Unscrupulous supply agencies

[Homez]

Our primary school has been in decline for some years, with high staff turnover and an endless stream of agency staff.
Supply teachers are used on a regular basis, and it’s becoming rather obvious, that not all the teachers provided, are actually teachers at all!
Last week we were sent someone who had worked as a TA for a few months, and was ‘contemplating’ starting a PGCE, the other had been an invigilator / cover supervisor in a secondary school, and somehow the agency didn’t seem to appreciate the difference!
We’ve also been sent an ‘English teacher’, who had just arrived from overseas, and could barely speak coherent English!
It seems highly dubious that agencies can approve completely unqualified staff for these roles, and yet still charge schools the supply teacher rate. I get the impression they are just so desperate to be the first to secure the post, they are just sending anyone.
Is this happening elsewhere? Surely they are required to check qualification status before they take these candidates on in that capacity?

It is a while since I did supply but there are definitely some good agencies around. If you have responsibility for supply staff/budgets, get a meeting with as many local agencies as possible and see what they are able to offer. They should be clear with you about what they are able to offer - and in the current climate, that might not be very much, unfortunately. Today I received an email offering me my choice of about 10 different roles within my specialism and a further 20-30 in primary, including TA posts - I have been out of supply for nearly 6 years now! Supply agencies are profit making and will charge you what they can get away with so you do need to query their rates for qualified and unqualified staff. If it helps, I found a local agency run by someone who had worked across the local big names for many years to be the most honest agency to deal with. Absolutely no messing with rates - paid to scale or M6 from day one, no fees charged to the school if they offer you a permanent position, no use of umbrella companies for their staff, honest about how much teaching work vs cover supervisor work they were likely to find you. Also incredibly supportive once they realised I was going to be asked back again and again by schools - paid me an enhanced rate for any days I took with them rather than anyone else.

You could seek to recruit your own supply register, particularly amongst former staff who you know work part time or who are retired. Put out feelers within your community and see what/who comes back to you.

Thank you @howtomoveforwards
The school did have a couple of good agencies that were solely used, but even they have been scraping the barrel of late. The problem is mostly with adhoc supply cover, where we will need various days covered across different year groups, so usually have at least two supply teacher requirements each week.
We are charged supply teacher rates for these placements, but have been sent everything from TAs to invigilators - not actual teachers with QTS!

We have better qualified HLTAs that we can’t use, yet pay overinflated rates to tick the appropriate ‘best practice’ box - which just seems crazy!

When we have cover, the agency gives us the profile of the person and we okay/choose who is coming in. Perhaps whoever is arranging cover in your school is only being offered these choices or is making a budgetary decision? Unless it's you arranging the cover and you're not being supplied this info, in which case you need to use a different agency.

For longer term posts, there is greater scrutiny, but it seems that for day to day cover requirements, the school simply asks for supply cover the night before / early morn, and somebody turns up. Bizarrely, this is supposed to be the school adopting ‘best practice’, as opposed to expecting the TA to cover classes which was the previous practice, and naturally drew much complaint - only now they are paying more to employ similar, or in some cases - less qualified staff to cover instead! The agency also doesn’t seem to comprehend the difference between ‘cover supervisor’ and ‘cover teacher’, and as long as nobody queries it, they are happily sending them in on ludicrously high day rates.
I know of a similar situation at another school in the area, and the school simply went to pot in the end. Once the executive team rocked up, the supply train was curbed straight away.

The problem with day to day is that many supply teachers were screwed over during covid - some got furlough, others didn’t. Those that didn’t found other work elsewhere and I suspect have not returned. Older supply teachers also removed themselves from the classroom because of the lack of fucks given over teacher safety during covid. The pool for supply is therefore reduced considerably and good supply teachers have their pick of where they can work and will be going again and again into the schools they prefer.

