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

Worst Agencies...and Worst Agency Experiences...

Discussion in 'Supply teaching' started by les25paul, Nov 23, 2011.

  1. ...the problem is that many national agencies do have good and bad personnel/consultants and it seems the teaching scene has changed so radically over the past few years that everyone has become extremley sceptical, if not a little, brutal about some work.
    Naming and shaming is arguably not the way to go, but I am afraid your comments insinuating teachers are owed something is crass and your arguement is poorly laid out. Dont suppose you trained for X number of years to be a consultant did you...? Thought not, as with any public sector professional body, it takes years of training and assessment to be in the position to be able to work and we do this foregoing other work we could have been doing. It is drummed into us at an early stage that to become a professional (in any field) one has to forego many things with the promise that you will get a good job with good pay...thats why teachers take up to 4 years to train.
    So, please dont belittle the profession that indirectly helps keep you (and other teaching consultants) in a job. The S££TE agencies out there have, I am sure their own pressures, which is why so many teachers are complaining of bad/poor practice, so I suggest (like many others) that agencies, for example, not "force" teachers to accept CS work on CS pay...and you wonder why teachers are so fed up with the fannying about they have to do, just to stay compliant etc. Poor practice is poor practice and I applaud anyone who has the balls to say it....rant over
  2. Good to see an agency worker coming on confirming that they do in fact continue to believe (if we use their rate of 1 good supply to 5 lousy ones - which is utterly ball..ocks btw) that a good 80% or so of the teachers on their books hover somewhere above "scum of the earth" in status.
    I used to defend the good agencies (indeed I did so for years when the agency rage got too bad on here) - now having seen a previously good one sink to the levels of all the rest... they're all scum of the earth - and I say that as someone who's worked my backside off to the extent that I was the person they sent into new schools to secure them the repeat business, recommended them to people, recommended them to schools when they asked which agencies treated their staff better in order that they could do that little bit to make their supplies' lives better... and it got me - chucked out because I won't work for free and dared to get pregnant.
    So yeah - Celsian... won't use a pregnant supply teacher. Won't use you unless you participate in their working for free half-days.
    Agencies want our loyalty - where's theirs? I was loyal for years - thrown away like a piece of rubbish and if you want to be viewed as humans... then view us as such - it hurts.

    Oh and Select/Ranstad - if they decide they don't like you because you politely say "no I can't get to that school an hour and a half away by 9am since it's now 8.50" - will LIE outright to schools (confirmed by the school secretary whom I happened to run into in Tesco) and say you're no longer doing supply when schools ring up and request you in order to "punish" you for not doing what they want.
  3. I personally do not think it is fair to name and shame agencies. It is fair and reasonable as they do not name and shame us. General terms,Naff agencies or Naff supply accepted.
    Agencies-my view, some are awful and the odd one is good. However I have a really big axe to grind as a supply teacher regarding Quality Mark. Fact from the supply view is that some Quality Mark agencies are Cowboys.
    The agency bod has a highly relevent and scary point. I am on M5, I had to prove to my agency that I am M5, however I said I am ok with lower rates. (imagine a supply teacher trying to negotiate lower rates!) I was looking with an eye on the new regs I was told I can't,I am M5 and that is it now.
    My agency spent last summer at the recruitment fairs getting hold of ex PGCE and maybe the odd ex NQT. They can use these for a year I suppose,but as they go up the scale they will be used less.
    For me I think agency work which has been poor this year, will die off for me. Simply because I am highly experienced but will be to expensive.
    To the agency bod, Yes some agency negotiators are highly qualified in the recruitment sector. It is worth us supply teachers remembering this,as teachers are not the only people with a lot of qualifications. We are not public sectors workers, we are temp workers in the private sector, tasked to work in the public sector.
    We are highly miffed at present, I personally do not see agencies as the sole cause of our miffedness. The public sector colleagues never cared for our plight. I think it is innapropriate to lump our moaning on here with the general moaning of the pubic sector.
    NB one of my good agencies has just dropped my rates without negotiating with me, I only found out on my payslip last week. HO HUM I am not moaning.
    screw Quality Mark

