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 Teachers

Discussion in 'Jobseekers' started by mrjack, Oct 23, 2017.

  1. mrjack

    mrjack New commenter

    HI All,
    Do contracted teachers have any idea how much supply teachers earn ?
    If your UPS 3 you should be paid £195 per day. Depending on where you live if you work with an agency you are paid between £80-£130 per day for supply and you loose your pension.
    Is it not disgraceful ? why have the unions allowed this to happen ?
    I get the impression that generally teachers who have jobs don't know how much supply teachers are exploited.
    In Wales we are trying to do something about this, check out Supply Teachers in Wales on Facebook.
    tonymars likes this.
  2. welshwizard

    welshwizard Established commenter Forum guide

    The real issue is why we have supply agencies in the first place. It was the reduction in LA's in the 80's and 90's who then managed supply pools and the increasing autonomy of schools that has fragmented the market. The STPC emphasises the daily rate for a supply teacher should be 1/195 of full time salary, Employers NIC is 13.80% and Teachers Pension 16.48% factor in the costs of providing Payroll and the Administration. Overall schools could directly employ a teacher but with the on costs decide it is not worthwhile of time or too costly.
    Therefore you have commercial organisations whose rationale is profits and you have a huge variety in the market of providing supply teachers.
    tonymars, BYusuf and pepper5 like this.
  3. Skeoch

    Skeoch Lead commenter

    I struggle to see what unions can achieve here beyond exhorting schools to pay better.
    If all supply teachers were unionised, and if they all, with union support and guidance, refused anything less than £x a day, then agencies and schools might decide to pay £x. However is some supply teachers are prepared to work for £0.5x, then agencies and schools will employ them and not those holding out for £x. Unions are only as powerful as their members working together.
    JohnJCazorla and pepper5 like this.
  4. slingshotsally

    slingshotsally Star commenter

    Did you see the Facebook screen shot post in which an agency wanted a Y6 teacher for £50 a day?

    A teacher would be better off stacking shelves, because you wouldn't have the marking, planning, data, parents evenings, OFSTED...
    pepper5 likes this.
  5. welshwizard

    welshwizard Established commenter Forum guide

    Daily supply does not involve the extras. I know many teachers doing supply exactly because of this as it gives them the freedom to just teach. I love the way schools are blaming agencies for what is their own poor employment practices. I am always amazed at why schools do not check what agencies are paying their teachers and what service they do actually provide.
    JohnJCazorla and pepper5 like this.
  6. slingshotsally

    slingshotsally Star commenter

    It was long term contract.

    Secondary supply might be like that, but primary supply, even day to day involves marking EVERYTHING done by the children with English and Maths requiring the highlight, www, ebi....
    thatmaninthehat and pepper5 like this.

    SEBREGIS Senior commenter

    You have to look at it from the school's point of view.

    When it comes to day to day cover (a teacher away ill for a few days, that sort of thing) they don't need anyone with the skills of a UPS teacher. They need someone who can write the work on the board, stop students killing each other and hand out the resources. Even if it's longer-term supply and your creating/marking lessons, you still aren't 'adding value' the way that a UPS teacher should.

    When I was working as a supply teacher, I was well aware that I wasn't being used to the full. I enjoyed it mostly for that reason. In some schools, they were quite happy for me to add a bit more to the cover work, but that was my choice. What I liked about supply teaching was that you generally had a really easy time of it, no planning, no marking, no additional duties, and you got to leave at 3.00. It left me plenty of time to do things like photography, visit historic churches etc etc

    I suppose what I'm saying is - if you want to be paid more, you have to be prepared to DO more. Which is why I went back into full time teaching.
    JohnJCazorla likes this.
  8. Landofla

