Associate
- Joined
- 16 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 1,724
- Location
- Worcestershire
Well that's the private sector & hence it doesn't come out of our tax
Outrage at Headteacher's £200k pay package
- Thread starter scorza
- Start date
Well that's the private sector & hence it doesn't come out of our tax
Except Doctor, Surgeon, Nurse, various positions in the armed forces, various positions within the police force, firefighters and so on.
None of whom would have got the education they need to fill these posts without teachers.
Teachers are the absolute bedrock of our society and are massively under valued - NO ONE who makes anything of themselves in this country has done so without the aid of teachers.
This guy has turned an underachieving school (including the teachers working below him - many of whom will have been demoralised and under performing) into a success story, which is a bloody hard thing to do. It takes more than just good teaching skills, it takes leadership and for that he is being justly reward for his efforts.
We need more head teachers like this fellow and we need to show the rest of the education sector that excellence pays.
This annoyed me so much earlier. I wouldn't have minded if it had been in the Daily Mail or something, but it was on BBC Breakfast, a programme i would consider fairly neutral and accurate. They'd even sent out a reporter to go to the school and ask the headteacher about his salary as he got to work.
It's ****ing pathetic. They kept on throwing around the £200k figure, yet only mentioned once that £83k of that was actually his basic from his job as a headteacher.
Why does the media insist go around witch hunting people who earn a higher salary these days?! Actually, scratch that, i know why they do this - it's to stir **** up. Then of course you get the minimum wage lot writing in saying "OMG I WORK 21 HOURS A DAY AND ONLY GET £12,000 A YEAR. SO UNFAIR - ****ING TEACHERS1!!111"
If the BBC want to look for the injustices of disproprotionate salaries, then perhaps they better start looking at themselves.
It's ****ing pathetic. They kept on throwing around the £200k figure, yet only mentioned once that £83k of that was actually his basic from his job as a headteacher.
Why does the media insist go around witch hunting people who earn a higher salary these days?! Actually, scratch that, i know why they do this - it's to stir **** up. Then of course you get the minimum wage lot writing in saying "OMG I WORK 21 HOURS A DAY AND ONLY GET £12,000 A YEAR. SO UNFAIR - ****ING TEACHERS1!!111"
If the BBC want to look for the injustices of disproprotionate salaries, then perhaps they better start looking at themselves.
It's a public service. People expect great things but they don't want to pay for it. Same story with the nhs, police and fire service.
I'm sure you're right, what with all of the schools you've been a headmaster of.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Oct 2008
- Posts
- 3,833
- Location
- London
Since when? They constantly spout ****, regardless of fact. They're a lapdog for the incumbant government.
To soften up the public for massive cuts. See previous point about incumbant government.
And their policy of hiring predominantly LGBT / Ethnic individuals for the sake of it, being unrepresentative of the UK as a whole... Maybe it comes with the territory, I don't know.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Well the main issue for me, is that he's gotten 83k basic, and managed to get what appears to be 10-20k in overtime. I understand a guy in a crappy job on 15k a year getting a little overtime, but a head teacher, frankly, shouldn't. yes teachers do things in the summer, but they are HEAVILY compensated in holiday times for a little "overtime" during the term.
He shouldn't get overtime, at all, my dad working for the NHS in a senior position is paid for 9-5, but leaves the house at 7.30, gets back at 7.30, and works a couple hours most evenings and 5-6 hours over the weekend, every week for the past 20 years of his life, he doesn't get overtime but is pretty well paid for doing a very very good job.
Theres a point past which overtime is well, shouldn't be allowable, especially for people who get more time off than really any other profession in the world(hooking aside).
The biggest killer, is the 50k a year, 100k for two years ridiculous pay he's getting for some stupid Labour driven government scheme, another "lets randomly pay out an extra 50K a year to someone to appear to be improving schools" rubbish. Sorry but 83k basic and 10k overtime will draw MORE than enough qualified applicants, 100k bonus essentially for some bogus and stupid Labour scheme.
