Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Work

Chat with other users about all things related to working life on our Work forum.

Original poster

Pro rata pay

27 replies

Piggywaspushed · 03/03/2018 07:53

This is going to sound a bit dim but I have up to this point worked full time in a field where pay is straightforward.

I applied for a job which was advertised as up to 45k pro rata. they have stated they want someone to work 25 to 32 hours but in discussions there ahs also been the complication of the weeks worked . As it is a job in the education sector, the standard holiday (5 weeks plus BHs) is sometimes altered to term time only or variants in between and I do appreciate that alters pay.
However, I had originally assumed the 45k was based on the 32 hours but I'm worn aren't I? Am I right now in thinking the full pay would be base on full time hours (37 hours in this case) and that I can't possibly get myself paid any more than 32/37 of this if I work the full weeks? They don't want someone to work 37 hours but they haven't outright said that.

I honestly don't think there is enough in the job to fill those hours.

Even at 45k the role (a great job) is a pay cut of 3k so I am thinking now, tempting as it is , this job is too much of a cut in pay. I had my second interview yesterday but am not very good at asking financial questions!

Sorry the length of this post reflects my confusion!

OP posts:
nottakenpersonally · 03/03/2018 07:56

45k pro rata means 45k for 37.5 hours or full time. Afaik.
So for 32 hours it's 38.4k. hth

Original poster
Piggywaspushed · 03/03/2018 08:04

Thank you. That's what I thought. I really don't know why they didn't just say that in the interview. Maybe because they have people who want to work 25 hours.

That would be a 10k pay cut so that's a no go Sad

OP posts:
MedicalEnigma · 03/03/2018 08:07

I work in a different field to you, but previously I have managed to negotiate the full time salary even though I only do 30 hours. This is because I’m very experienced and the employer gets a better qualified/more able candidate. It’s always worth a conversation, and fwiw I hate talking about money too, but I am a trained negotiator which clearly helps. Good luck!

Original poster
Piggywaspushed · 03/03/2018 08:12

Hi medical. In my vague British kind of way , I think that is what I was doing. In the first interview it was all quite open. By yesterday I felt they were being clearer that the maximum they would offer is the 32 hour equivalent with the minimum holiday. They had 50 applicants and 3 final candidates (who I haven't met so can't sound them out) so I don't think I am in a huge bargaining position.

I did think originally I could wait until offered the job and then we could sit down and thrash this sort of thing out until we were all happy but it felt like yesterday they wanted me to declare I was happy with their terms before accepting the role.

As it goes, I think my interview was pants! Lots of 'no , I don't know anything about that' from me!

OP posts:
flowery · 03/03/2018 08:14

” I really don't know why they didn't just say that in the interview.”

They didn’t need to, they’d already said it in the ad- £45k pro rata- and they’d specified part time hours.

You need to get better at asking financial questions if you are working in a job that pays nearly £50k!

Original poster
Piggywaspushed · 03/03/2018 08:31

Yes flowery I am embarrassed Blush but teaching (current job) is a very paternal industry and quite infantilising I suppose. I have been institutionalised!

In my defence I have never ever worked part time. The only time my pay altered was on two mat leaves yonks ago.

I was encourage by people to apply because the job suited me and was so pleased to get an interview (I normally struggle to stand out form the crowd) that I got swept along a bit. Suffer form terrible imposter syndrome these days which makes me lack confidence about asking the tougher questions .

OP posts:
LyndaLaHughes · 03/03/2018 08:46

I'm intrigued as to what the role is? Is it too outing for you to say?

FancyNewBeesly · 03/03/2018 08:59

I’m not really sure what the issue is here - by publicising it as a part time job with a salary of up to £45k salary pro rata, they’ve been quite clear, especially when they’re open to a range of hours so it’s really the only way they can present it.

Also, the salary is up to £45k pro rata so there’s no guarantee they will offer you the job at the top of that range. I don’t think it would go down well if you were offered the job and then said you wanted the top of the full time salary range for working part time. I mean, if you definitely don’t want the job unless you can get a salary they haven’t offered and you don’t want them to bare you in mind for future roles, then you don’t have anything to lose by doing so. Although it sounds like a significant drop for you, do check out a tax calculator to see how much you’d actually lose in real terms. And of course you’d be working fewer hours, so it’s up to you whether that’s a trade off you want / can afford to take.

If I were in your position and they offered me the job, I’d say I am very interested in the job but due to holiday issues, term time etc you need to understand what the salary would actually be for working X hours. You can make it clear that even at the top end it would be a significant pay cut for you so you can ask what would be the highest salary they’d be willing to offer you. Or of course you could ask if there’s any chance of expanding it into a full time position now or in the future by taking on additional responsibilities etc. But I personally wouldn’t ask for a full time salary at the top of the range for a part time job.