    Landofla Established commenter

    Please correct me if I am wrong but I am under the impression that bank nurses get paid much more than their perm employed counterparts. I have heard of them earning £40 an hour! These bank nurses don't do more. How will supply teachers ever get a better deal if their perm counterparts look at them as unequals? Teachers think like this because of envy. Teachers envy the supply teacher and their lesser workload. Combat the workload issue and I believe we will see a more supportive workforce.
  9. welshwizard

    welshwizard Established commenter Forum guide

    I don't know about nurses but daily rates are always misleading when compared to full time contracts as you have to factor in sickness, holiday pay and TPS which is part of the full time provision.
    pepper5 likes this.
  10. guinnesspuss

    guinnesspuss Star commenter

    What you have to factor in is; Supply teachers aren't paid near what the agencies charge the schools. At one school I was being paid £130 per day and the agency was charging the school £195. That's a whole lot of money for not much admin. I was there three and a half days a week for over a year.
    Landofla likes this.
  11. pepper5

    pepper5 Star commenter

    Out of the £65.00 the agency would have had to pay employer's National Insurance contributions. How much that would have been, I don't know. That is if you were being paid PAYE.
  12. JohnJCazorla

    JohnJCazorla Lead commenter

    Not impressed with this thread at all...

    It's not yet the pantomime season and we're already into
    "I'm worse off than you..."
    "Oh no you're not"
    "OH YES I AM"
    "OH YES I AM"

    .....repeat ad nauseam.

    To answer the original post
    So what!
    I've been a contracted teacher and I'm currently a supply teacher. I prefer supply because I am just about avoiding the WRS that I'd get if I was permanent.

    Am I right?
    Maybe, but only for me and even then Mrs Cazorla would tell me I'm wrong.:(

    Sorry, rant over....
    pepper5 likes this.
  13. Moony

    Moony Lead commenter

    Sod thinking about it from the schools point of view, what about the supply teachers point of view?

    If the work/earning power isn't there to make ends meet we have to pack it in. For some they might take jobs in schools but for many it's non teaching jobs we go. I'm still involved in education just not schools, but there are others thinking about shop work as they know that they can at least pay their bills with that.
    JL48 and pepper5 like this.
  14. Pomza

    Pomza Star commenter

    It's supply and demand.

    Nationally, the trend is to use HLTA/TAs to cover teacher absence, or to directly employ a CS to do the same.

    As there is less demand for supply teachers, the agencies for forced to become more ad more commercially competitive to stay in business. I know from the daily emails they send me, offering all kinds of 'talented' people at a the drop of a hat, constantly undercutting each other.

    That said, on the rare occasion that we actually use a supply, the deal always seems to have mysteriously expired...
  15. pepper5

    pepper5 Star commenter

    Some might say in 20 years that robots will be able to cover some lessons and it is not as far away as some might think.
  16. welshwizard

    welshwizard Established commenter Forum guide

    Fundamentally there are not enough teachers in the system! The Government has given up on the whole issue of planning to train sufficient teachers to meet demand in subject/phase or parts of the country and passed that responsibility across to schools through School Direct. I have already heard the civil service beginning to suggest that the problem lies with schools not training enough teachers and not retaining them.
    JohnJCazorla likes this.
  17. captain scarlet

    captain scarlet Established commenter

    Sorry pepper5, the agency don't pay the employers NI, this is passed to the teacher, who has it deducted from their payment [ this is 13.5% skimmed straight off the top ], the supply also pays their own NI contributions, this means that I currently have to pay my NI twice . They also deduct the employers pension contribution too. So the agency keep their cut, and laugh all the way to the bank.

    Since IR35 came live, supply teachers lose out, as mentiionion in other threads, currently I am ~350 - 400 down per month, compared to when I could invoice direct.
  18. pepper5

    pepper5 Star commenter

    What you describe is payment through an umbrella company. I was talking about PAYE which is something entirely different.
    Moony likes this.
  19. welshwizard

    welshwizard Established commenter Forum guide

    To clarify- The employers NI contribution is 13.8% of salary and is paid by the employer or the agency on behalf of the employer if payroll administration is part of the agency service.
    If Teachers Pension is being paid the employers contribution is 16.48% these are the payments made by the employer not the teacher.
    Passing these costs on to teachers can only be through self employment status when NI costs are paid directly.
    PAYE , Pension and NI contributions have to be deducted for employed staff.

Share This Page