  4. good rant and I would say a rather effective example of how some agencies have been operating over the past few years. Its got worse of late but thats due to the economy...isnt it??....erm, I dont think so as dont we still have the same number of kids to teach as before the economic downturn? Yes its also true that budget cuts etc have also hit schools but where are our priorities in this country?Dont we want kids to be educated...?...Oh sorry, we do, but we want to do it on the cheap!! Thats why teachers are being insulted in the first instance when their roles are usurped by CS's and in the second instance being asked to take on CS work!!
    If you want quality, you have to pay for it and the fact that this thread may get pulled is simply a case of wanting to brush things under the carpet. Bad agencies and their tactics need to be highlighted
  5. ....naming and shaming is something left to the individual...Ive heard all the arguements about the legalties and so on, but how long do agencies and even schools going to be allowed to get away with incompetent/poor conduct. Its easy to point the finger at the teacher (as done earlier in this thread by an agency consultant) but when the boot is on the other foot....people start to cry foul....
    As I said earlier, bad pratice should be made available for people to amke their won mind up
  6. I do not know if the Qualitiy Mark operation with regard to Temp teachers employs public sector workers. As far as I am concerned the government can sack the lot.
    Quality Mark for a teaching agency.
    Since when do Qualitiy Mark ask us temp supply for info on the 'Quality' of a teaching agency.
    Something to boast on a letter head I suppose.
  7. Teaching agencies with a Quality Mark - what does this really mean in the real world of cut throat operations? I mean when did any of us think th day would come when fully qualified (and highly experienced practitioners) taechers would have to steep so low as to HAVE to accept non-qualified positions such CS just to earn a crust...its criminal. QM - its just another quango fest to give some people something to do
  8. Yep if I had my way a thrust of our moans would be made to quality mark.
    The schools would not like it as it looks good and official, and it can restrict direct approaches to school.
    Phone school ask if you can do a deal, school says we only use such and such agencies. register with them.
    Agenices would not like it as it would expose that they are in no way or shape of form interested in quality. From the supply teachers view
    Qualitiy Mark- a mini quango which reduces 'Quality' in the sector.
    Please Please can a supply teacher tell us that they have been approached by Quality Mark for feedback on the agencies we work for and the role which we do (or have done)
    I really do become angry when I think of Quality Mark. I try to be reasonable however some agency muppit saying Quality Mark is a good idea can go and . . . .
  9. ...the quality mark nonsense is very arbitary. It looks good on paper but in reality it doesnt mean a thing, particularly in the current climate
  10. ...oh yes, good point reference the hassle it is to deal directly with schools. It seems schools only now want to deal directly with agencies, which I presume is to save on the the compliance admin, so qualified teachers have to scrabble around like lost sheep.
  11. I'm registered with Future Education and they are great. They are run by a former head and the guys in the office are all teachers. I would highly recommend them.
  12. After having bad experiences with a few of the larger agencies, I signed up with Future Education and they are really good. Lot's of work and opotunities in London and they always treat me like an individual. I won't name names, but the big corprate companies don't care about anything other than money!
  13. I checked out their website, Looks ok to me, if I was back in London I would give them a buzz,
    I did not see quality mark, which is a big brownie point. All the naff agencies have quality mark. However they are probably working toward quality mark.
    I hate quality mark almost as much as I hate teachin unions!
  14. Are you D.Attwell the same as Mr Derek Attwell, former headteacher and MD of Future Education? Just wondering.......
  15. I mean D.Attwell who posted at 14.26 in praise of Future Education.
  16. As if agency folk would do such a thing... ahem.
  17. It would appear that I have been BUSTED! I am actually Derek's younger son, I noticed John Paul 10 said something about Future Education so I thought I would jump in on the act. I'm actually a primary school teacher myself, so I peruse the forums regulary. I don't think I'll be contributing again too soon [​IMG].
  18. ...Quality Marks are balls-ox!!
  19. Strange post, Ho hum, I think I would take a rain check on signing up for this one despite my previous post.
    Sounds like Godfather 4, one would not want to upset the 'family'.
  20. ...strange, maybe?, as the original poster's (me) question has kind of been lost in the midst of other interrelated banter. That said, whether or not one agrees that naming/shaming is a good or bad idea, it has certainly raised enough to show that there are many less desirable agencies out there who have little or no knowledge about the profession

Share This Page