1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

False advertising on pay scale

Discussion in 'Workplace dilemmas' started by helen711, Jul 8, 2019.

  1. helen711

    helen711 New commenter

    I went for an interview last week. It’s just for a term, which suits me as I would normally go for part time these days. The head of department called me to offer me the job within an hour of me leaving the school. I was delighted, until the contract came. It was a main scale contract. I queried this as I’ve been upper scale for years. The personnel manager replied to say that the contract was main scale, because the job was main scale, (is there such a thing as a main scale job?). I replied with a copy of the job advert and the job description which stated that the range was up to U3. I’ve had absolutely no response from the school. It just seems like a whole waste of time to call people for lengthy interviews only to try and stiff them with a contract five grand lower than expected. Is this a thing now?
  2. Rott Weiler

    Rott Weiler Star commenter Forum guide

    Sorry to disappoint you but "up to U3" is not false advertising (not in law anyway). They were willing to pay up to U3, but obviously not to you. Importantly, what the ad didn't say is that they would match your previous scale point.

    Have I understood this correctly, they offered you the job and you accepted it without asking what the salary was? You won't be the first person who has come on TES and said that but when there are no national payscales nobody should accept a job without knowing the salary. They might have offered you M1!

    "Is this a thing now?" Yes
    Pomza, DYNAMO67, jlishman2158 and 6 others like this.

    SEBREGIS Lead commenter

    But you can still decline, because a verbal agreement is always dependant on you agreeing specific terms. Its not like Brexit. And I would say that standard practice in this industry is to offer you at least what they know you are on, so it was a fair assumption.
  4. helen711

    helen711 New commenter

    Thanks for your perspectives, it’s been so long since I’ve been to an interview I hadn’t even realised how much has changed.
    To be clear, regarding the the title, the email from personnel said the job was main scale, not me....so kind of false advertising.
    And yes, I have declined.
    jlishman2158 likes this.
  5. HolyMahogany

    HolyMahogany Senior commenter

    In my experience, when I have completed application forms, there has been a section covering current pay. This informs the HT at what level you are, and would provide the HT with the opportunity to discuss any issues about pay. Of course that does not mean that they have to offer you the same rate, but I would expect it to be raised at the time of making the offer and I would assume that if they want to offer less it would be made clear.
    Did you complete such a form? If so then I would think it reasonable for you to expect them to offer you your current level or give reasons at the time as to why not.
  6. caterpillartobutterfly

    caterpillartobutterfly Star commenter

    It seems very short sighted of the school not to negotiate.
    A term paying UPS3 type wage rather than M6 type would be less of an expense than starting the recruitment all over again at this late stage, or paying to use an agency.
    SundaeTrifle likes this.
  7. frustum

    frustum Star commenter

    I went for an interview for an intervention post. The advert said "salary to be discussed at interview"; they didn't bring it up, but I did. They said that that was because they didn't know what qualifications the applicants would have (I was the only qualified teacher for the maths post), and didn't elaborate, so I assumed that meant teacher pay for a qualified teacher. Note to others: if this happens to you, do not make any assumptions and ask follow-up questions if they are not specific. I wasn't offered the job, but I saw one of the (qualified and experienced) applicants for the English post later, who had been offered that job but for peanuts. She said no, and after much to-ing and fro-ing, they offered her what she asked for, but by then she'd accepted a post elsewhere. Ha!
    jlishman2158 and DexterDexter like this.
  8. starlightexpress

    starlightexpress Occasional commenter

    Usually salary is discussed at the end of the interview and certainly when the offer of a role is made after. My line is: “We are / I am pleased to offer you the role of ... on salary of ... , subject to all pre employment checks. Do you accept the role?” By the end of that phone call then I and the candidate know where we are. If I knew I couldn’t match a previous salary (rare for a teacher without responsibilities as I’d generally match it if I wanted them to join the school -and you do know the current / previous salary before shortlisting!), I’d make that clear before they walked out of the interview and gauge view of acceptance likely. If not I waste time making offers of role to have it declined. You offer to the strongest and if they indicated they would accept. It’s my final question, after the ‘any questions’- ‘Would you accept the job if offered it?’
    SundaeTrifle likes this.
  9. scienceteachasghost

    scienceteachasghost Lead commenter

    Now portability of pay is a thing of the past this is a salient lesson that salary must be discussed during interview.

