xbhappy4evax, Waterfin, Lizziebett and the rest. Do you not know the recent history of education in UK? (In my day, we went back to the 19th century.) You originally got TAs, on the same pay as floor staff in Tesco, when government finally saw the sense of teachers' complaints about wasting their expensive time doing the kind of jobs other professionals would have typists and filing clerks to do. Your incompetent Unions didn't make sure they were legally denied any role that every other country I have worked in would require a teaching qualification for, so now you have TAs, on a third of teachers' pay, doing exactly the same kind of teaching - whole classes, regularly or supplying for absent teacher colleagues, special needs - that was done by QTs. Hence the difficulties in finding job vacancies I see voiced in these columns. Why would a Head pay a teacher 3 times as much to get a job done when TAs are eager to jump in to do it at least to the low level acceptable here, but often better (since you now have TAs who are QTs, as well as TAs who are more competent than some teachers, esp NQTs)? You ought to be very glad to have somebody do all that work for you on a third of the pay you are getting (as Ucan2 recognises), in effect less than a third as apparently they're doing unpaid overtime, something your higher salary is supposed to allow for. Have you actually calculated your effective hourly rate for the number of hours you find essential to do the job? Probably not. But it's the only way of measuring how your job is valued by those who pay you - government or tax-payers - and that may disappoint you. Someone has already pointed out that the TU official was also a dumbo, but your post implies the same about his audience since, apparently, no-one asked him for chapter and verse, as one might have expected a class of postgrads to do. I had an enjoyable career in teaching, though mainly in Tertiary, but when I browse the Forums now my main reaction is "Why did they go into or why do they stay in teaching?"