I noticed the other day that one supply agency local to me is advertising on a local Facebook group - never seen that before. I suspect you need a meeting with the agencies you use and a look at the contracts you have with them. If you want qualified staff, rather than cover supervisors, then that is what they should be sending you. You may need to accept, however, that there aren’t that many qualified staff out there but at least if they are sending unqualified staff you should be paying less for them. And please, please, please do expect qualified staff to do cover supervisor rates of pay unless you are genuinely providing cover to be supervised! There are lots of unscrupulous schools who will put you in a classroom with sod all planning on £70 or less a day.

I have found recruitment agencies to be very unreliable. CV's promised. Never any follow through. They say they have a couple of candidates to contact and will call back. Never any follow through.

I have lost faith in supply agencies - cowboys and timewasters from my experience. Clearly I can only speak on the 4/5 agencies I have been in contact with this academic year. I'm sure some reliable companies exist there were certainly many 10 years ago!

As a Supply Teacher I have been in conversation with a school Cover Manager when he was telling me how he had cleverly managed to negotiate really low rates. I was only there because I had foolishly agreed to the 2 weeks without checking the rate first and was already quietly fuming...(Lesson now well and truly learnt. The school now desperate for invigilators and I might have been persuadable if he hadn't been so cock a hoop.)

Many, many schools ask for qualified teachers and then pay unqualified rates. I know agencies take a cut and can be unscrupulous but if schools want qualified teachers they should be prepared to pay for them.

Why do I still do Supply work? Husband has a good job and I don't really need to work. I care about SEN children. But I am very close to joining the Great Resignation. (And having the MUG tattoo on my forehead removed. I can't see it in the mirror but I suspect schools and agencies can).

I do supply. I'm with one agency and they're able to get me plenty of work. They were thorough in their checks of me, asking for all my certificates (PGCE, QTS, NQT etc).

It's shit pay, though. I get £130 a day before tax/NI. No idea what the school pay for me. I'm UPS3! I'm very probably going to leave teaching next year and find something where I'm paid my worth!

If you can, I would see if there are some qualified teachers you can have on payroll so you can pay them direct. They'll get paid more so they're more likely to stick with you, and you have a small bank of known qualified teachers. If the 4 or 5 local primaries to me would keep me on their books and pay me around £180-200 direct, I'd stick with them and ditch the agency!

To add context to KatherineofGaunt

£130 per day = £25, 350 pa

£180 per day = £35,100 pa

£200 per day = £39,000 pa

Depending where she lives this is main scale. £130 is below the minimum of Teachers pay.

When I started you couldn't do Supply work unless you had completed a probationary year after PGCE. Then you automatically got M6. (To reflect the difficulty of the job).

Sounds like some schools are willing to overlook basic credentials in order to secure a good deal!
This agency advert is one of many I’ve seen…thinking they can interchange cover supervisor with cover teacher..probably why we are being sent so many!

“Do you want to Teach but don't have a relevant teaching Qualification?
Ever considered being a cover supervisor / Cover Teacher?

Cover supervisors are essential unqualified cover teachers who are able to take the responsibility of the full time class teacher if the full-time class teacher is absent.

To apply to be a cover supervisor / cover teacher: • You would need to have a Valid and up to date DBS or on the update service • Possess a degree OR have previous experience as a cover teacher / cover supervisor”

Sounds like some schools are willing to overlook basic credentials in order to secure a good deal!

Depends what you mean by 'basic credentials' and 'good deal'. Budgets have been cut to the bone. There are few schools with people sloshing around ready and able to cover. TAs etc. are in increasingly short supply because people need a decent wage, not pin money. Schools need a body in front of the class of sick teachers because the alternative is to merge classes or, in a worse case scenario, close classes. No one wants to be the head having to make that decision.

I don't think this is the fault of schools - except to say the schools need to accept that if they're paying peanuts, they need to provide cover and not expect a teacher - this is years of a Conservative government and under-investment in education coming to a head. It really needs parents to wake up and see what is happening in schools because en masse, their votes really count. Sadly, as covid showed us, all parents really seem to want is their children taken off their hands 5 days a week.