    Although what annoys me about this is it’ll be the more confident, the ones with a few more PSI in their handshake that hoover up the advantage.

    I’m not religious but my God, the day the meek inherit the earth will be the day this species is saved.
  10. sbkrobson

    sbkrobson Star commenter

    My guess is that if this is literally the manner in which you replied, it will be no great shakes to them that you have also declined the role.
    If you had simply replied with the comment that you'd be happy to consider the role if they were open to further discussion about salary, then you may have both parties felt differently about things.
  11. DrJay

    DrJay Occasional commenter

    It’s only in the UK state schooling system that teachers’ salary isn’t portable. It is the case elsewhere - US, Canada, NZ, Australia, etc.,- that if you teach in state funded schools your salary is portable. Nurses, doctors, social workers here in the UK enjoy salary portability. I refer to these professions as I have family members and acquaintances in those professions who have moved jobs and only negotiate upper wages not lower wages. You can’t be a band 7 nurse, for example, and be offered a band 6 or 5 wages. You can’t be a consultant and be offered the wages of a junior doctor. Why are UK teachers seemingly timid? Why did they allow themselves to be forced into accepting non portability of pay scale? Which other professions accept this nonsense? Begging for answers. Who set the agenda for Teachers’ annual conferences where this and other crucial matters should be discussed?

    I get it that you shouldn’t move people up the scale if a teacher’s annual performance review isn’t satisfactory. If, however, upon review, the teacher’s performance is adjudged satisfactory what’s the point in holding them down, especially if they haven’t reached the bar. If they have satisfactorily performed in their previous post on a specific pay scale why seek to underpay them in the name of budget cut?

    A local primary school lost an experienced and presumably expensive teacher who is very well known for successfully preparing kids for entrance examinations into selective state and public schools only to be replaced by an NQT. The following year, less than a fifth of the kids passed the entrance examinations. Now parents of kids in the same school are hiring tutors to help coach their children. I know this is a different matter. My point is, you won’t hire junior doctors to carry out complex surgical operations in theatres, you need experienced commandants to lead troops into battlefields, why put Y13 students - who desperately need their A-Level grades to take up conditional offers - in the hands of trainee teachers? ☹️
  12. Stiltskin

    Stiltskin Star commenter

    Because of the rise of academies who can set their own pay scales and own curriculum. The government's control of compulsory education is rather weak these days.
  13. blazer

    blazer Star commenter

    It was this Governments choice to let go of the reins and put education into the hands of 'the market'.
    Jamvic, Catgirl1964 and agathamorse like this.
  14. HolyMahogany

    HolyMahogany Senior commenter

    Also the evidence from business and industry is that women are less likely to negotiate as hard as their male colleagues leading to greater inequality in pay for the same jobs. what a shame that we will now probably see teaching going the same way.
    jlishman2158 likes this.
  15. Stiltskin

    Stiltskin Star commenter

    Indeed. Although I believe they thought they could have it both ways. That they could still dictate what was taught whilst getting academies to provide cheap education.
    jlishman2158 and agathamorse like this.
  16. Piranha

    Piranha Star commenter

    It isn't just about academies. They have the right to set their own pay scales etc, but STPCD was changed to allow LA schools to offer the bottom of the scale to any qualified teacher, however experienced. It is not clear if this school uses STPCD, but what they have done certainly meets the rules. More's the pity.
    jlishman2158 and agathamorse like this.
  17. oldsomeman

    oldsomeman Star commenter

    On issues like this, I am so glad I do not have to negotiate salaries any more for myself.
  18. Pomza

    Pomza Star commenter

    The vast majority of academies follow the national curriculum and pay according to national pay scales.

Share This Page