The years of discontent, 2022/23

[Gaz]

1 hour ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Fair enough.

I have honestly never heard this "unpaid holiday" lark in my life before seeing it mentioned here.  You live and learn I suppose.

I don't think it actually means anything, but it seems a strange way to express it.  What's the reason for it?

I’ve honestly no idea. It changed back in 2011 I believe.

[Monkey Tennis]

1 minute ago, Gaz said:

I’ve honestly no idea. It changed back in 2011 I believe.

So what did the pre -2011 contract look like?

[TxRover]

3 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-63785421

That's BT and the unions agreed a deal.

Looks like they offered everyone under £50k a flat £1500, presumably with those earning above that not getting a rise at all.

Haven't seen the full details so not entirely sure where they're getting the headline 16% pay rise from but it looks like the union involved has recognised the need for a progressive pay-rise. Maybe they have some people on £10k a year or thereabouts.

Given the circumnstances, this is exactly what I thought would be the fairest approach and I hope to see other unions follow suit to protect the lowest paid workers.

The difficulty here is the resulting wage compression. You actually disincentivize working toward promotion if you take it too far.

[vikingTON]

'Won't somebody please think of people who want a job promotion?!' is an interesting angle to take during a Cost Of Living Crisis™, but given the poster it's hardly surprising. 

[Bairnardo]

'Won't somebody please think of people who want a job promotion?!' is an interesting angle to take during a Cost Of Living Crisis[emoji769], but given the poster it's hardly surprising. 

Iv said already about this, but in my work, my employer has a real problem convincing people to train for a higher grade job because lots of people consider the financial gain to be way out of proportion with the considerable increase in responsibility. In this case, there's no way my employer would allow the gap to erode further. They would then face people taking the drop down and easily making up the gap then some with overtime.

It's absolutely correct that the responsibility is way more than the cash is worth, but I did it years ago because its almost undeniably neccessary for the CV to move about in the industry...

But aye, salary differentials are very often something that an employers needs.

[Deanburn Dave]

If you want someone to do more work and take on extra responsibility for the same money appoint them as aTeam Leader.  

[Dawson Park Boy]

In the current situation where the inflation rate of around 10 to 11% is a temporary phenomenon due to exceptional circumstances and will drop rapidly next year, the BT deal is exactly what is required.

[19QOS19]

If you want someone to do more work and take on extra responsibility for the same money appoint them as aTeam Leader.  

[MacDonald Jardine]

7 hours ago, Carl Cort's Hamstring said:

I know this chat is focused on the issues in Scotland, but I thought I'd through in my tuppence worth from the perspective of a teacher in England.

@Monkey Tennis post above echoes a lot of my thoughts. I disagree with the idea that teachers are "very well paid." The job is highly skilled, demanding and requires a degree (and often a post-grad). Put in that context, I think the pay is alright. We're not on the breadline, but I also work with quite a few people who could earn ( or have previously earned) a lot more in other professions.

I decided against strike action, and felt that I couldn't in good conscience vote for it, although I will support my union when the ballot inevitably comes out in favour of striking. The UK government's offer of 5% for experienced teachers (slightly more for new staff) is already unfunded and schools will have to make cuts elsewhere to pay for it. An 11% rise would almost certainly lead to redundancies amongst support staff, many of whom are already struggling as it is.

It's fair to say that teachers often exist in a bubble and, as MT mentioned, you'll hear people on £40k+ in the staffroom talk about pay in a way that is frankly insulting to our support staff, who are on not much more than minimum wage. On the other hand, the job is far more demanding than most people realise. I'm a full time class teacher and a core subject leader in a primary school, and it is impossible to do both jobs properly within my working hours to the standard that I need to. The pay I get for that is absolutely not in line with the amount of responsibility and pressure involved.

 

 

 

This is a really good post.

It's nice to see a bit of perspective. 

[Billy Jean King]

BT deal is a stonker for their staff, a really good outcome as the 1500 pounds from 1 January is on top of another 1500 back to 1 April this year so £3000 with an agreement to a further negotiation from September 23. Overall its an average double digits rise over all grades ranging from 6% down to 16%

The deal has doubled since the threat of strike action. Great outcome for them.

Interestingly they haven't made public what the deal was in the higher pay grades (50-85K) but have admitted a deal for those in that bracket has been brokered with those above 85k "agreeing" to accept a pay freeze despite the CEO getting a massive rise.

[Clown Job]

That changes quickly from no chance to maybe

 

[hk blues]

19 hours ago, Carl Cort's Hamstring said:

I know this chat is focused on the issues in Scotland, but I thought I'd through in my tuppence worth from the perspective of a teacher in England.

@Monkey Tennis post above echoes a lot of my thoughts. I disagree with the idea that teachers are "very well paid." The job is highly skilled, demanding and requires a degree (and often a post-grad). Put in that context, I think the pay is alright. We're not on the breadline, but I also work with quite a few people who could earn ( or have previously earned) a lot more in other professions.