Original poster
Piggywaspushed · 03/03/2018 09:47

Thanks for that detailed feedback. these are the sort of conversations I have never had to have. They interviewed me of course knowing my salary and that I am full time. They are also aware that I am a novice at understanding such things. We have no HR at my work so no one really to ask!

My head did tell me he wouldn't look kindly on a teacher offered a role who then tried to negotiate an advertised salary.

OP posts:
Original poster
Piggywaspushed · 03/03/2018 09:48

Lynda , it probably is a bit! Shall we just say it's a non teaching MAT role?

OP posts:
Original poster
Piggywaspushed · 03/03/2018 09:50

Just to be clear, I did say to them that I wanted to work full time and have always worked full time. would actually love to work part time really , who wouldn't?

I think this has helped me to make a decision!

OP posts:
Original poster
Piggywaspushed · 03/03/2018 09:51

If I wasn't married, and didn't have children I would happily absorb a cut in salary for a job with more job satisfaction and fewer stresses!

OP posts:
AJPTaylor · 03/03/2018 09:53

get the specific salary and the run it through a take home pay calclator. you might be suprised

Original poster
Piggywaspushed · 03/03/2018 10:00

I looked at something like that but needed to know the tax bands and didn't know how to work that out?

OP posts:
Original poster
Piggywaspushed · 03/03/2018 10:03

I found one that didn't need as much info. You are right : it is actually (roughly) £500 less a month (based on top end of pay guesstimate for the new post) which doesn't sound as horrific expressed that way.

OP posts:
Original poster
Piggywaspushed · 03/03/2018 10:05

And the job I have seen and now want would be maybe an extra 3 - 400 a month....hmmm

OP posts:
JoJoSM2 · 03/03/2018 10:17

I'd also factor in terms and conditions of employment. With teachers in the state sector it's often quite preferential + you get teacher's pension. If it's a different sort of rule, you might not be eligible for this type of pension or some other things.

So make sure you get some understanding of your options. Ideally before applying. Seems like complete time wasting to apply for lower paid, part time jobs when you don't want a pay cut but just haven't understood the advert that actually specified everything...

Original poster
Piggywaspushed · 03/03/2018 10:29

Well I wouldn't say it specified 'everything'. Elements of the ad were very vague!

How would one find out t and cs before applying? As I said I haven't been in this position before so am a bit clueless. There will definitely be a decent pension scheme.

OP posts:
JoJoSM2 · 03/03/2018 14:16

Sorry, didn't mean to come across a bit strong. I just imagined that interview panel who got as far as wanting to appoint you to now find out you wouldn't even be entirely happy with the full-time salary...

Personally, I've blatantly rung places up before applying or asked in first interviews if the pay situation wasn't clear. It's one of the most important aspects of a job so it's good to know from the start.

Original poster
Piggywaspushed · 03/03/2018 16:04

Yes, I agree and don't worry. I wasn't offended!

I did ask about pay at the first interview and the response was very friendly but not all that clear. Basically I was told that we would all sit down and look at salary if I got the job. I juts felt by the second interview that that stance had changed a bit and it became more 'no you should ,know what you expect by now' so it confused me.

But, anyway, having done some sums today , I can't see how this post is going to work out for me financially, so I think I will be bowing out. I am sure the other people they interviewed will be at least as good as me!

OP posts:
zaalitje · 03/03/2018 19:46

If it's term time only and pt hours you need to pro rata by both
So full time hours = 37 hours
Full working year = 52 weeks

If the post was full time at £45k

Pro rated by 30 hours would be £36k(assuming 52 weeks worked)
Or £27k if term time only (39 weeks).

Original poster
Piggywaspushed · 03/03/2018 20:28

Thank you for the sums : very helpful!

OP posts:
lougle · 04/03/2018 10:46

That's incorrect, zaalitje, because everybody is entitled to 5.6 weeks annual leave, including term-time workers. So 5.6 of the 13 weeks non-term time leave would be paid. Therefore, it would actually be 44.6 weeks Pro-rated and £30,877.

Original poster
Piggywaspushed · 04/03/2018 11:14

Thank you. Either way, I'd be having to work the full year (with holidays of course!) to make this anywhere near financially viable. I am trying to balance that against never having to mark again, attend endless extra meetings, parents evenings and being abused by teenagers and their parents!

I guess I have to decide if that is worth losing 5 - 600 a month for...

OP posts:
lougle · 04/03/2018 13:53

Have you worked out the difference in gross pay and net pay? Because you'll also have less tax and NI contributions, so the overall hit may be less than you think if you've only looked at the gross pay drop.