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 professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

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

    Dismiss Notice

Supply teacher payscales

Discussion in 'Supply teaching' started by darkness, Apr 7, 2012.

  1. darkness

    darkness New commenter

    What would supply teachers think of this? Clearly supply need to be more competitive, and agencies are destroying the LA supply pools. So what if supply teachers had a different payscale, since let's face it, we don't really carry out the full duties of someone employed as a teacher, but could certainly be more competitive. What if something like this was done on the condition that the rule allowing cover supervisors and unqualified to take classes was abolished.

    Okay, less money for some people, not all though, but far more work on the whole meaning supply would be better off.

    Just thinking now, seeing cover supervisors go in for £50 a day, we could do that, but getting far more work than 1 day every 2 weeks. 1 day at £100 over 2 weeks or 4-5 days at £50 over the same period. Cut agencies out, LA charges £100 to schools, cheaper than currently what goes on.

    Just thinking aloud, and thinking of ways to make supply teachers more appealing and cutting agencies and cover supervisors or learning managers etc out.

    We need to start thinking outside the box people. OUTSIDE THE BOX.
     
  2. darkness

    darkness New commenter

    What would supply teachers think of this? Clearly supply need to be more competitive, and agencies are destroying the LA supply pools. So what if supply teachers had a different payscale, since let's face it, we don't really carry out the full duties of someone employed as a teacher, but could certainly be more competitive. What if something like this was done on the condition that the rule allowing cover supervisors and unqualified to take classes was abolished.

    Okay, less money for some people, not all though, but far more work on the whole meaning supply would be better off.

    Just thinking now, seeing cover supervisors go in for £50 a day, we could do that, but getting far more work than 1 day every 2 weeks. 1 day at £100 over 2 weeks or 4-5 days at £50 over the same period. Cut agencies out, LA charges £100 to schools, cheaper than currently what goes on.

    Just thinking aloud, and thinking of ways to make supply teachers more appealing and cutting agencies and cover supervisors or learning managers etc out.

    We need to start thinking outside the box people. OUTSIDE THE BOX.
     
  3. jubilee

    jubilee Star commenter

    But qualifies teachers are already being use to act as CS on CS pay! You don't need a supply teacher payscale to achieve that end.
    CS are only supposed to be used to cover the first 3 days of a teacher's absence, with a qualified teacher brought in therefter. Things would be much better for us supply teachers if schools followed those rules, but they don't and no-one policies the system.
    Supply teachers may not do all the duties of a contract teacher but we don't get PPA or PM reviews either and everyone must surely agree that we face a more difficult time with behaviour challenges.
    Most of my random supply days are clearly on the absent teachers worst day of the week, with an inordinate number of classes of mailnly lower set pupils.
    We don't get sick pay.
    I once covered for a teacher from January until November. She had been off work more than she'd been in in the previous 5 years. She had never been in work for Parents' Day (whole school off timetable and parents seen by the Form teacher who relayed comments from subject teachers) and needed help if in work when pupils' effort and achievement grades were allocated as she didn't know her pupils well enough.
    When I stayed on to support her return to work, she got the frees and PPA time, even though she was only taking full responsibility for one GCSE class (with me doing all the rest of the marking and leading the teaching ) and I was allocated to sundry other departments to cover for absent staff.
    At least I was LA paid on the teacher's payscale but I was daily paid and received nothing on the few days that I was off ill. I wouldn't have done it for £50 per day. Threre are lods of places where I'm sure I could earn £50 per day, or thereabouts, with less travelling and no abusive adolescents feeling entitled to treat me with disrespect.
     
  4. There is NO WAY I would work for £50 a day. I am currently getting £120 a day which is more than £60 a day less than I would get if I were paid to scale. This is absolutely the lowest I would be prepared to go to. My 18 year old son gets £50 a day working in McDonald's. Why on earth would be use all our expertise and training and put up with the appalling behaviour in some classes for such pitiful money?
     
  5. Mrs-Pip

    Mrs-Pip New commenter

    I earned more than £50 a day as an NQT 15 yrs ago!!! Is it me or has inflation changed since then... I could fill my car up for about £15 and less... now it's £50! I will not work for £50 a day as a supply teacher. I think having the whole responsibility of 30 other peoples children's education and welfare for the day is worth more!!!
     
  6. les25paul

    les25paul Star commenter

    £50 a day is far too low to expect someone to work as a teacher, it in no way reflects the amount of training and knowledge expected from the role. I have worked for that figure doing some admin work in a school which I thought was fair but to take responsibility for up to 30 students for five hours its not enough.
    I was offered some teaching work just before the Easter break at £70 a day, that was all the school was prepared to offer. I wonder if they got anyone to do it because it wasn't going to be me.
     
  7. My absolute minimum is £100 per day. For that rate I will not do any planning or marking, nor do more than the core hours. At that rate I would be getting (pro rata) far less than an NQT. If I'm taking on more responsibilities, planning, marking etc my absolute minimum is £120 (approx NQT rate). To ask a qualified, experienced teacher to work for less than a new entrant to the profession is a HUGE insult and should not be acceptable to anyone.
    For £50 a day I wouldn't even bother to answer the telephone and anyone even suggesting I work for this would get quite a mouthful. I'd far rather keep my self-respect and hold out for reasonable, if less frequent, pay.
    As for my work ethic.... I'm more than happy to do voluntary work for causes I believe in. This does not extend to boosting agency profits or subsidising a school's budget. If the schools are so strapped for cash perhaps the SLT could do a bit more cover rather than expecting us to work for peanuts.
     