I decided against strike action, and felt that I couldn't in good conscience vote for it, although I will support my union when the ballot inevitably comes out in favour of striking. The UK government's offer of 5% for experienced teachers (slightly more for new staff) is already unfunded and schools will have to make cuts elsewhere to pay for it. An 11% rise would almost certainly lead to redundancies amongst support staff, many of whom are already struggling as it is.

It's fair to say that teachers often exist in a bubble and, as MT mentioned, you'll hear people on £40k+ in the staffroom talk about pay in a way that is frankly insulting to our support staff, who are on not much more than minimum wage. On the other hand, the job is far more demanding than most people realise. I'm a full time class teacher and a core subject leader in a primary school, and it is impossible to do both jobs properly within my working hours to the standard that I need to. The pay I get for that is absolutely not in line with the amount of responsibility and pressure involved.

 

 

 

Just one comment from me on the use of "very well paid".  You've said you disagree with that due to the demands and requirements of the job.  I would say the term it is not relative and instead absolute, you seem to think it is relative.  By your definition a pilot on 70k a year wouldn't be well paid, nor a surgeon on 85k. It all comes down to how "well paid" is defined and this is subjective.

 

[Todd_is_God]

36 minutes ago, hk blues said:

Just one comment from me on the use of "very well paid".  You've said you disagree with that due to the demands and requirements of the job.  I would say the term it is not relative and instead absolute, you seem to think it is relative.  By your definition a pilot on 70k a year wouldn't be well paid, nor a surgeon on 85k. It all comes down to how "well paid" is defined and this is subjective.

It also doesn't work to use payscales from one country (which are lower) to argue that teachers in Scotland are not well paid.

Teachers in Scotland are very well paid for the work they are contracted to do.

[hk blues]

8 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:

It also doesn't work to use payscales from one country (which are lower) to argue that teachers in Scotland are not well paid.

Teachers in Scotland are very well paid for the work they are contracted to do.

I have no idea as I've been out of the loop for 15-odd years but there are certain professions where those working in them always seem to think they have it tighter than anyone in any other profession.  Are teachers part of that group? 

[Billy Jean King]

I have no idea as I've been out of the loop for 15-odd years but there are certain professions where those working in them always seem to think they have it tighter than anyone in any other profession.  Are teachers part of that group? 

Q the "vocation" discussion !

[Gaz]

26 minutes ago, hk blues said:

I have no idea as I've been out of the loop for 15-odd years but there are certain professions where those working in them always seem to think they have it tighter than anyone in any other profession.  Are teachers part of that group? 

No. At least, I'm not.

It's not a zero-sum game, though. I think we have it tight. It doesn't mean that I think other professions don't have it tight.

You can acknowledge that your job is difficult while saying that other jobs also have it difficult. It's not mutually exclusive.

[Gaz]

15 minutes ago, Billy Jean King said:

30 minutes ago, hk blues said:

I have no idea as I've been out of the loop for 15-odd years but there are certain professions where those working in them always seem to think they have it tighter than anyone in any other profession.  Are teachers part of that group? 

Q the "vocation" discussion !

Thankfully the idea of teaching as a vocation seems to be dying out.

[scottsdad]

2 minutes ago, Gaz said:

Thankfully the idea of teaching as a vocation seems to be dying out.

I think it has for a long time.

When I was at school I remember teachers talking about how they used to run clubs and so on for pupils after school. Loads of sports clubs and the likes. Then the strike came in the 80s, the teachers were treated like rubbish by the government. When they came back to work they just did the job - all this extra time they put in at evenings and weekends, unpaid, just ended.

[super_carson]

I'm not in favour of the strike action for a few reasons, most of all if we keep pushing for 10% then there are going to be cuts made elsewhere that are going to make our jobs much harder.  The only way to fund it would be through cuts or tax rises and neither of those seem particularly palatable. 

For example, I've taught several children with additional needs (and some that have often been violent) or who don't speak any English and the lack of support for staff and these pupils is shocking. Some pupils take years to get an additional support diagnosis and untill that's confirmed we don't get much support with helping these kids.  That then has a knock on impact on staff, both in terms of in class experiences (I've been bit, kicked, spat at and punched) and in terms of hours worth of additional time spent in meetings, filling in forms etc. 

I'm not going to turn down a pay rise (let's be honest, most of us here wouldn't) and we are all facing pressures to do with the cost of living.  But I think we also need to be aware of the wider impact that a 10% rise would have.  

 

 

[ICTChris]

I was at school in the 1990s and even then people blamed the strike in the 1980s for lack of after school activity.

I can remember people blaming them for the fact that the school didn't have as big a rugby programme as it had pre 1980s, although that was due to the head of PE being more interested in canoeing than rugby.