Teachers demand 10% pay rise

Really2

kennyboy66 wrote: »

Thats because the adverts are aimed at teachers who all know exactly what is meant by a payscale.

Thanks, so now you must know what I mean as also writing the figure down also indicates the pay scale.;)

I think you feel I am picking on them. I am not I am just stating why a lack of transparency causes the "public outrage"

As many people make their own minds up on what teachers earn.

EG all local government jobs used to state pay scale.

They now all have the scale and the coordinating wage.

kennyboy66_2

Really2 wrote: »

Look I have nothing to feel shame full of I never knew about that site so it is hardly "public domain"

I am just stating what breeds distrust that is all.

I know a lot about how the human mind works so part of the distrust of teachers is that their pay is "hidden" when advertised.

It is not a go at teachers (As I am sure it is not them who requests for jobs to be advetised in that way), it is just a statement on what creates distrust.

You said that "they keep it hidden".

It takes 30 seconds to find it using google.

Using teachers and MP expenses claims in the same paragraph.
I didn't think you would stoop so low.

gemmalouanna

mitchaa wrote: »

£33400 after 6yrs as a basic teacher does not seem too bad to me considering the 13wks holiday they receive.

If you teach 22.5hrs out of 35hrs, why the need to take work home with you on evenings and at weekends? This is surely what the 12.5hrs pw is for that you are not teaching?

£33,400/39wks = £856pw

Multiply this by a normal 46wk year and it equates to an equivalant salary of £39,376.

Not too shabby for teaching primary school children if you are asking me.

I think that salary after 6 years must include some kind of management allowance on top for extra responsibility as a 'normal' teacher would not be on that amount - I think it is more like £30k but Scotland maybe different I don't know. Plus after the 6th year teachers have to apply for future rises and prove they have met certain criteria.

12.5 hours per week time that you mention out of possible 35 hours: would be great if it could be used to get your own work done but at our school: every Mon afterschool for 1-1.5 hours is meetings, Tue I do afterschool club which departments have to offer each week- 1 hr, Wed afterschool is extra GCSE revision/coursework catch-up- 1 hr, Thur is sometimes 2 hours professional development INSET courses/meetings afterschool, Fri is my detention day afterschool for 30 mins (so this stuff takes up between 3.5-6 hours per week before any of your personal work is touched). I always take work home as if I try and get marking done at school there are constant disruptions and a set of books tends to take me between 1-2 hours depending on class size there is very little room in the day to do this.

From my point of view I cannot complain about the pay - quite happy with it but like everyone else it is the payrise that needs to be fair, just like civil service want for their employees (friends of mine went on strike for this about 2-3 times last year).

dylansmum

Really2 wrote: »

I agree but 10% one off + yearly rises does not seem fair.

I am not having a go at teachers but a demand like this does not help the cause.

I think there union could be a lot more tactfully, public support is a good thing.

I would support a rise but such a demand in one hit at this time will get peoples backs up,

Ok - then the government should honour its own promise for a proper pay review.

Unions are there to protect their members. That is their role. Without unions then we would have lax health and safety was, poorer pay and conditons - and this does effect all, whether unionised or not.


I still say, once more, that we should abolish state education if teachers are overpaid or asking for too much. Let's count the cost directly by using private education. And on this, the government is privatising public service after public service - and this IS costing us a fortune! Far more than a teacher's pay increase.

Really2

kennyboy66 wrote: »

You said that "they keep it hidden".

It takes 30 seconds to find it using google.

Using teachers and MP expenses claims in the same paragraph.
I didn't think you would stoop so low.

:rolleyes: I have made it fairly clear I was sating what causes distrust.

It was you who said they did it because teachers would know what a scale meant (which means the genral public won't)

But you don't want to see it. (it is not an easy google search at all, and a lot of work for your "average" user)

If you want to feel this is "having a go" at teachers so be it.

But perhaps a bit less "Telling" and a little "listening" may get teachers a more sympathetic public.;)

Really2

PS have you lot not got any marking to do.:D (only joking)

(where did that teachers post go)

Preserving_Anonimity

jamespmg44 wrote: »

Public sector unions completely out of touch with reality.

Where are the tax revenues going to come from to fund this increase that they want?

Whereever it comes from, I doubt it will end up in the individual schools budgets in its entiriry.

Schools only get an average teachers pay for each teacher so if all or most teachers are on thresholds then the amount given to the school for wages is less than the amount being paid out! (The opposite is true if an NQT is employed)

Schools are already struggling with wages because the PPA cover wasn't/isn't fully funded. This is why you get lots of PPA and sickness covered by HLTAs rather than teachers!

The school where I'm a governor (and we're by no means unique) has to take money from elsewhere to fund its teaching staff. Once the savings are gone, it will be redundant support staff and ultimately redundant teachers.

dylansmum

Preserving_Anonimity wrote: »

Whereever it comes from, I doubt it will end up in the individual schools budgets in its entiriry.

Schools only get an average teachers pay for each teacher so if all or most teachers are on thresholds then the amount given to the school for wages is less than the amount being paid out! (The opposite is true if an NQT is employed)

Schools are already struggling with wages because the PPA cover wasn't/isn't fully funded. This is why you get lots of PPA and sickness covered by HLTAs rather than teachers!

The school where I'm a governor (and we're by no means unique) has to take money from elsewhere to fund its teaching staff. Once the savings are gone, it will be redundant support staff and ultimately redundant teachers.

Yes and out of interest, I have been asked for a bunch of references lately from employment agencies for final year uni students who want to be cover supervisors - this worries me. Should I be worried?

dylansmum

Really2 wrote: »

PS have you lot not got any marking to do.:D (only joking)

(where did that teachers post go)

Got loads and on leave until tomorrow! Yikes, you've just burst my leave bubble - the reality dawns that I have 35 3000 word essays to mark:eek:

kennyboy66_2

Really2 wrote: »

But perhaps a bit less "Telling" and a little "listening" may get teachers a more sympathetic public.

You can't "tell" anyone anything on this site, because they know everything anyway & their minds were closed long ago.;)