  8. I agree 50 quid is too low. I am ex leadership and if paid to scale would get M6 as I never actually did threshold but my agency has a non negotiable flat fee. It's 105 per day and for that I do no planning and if day to day stay til 4pm to mark. I've been on long term and often left some nights at 3:30 as PPA cover for PE and PSHE has minimal marking but then on another night I was happy to stay later to mark year 6 French and topic work which takes ages. I recent found out though that as I have done no planning the school have actually got me in as a CS/HLTA but agency have paid me as a teacher til I asked for my AWR increase. Suddenly they quoted DFE at me stating a teacher does planning so if a job has work left then they would pay CS rate in the future. They were going to continue paying me the flat rate for a teacher but guess what, last day of term the school tells me they can't afford to keep me after Easter. I would rather work in a supermarket or shop for 50 quid a day than teach, shame none will have me!
     
  9. Pennyforyourthoughts

    Pennyforyourthoughts Occasional commenter

    Instructors pay scale seems a relatively fair pay scale...... 6 pay points up to £25,000 ....... = £128 per day
     
  10. les25paul

    les25paul Star commenter

    That argument might hold some validity if as a supply teacher you are covering a lesson completely outside of your subject and all you are doing is handing the work out /supervising the students. Languages might be an example of this where literally the covering teacher might not understand a word of the work (Like I wouldn't in a Spanish lesson). In this case maybe the supply is comparable to a CS who has had training in classroom mangement and knows the individual school's procedures.
    It no longer becomes the case as soon as you start to help students with their work, answer questions or explain something within your subject. Bear in mind also that there are many cross curricular links between subjects, eg there are common areas between Maths and DT, History and Geography and Science with almost anything (except Spanish). Once this happens you are now teaching and therefore should be paid as such.
    Another step up occurs when rather then just teaching prepared lessons you start planning, marking and keeping records on longer term placements in the same way the regular teacher does. Now you have grounds to argue for more money and ideally be paid to scale. But good luck on that one you might be talking yourself "out of a job" as AWR seems to be demonstrating.
     
  11. hammie

    hammie Lead commenter

    £50 a day and no holiday pay would doubtless work out as less than the minimum wage if the unions could be bothered to investigate fully.
     
  12. Dragonlady30

    Dragonlady30 Star commenter

    At present I am doing a long term cover so I AM preping, marking and taking part in parents evenings-I get overtime payments for parents evenings and I get a fee mealt too!!. I am being paind at about £50+ less per day than I would in a full time job, so would I work for £50 per day? In the words of Eliza Doolittle, 'Not bloody likely!' [​IMG]
     
  13. darkness

    darkness New commenter

    This isn't even true though. No such rule exists. The provision in the act states they can be used for any length of time, it is at the HTs discretion.

    I would also point out, 3 days in whole within secondary schools, can mean a class covered for months by a CS if that rule were even true.

    I was just thinking how I read some supply getting a days work every 2-3 weeks, sometimes it can be even worse. Surely if a CS can be employed by a school full time, it would be better to pay a supply teacher, but this cannot happen due to payscales.

    I would also express concern about going in as a CS if a teacher. Where would you stand on protection by Unions? Insurance etc?

    If I was told I could regularly get 3-4 days a week but at a slightly reduced rate, I would take it, but not if it meant an undermining of my own qualifications to the detriment of others.

    I am looking to get rid of agencies, who I can tell you now, are slowly grinidng down the pay until it becomes minimum wage for a teacher. Better to act now and pre empt this.
     
  14. darkness

    darkness New commenter

    At present you are, but I can tell you, agencies here are expanding nationwide, and they have almost destroyed the LA pools here, and that is all you can get and told it is now because you are effectively a CS. This will only get worse in time when LA pools effectively become obsolete, the agencies run things and are in it for profit. Minimum wage it will be in the end.
     
  15. darkness

    darkness New commenter

    https://www.tes.co.uk/article.aspx?storycode=6076835

    Have a read of this. You know what they will do, simply stop taking people on as supply teachers if the loopholes are closed and simply class everyone as a CS.

    Not all schools have caught on, they have here, who do you think they will choose, the LA which charges over the MPS1 at least, or an agency?
     
  16. In many parts of the UK there are no longer LA pools or preferred agencies. With the rise of Academies and Free schools, pay scales are becoming more varied anyway.
    In this area (NW) a couple of agencies are approaching schools saying that they have reduced their fees, undercutting the previous LA rates, whilst still maintaining their profit margin, claiming this as a "win-win". No points for guessing who loses out! Fortunately many schools are noticing that these agencies have disgruntled staff who don't stay around for long.
    Had an interesting chat with SLT yesterday about this....the school are now chosing to go with a more expensive agency who have happier, more motivated staff. (But we're obviously still not paid to scale.)
     
  17. PaulDG

    PaulDG Occasional commenter

    Laughable.
    What LA supply pools?
    The government is currently tearing up national pay scales.. Supply agencies are paid somewhere between £160 & £200 a day to provide a supply teacher (less if a CS is asked for) and have to run their businesses (and it's not easy!) on the margin between that and what they pay supply teachers.
    That money isn't going up. If anything, it's going down.
    Schools pay between £160 & £200 a day. They only bring in supply when they have to (when all internal cover options are exhausted) and if they could bring down the price, they would.
    If they brought it down, they'd not use the cash released to employ more supply teachers - they'd use it on any of the million and one other things schools have to pay for.
    It's easy to cut the agency out.. Just offer the school a better deal, spend ages getting yourself in front of the right decision makers, arrange for your own CRBs.. Insure the school against you abusing a child, etc.
    Oh.. hang on.. perhaps not that easy then..
    But having some small grasp of the operation of economics and at least a basic idea of the operation of supply and demand would be a great asset...
     

Share This Page