Not at all that Labour were handing out cash trying to buy votes of the teachers union at all though.
Footballers get paid what clubs make on tv money, which is money the tv people pay and still make a profit after charging us to watch the football. If footballers were paid less, the owners would simply get a lot more money in their own pocket, none of it is tax based income, theres profit to be made from football and that profit is filtering down into footballers pay packets, considering they produce the football I don't see any problem.
As for bankers, it would seem most people forget a bank losing billions doesn't mean individual people within the bank didn't make a profit, a lot of bonuses went to people who made profits, several bonus's did go to people who half ran the banks into the ground. But also remember people like Labour used the banking system as a scapegoat, it was Labour who allowed the banks and actively encouraged them to dole out loans in larger and larger amounts, while actively ruining the economy.
Make no mistake the "recession", and downturn in world economy had nothing at all to do with the banks, but to do with massive massive industry loss in the USA and UK, we've for a decade lost so much business while loading the countrys with debt, thats what happened.
People are also saying somehow this guy earned it, in that article other than hearsay comments that he deserved the money, theres nothing in the article to suggest he's actually turned the school around, nor that he was responsible for it. One quote from one parent, could have been a troubled kid any teacher, or friend, or parent got through too.
SHockingly, and disgustingly, headteachers are simply managers now, nothing more or less, they don't teach, its a basic job these days, making sure books get ordered and buildings get maintained etc, etc. A headteacher should really not make more than 60-70k MAX with no overtime, as its embarassing to take 3-4 months off a year, and claim overtime in the other 8 months. The money should go on increased salarys trying to entice QUALITY teachers with a decent paycheck, people go into teaching these days as the courses are paid for them and they aren't good enough for anything else.
Last edited:
You can't get £200k. You get £83k.
And honestly, take a step back from your "uber" PC and try living in the real world. You sound like a 16 year old.
"But he also received in the same year more than £100,000 - £51,957 of which was back-dated pay for 2008/09 - for work on the City Challenge programme introduced by Labour to tackle underachievement in disadvantaged areas.
He was also paid £10,000 in overtime for 2009-10, and a further £9,317 for overtime in 2008/09."
I don't see the discussion here. If he's owed payment from 08 and 09 he's entitled to it, and the same with overtime.
He was also paid £10,000 in overtime for 2009-10, and a further £9,317 for overtime in 2008/09."
I don't see the discussion here. If he's owed payment from 08 and 09 he's entitled to it, and the same with overtime.
Well thats debatable to be honest, as a guy that I went to school with went into the army without gaining any qualifications at all from school, but thats neither here or there.
My point was that all of those careers that I listed involve the regular possibility of either being killed in your line or work or having to regularly deal with/cause the death of others. I find it somewhat laughable that those careers have such comparatively low wages vs the risks involved.
My point wasnt that this guy didnt deserve the money he got, my point was that if thats what its worth then the careers I listed should be worth , at the VERY least, the same amount (though personally I think more than that amount). I believe, and always firmly have, that the careers I listed are vastly underpaid for what they have to deal with.
Last edited:
You quite clearly don't have even the faintest comprehension of the work involved in turning a school around.
Again, talk about something you have experience of. They don't take off 3-4 months a year, and I think you'll find quite a lot of heads do actually teach too ...
Annoys me the amount of people that harp on about footballers wages, football is a private entertainment industry, it's not funded by tax payers, so why get angry with what they are paid, it's the way capitalism works.
For the headteacher on the other hand, His wages are funded by tax payers and are we really getting value for money for £200k a year? I'm sure there are plenty of people that would do his job at half that rate.
For the headteacher on the other hand, His wages are funded by tax payers and are we really getting value for money for £200k a year? I'm sure there are plenty of people that would do his job at half that rate.
