Some people say teachers don't get paid over the holidays. They are paid, they say, for 40 weeks, but their money is aggregated over 52 weeks and paid monthly.

What does that even mean? How is it (practically) any different to being paid (less per week) for 52 weeks?

I agree with you, would be different for f they had months with no pay at all. It’s semantics though. I still think they don’t get paid enough overall for the job they do. I couldn’t do it.

Yes this, the pay doesn’t reflect the work and adding in summer holidays as a ‘break’ is ridiculous because most teachers work a full year even if they’re not physically at the school.

I also couldn't do it, appreciate how hard teachers work and acknowledge that their real incomes have fallen significantly in the last decade and more. In fact, it's the conversation around teachers' pay that has provoked my question.

They don't get paid "for" the holidays. Not 'over' the holidays. And it's a swizz, because all the teachers I know, Secondary and Primary, work during their unpaid holidays marking work completed and getting stuff ready for the next term/half term.

It’s the same salary every month; pay rises run from beginning of September to the end of August.

I think it is an important definition when people talk about making the school year longer as you would need to increase teacher pay, rather than just shorten the holidays.

Apart from that it is semantics.

You make an excellent semantic point. They do indeed get paid over the holidays. That is unquestionable, because they get 12 equal monthly payments.

So, what I really should have asked is AIBU to think teachers DO get paid for the holidays?

In what practical sense do they not get paid for the holidays? Teachers are not paid hourly.

Many teachers work over "holidays", and parents evenings and extra curriculum stuff isn't overtime or TOIL.

Most teachers are expected to mark and prep at weekends. Many pass ofsted because they contribute from their own pay packet for materials required by ofsted to pass.

Yes. I agree. None of this addresses the question, though.

Yes they (we) do. They get the full published salary paid over 12 months. Other school staff aren't paid for the holidays (unless they work them) and get c. 80% of the salary scale. paid over 12 months.

That depends on the type of contract, according to this:

If you’re on a permanent full-time contract then you’ll get school holidays as paid leave. However, most TAs are on term-time-only contracts, which means you don’t get paid for school holidays but should get four or five weeks holiday a year.

https://www.tes.com/jobs/careers-advice/teaching-assistant/teaching-assistant-pay-and-conditions#:~:text=Holiday%20allowances%20for%20teaching%20assistants,five%20weeks%20holiday%20a%20year.

Agree it’s just semantics. I’m really not sure why teachers keep bringing it up as if they were uniquely hard done by.

Because a full time equivalent job (i.e. 48 weeks + 4 weeks paid hol) with similar responsibilities and workload as an average classroom teacher would earn significantly more than £30/£40 k. It's only considerable as a justifiable salary if its only renumeration for 39 weeks.

Following as I find it confusing too
So a normal teacher's salary is 30K

Do they actually only get paid 26.5K (this would be 6 weeks unpaid)
Do the get 30K it says on the tin
Do they get 34K pro rata (so 30K because 6 weeks is unpaid)

Not interested on how hard you work or do longer hours than everyone else
or how underpaid y'all are
Just straight up confused about the 6 weeks being unpaid

That is not true
Many people work just as hard for less
Many people work just as hard for more
Everyone does not sit nicely into a little bracket of how hard they work and how much responsibility they have
It varies wildly

What does that even mean? How is it (practically) any different to being paid (less per week) for 52 weeks?

It's not, it's the exact same and its the sort of nonsense that diminishes teacher strikes for pay. Along with how every single teacher works long painstaking hours over the summer holidays so it isn't even really time off apparently.

Would love to see some proof for this please?

@kitsuneghost Not interested on how hard you work or do longer hours than everyone else
or how underpaid y'all are
Just straight up confused about the 6 weeks being unpaid

😂It's more like 13 weeks once you factor in Christmas, Easter, half term etc

YABU to try and compare a teacher contract to a normal contract. Teachers are contracted to a number of hours per year plus as much time as reasonable to get the job done. The hours equate to term time only though and it's the other bit that is entirely unfair and makes it difficult.

As support staff on a term time only contract I don't get paid for the full school holidays (though I do get the statutory ones). Here it's not just semantics as a lot of support staff are now don't get paid that much more than minimum wage for the time they work, there are quite a few that would get more working all year round at minimum wage.

It's more like 13 weeks once you factor in Christmas, Easter, half term etc

So a teacher on 30K is actually on 40K prorata?

Teachers are paid over the holidays, not for them.

When calculating my maternity pay, I was told that a teacher’s salary is calculated at 39 weeks a year + statutory paid holiday. Any remaining time is unpaid, but salary is split equally over 12 months.

Teachers bring it up as the holidays are used as a stick to beat them with. When you are told you are so lucky to have so much paid holiday it's going to be a bit annoying when you've already worked your alloted hours for the year by may half term.

Teachers are paid for the weeks they work. As the summer holidays are longer than a month it’s just budgeting for the LA and teachers to annualise their salaries.
Othet school employees are paid by this system too.
If the holidays were reduced by,say, 4 weeks then their salary would/should increase by 4 weeks.

@fuckityfuckityfuckfuck Because a full time equivalent job (i.e. 48 weeks + 4 weeks paid hol) with similar responsibilities and workload as an average classroom teacher would earn significantlymore than £30/£40 k. It's only considerable as a justifiable salary if its only renumeration for 39 weeks.

Nonsense, plenty of people work very hard with hours just as long or longer than a teacher and do not earn significantly more than 30/40k.

Teachers are paid for up to 1,265 hours of directed hours per year, spread over 195 days.

The fact they receive their pay in 12 equal instalments does not alter the fact that thy are paid for 195 days per year only.

Interesting that for mat leave, entitlements to annual leave are only statutory allowances - not 13 weeks. So while all my peers extended their mat leave with paid holiday taken either end, that wasn’t an option to me as a teacher as I had already had ‘holiday’ to the total of 5 weeks or whatever statutory is over the previous year.

That implies to me that parts of the hol (over & above statutory) are unpaid however it’s also true that the salary stated for the job is the salary paid, it’s not pro-rata-d further for full time teachers. So I think you can argue both sides. However, the main point being if you wanted to make holidays shorter you’d have to increase salaries as the current salary + current holidays is the ‘package’ So to speak.