He isn't on 200k a year. Seriously it has been pointed out more than once in this thread already.
3 posts above yours for example splits it out nicely....
I think people are envious which is why they're complaining.
Man does a good job, a damn fine job in fact and is entitled to his pay, considering this is backpay and bonuses etc what is the issue exactly?
If you worked your arse off and achieved something from it then you would want every penny you're entitled to.
Some of you make it sound like running a school (primary or not) is as easy as anything.
Man does a good job, a damn fine job in fact and is entitled to his pay, considering this is backpay and bonuses etc what is the issue exactly?
If you worked your arse off and achieved something from it then you would want every penny you're entitled to.
Some of you make it sound like running a school (primary or not) is as easy as anything.
Many head teachers earn their wage. There are a good few exceptions to the rule, and they don't deserve to be in teaching let alone running a school.
To be a successful and concientious head teacher takes a massive amount of dedication, especially where problem schools are concerned and the 'turning around' of them.
I may have missed something, but seeing as he's being criticised for earning over £200k, surely they should get their facts straight - after all, a good chunk of the money was backdated. That's not his annual salary, which is what the article seems to be alluding to at least tenously. He probably worked his arse off too. Man works hard, does good, gets bonus. What's the problem exactly?
To be a successful and concientious head teacher takes a massive amount of dedication, especially where problem schools are concerned and the 'turning around' of them.
I may have missed something, but seeing as he's being criticised for earning over £200k, surely they should get their facts straight - after all, a good chunk of the money was backdated. That's not his annual salary, which is what the article seems to be alluding to at least tenously. He probably worked his arse off too. Man works hard, does good, gets bonus. What's the problem exactly?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 32,926
- Location
- Rutland
**********Newsflash******
Man is paid what he has earned!!!!
That is all
Man is paid what he has earned!!!!
That is all
lol DVDBunny.
DO NOT READ THE FOLLOWING POST YOU DO NOT REALLY CARE
Pay Breakdown
Basic pay - £82,714.37
City Challenge - £102,955.00 over two years (this includes 50k he should have been paid last year)
Out-of-hours work - £9,317
Arrears - £9,317
so, this year he was paid 82k+50k for the City Challenge thing.
he also received 50k that was owed from last years work (how many of you could go without over 50% of your pay from last year?) plus 18k or so in overtime etc.
doesn't seem too bad for a guy that's done so much.
amazed this wasn't in the daily fail tbh
So this poor teacher who managed to achieve targets which were set by Labour was paid what he is owed and people are up in arms about this?
People need to get a grip, he has turned things around and could improve childrens lives.
Some people have completely the wrong attitude and that is what is really wrong with Britain today.
The guy is £89k a year FFS!
People need to get a grip, he has turned things around and could improve childrens lives.
Some people have completely the wrong attitude and that is what is really wrong with Britain today.
The guy is £89k a year FFS!
Exactly how many children do you come in to contact with? Now if you had said popstar, footballer or "I want to be famous" I might have possibly thought you had some sort of point, but once again (like your original post) you take a pop at the banking system again. It's OK, we get it, you are a socialist and hate the bankers as the ultimate expression of capitalism. I don't think I have ever heard a kid go "I want to be an investment banker!"
By "brightest students" I was thinking more along the lines of undergraduates at top universities rather than high school students, but I guess it was a bit ambiguous.
The point I was making was that by having London as a global financial centre, it kind of sucks up all the best UK talent, unintentionally depriving other key industries and areas of the UK. In turn this reduces the supply of teachers and the overall quality (that's not to say there aren't some very good teachers). Imo it'd be far better for the national interest to offshore some of London's banking to other European capitals and allow the UK economy to re-balance itself gradually.
P.S. I'm not a socialist and I don't hate banks. Banking is an important tool in the ways of wealth creation - it's just got a bit out of hand over the last couple of decades and needs to be corrected.
Associate
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 2,211
We're not.