Salary stagnation: how to survive it

gaiscioch

Looking at the Pre-2011 salary scale here I'm very close to landing on one of those salary points that don't change for years - i.e. no increment at all for 3 years, then an increment, then none for 4 more years, then an increment, then none for 4 further years. Then, you get one final increment where you will spend the rest of your teaching years without a salary increase. As retirement is currently 68, and will probably be at least 70 by the time I get there, that's a great number of years at the same final salary.

What was the initial logic behind structuring pay points like that? It sounds very depressing to have no salary rise at all for years, which when inflation is taken into account sounds like your salary will in fact be decreasing in those years of ostensible 'stagnation'. Does reaching this point of staring at salary stagnation become a bit of a mid-life crisis for some teachers? Career change? Time to take early retirement? I'm certainly feeling older just thinking about being (almost!) at a place which once looked so far away. I googled for survival guides and blogs but to no avail. Is there any financial solace at all in these years, or advice to triumph over this financial disincentive to continue?

rainbowtrout

Survival guides? Are you taking the piss? If you are going on to Point 14 which is the first of those points, you are not living like a pauper. And you've only been teaching for 11 years or thereabouts, so I doubt anyone going on to Point 14 is thinking of retirement.

You don't get a payrise for 3 years, life goes on. Lots of people do not get an annual payrise. If you go back and look at that payscale at the end of the three years, when you go from 16 to 17 you'll notice that the payrise is more than the typical 1000-1200 that is typical of the annual increment. It's typically about 2500.

Inspector Coptoor

Agree with rainbowtrout here.

I’m in the same boat but more than happy to be in that boat.

As a pre 2011 teacher, you’re in a great position and you certainly won’t get a better offer anywhere else without a lot of expensive retraining.

I’ll get an increment now in September I think and will be on that wage for 3 years but the increment is for €2500 and my basic wage will go from €58k to around €60.5k.


Zero complaints and really happy with it.
About to turn 36 and teaching 13 years.

The last line of your post reeks of entitlement tbh

r93kaey5p2izun

It's a big demotivation I think OP. It was definitely a big factor in why I quit last year. The salary scale in teaching starts well but it is far too long and the increments too small.

Victor

gaiscioch wrote: »

Then, you get one final increment where you will spend the rest of your teaching years without a salary increase.

Take on extra duties. Get a promotion. Correct exams for the summer.

It sounds very depressing to have no salary rise at all for years, which when inflation is taken into account sounds like your salary will in fact be decreasing

Um, don't you still get annual indexation, as agreed from time to time?

Inflation has been about 5% in the last 10 years: https://www.cso.ie/multiquicktables/quickTables.aspx?id=cpa01

Wesser

take a summer job to make some extra cash

Millem

I am on one of those points on the scale . We are getting a 1.75% increase on the 1st of September 2019 and then 2% on the 1st October 2020 so that’s something
I am guessing the increase only refers to our basic pay and not allowances?

honeybear

Think the freezing of increments was a real pain during the financial crisis, not to mention the USC-if memory serves me right, USC was meant to be temporary! Having said that, I think I’m paid ok but maybe that’s because the Summer holidays are looming!

JPF82

OP post is so entitled. I'm 37 years old, teaching 4 years now after a career change and my wife and I have managed to buy a house. I'm not full hours earning 36k. My wife earns less than I do in a private sector job. I think the OP can survive on what they are earning or get over themselves.

spurious

Not sure this thread is going anywhere except into the arms of those who like to troll here.

Would be mildly interetsed myself in the reasoning behind the structure of the scale, if anyone knows the reasoning behind it.
I think most would agree it is a very long scale, particularly for anyone who doesn't get a fulltime position for the first few years (i.e. almost everyone). Of course it was set in a time when teaching was very different and people had actual 'real' jobs straight from college, not part-time contracts.

rainbowtrout

Millem wrote: »

I am on one of those points on the scale . We are getting a 1.75% increase on the 1st of September 2019 and then 2% on the 1st October 2020 so that’s something
I am guessing the increase only refers to our basic pay and not allowances?

Yes, the increase is applied to the scale only.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

God love you OP, I haven't had a pay raise this decade. I would love to get a pay raise ever 3 years... pfft...

evolving_doors

I say fair fex to the OP in feeling entitled.
Yes teachers should get more considering the level of education and low hours and insecurity we start off on.

Teachers are too humble and made to feel accountable for every piece of bread they put in their mouths.

60k for a professional after 30 years is pittance.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/fitness-instructor-to-be-paid-160000-to-work-at-dil-gym-used-by-just-one-politician-each-day-38220979.html

PhoenixParker

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Survival guides? Are you taking the piss? If you are going on to Point 14 which is the first of those points, you are not living like a pauper. And you've only been teaching for 11 years or thereabouts, so I doubt anyone going on to Point 14 is thinking of retirement.

You don't get a payrise for 3 years, life goes on. Lots of people do not get an annual payrise. If you go back and look at that payscale at the end of the three years, when you go from 16 to 17 you'll notice that the payrise is more than the typical 1000-1200 that is typical of the annual increment. It's typically about 2500.

Also there's a 1.75% rise this September and a 2% rise in October 2020.

TheDriver

Please ensure you read the forum charter before posting. Any post that is used to merely cause reaction will attract mod attention

rainbowtrout

evolving_doors wrote: »

I say fair fex to the OP in feeling entitled.
Yes teachers should get more considering the level of education and low hours and insecurity we start off on.

Teachers are too humble and made to feel accountable for every piece of bread they put in their mouths.

60k for a professional after 30 years is pittance.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/fitness-instructor-to-be-paid-160000-to-work-at-dil-gym-used-by-just-one-politician-each-day-38220979.html

The OP alludes to moving on to point 14 on the scale soon, which is €53645. Combined with an Hons Dip (1236) and Degree allowance, (4918), gives the OP an annual salary of 59,799. Assuming the OP is on full hours it has taken them 12 years to get to a salary of 60k. Not 30 years. With the 1.75% rise in October it will certainly take that salary across the 60k threshold.


I think teachers deserve to be well paid, but at what point will you be satisfied? 80k? 100k? 120k?


Did you even read the full article you linked to instead of the clickbait headline? It says 160k over a four year period. So 40k a year. Not exactly raking it working in Dublin. Granted the gym instructor doesn't seem to be taxed by the work if only one person uses the gym per day but that's not their fault. Perhaps the government would be better tasked by asking if the Dail needs a gym instructor.

PhoenixParker

evolving_doors wrote: »

I say fair fex to the OP in feeling entitled.
Yes teachers should get more considering the level of education and low hours and insecurity we start off on.

Teachers are too humble and made to feel accountable for every piece of bread they put in their mouths.

60k for a professional after 30 years is pittance.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/fitness-instructor-to-be-paid-160000-to-work-at-dil-gym-used-by-just-one-politician-each-day-38220979.html

60k is an excellent salary.

Quoting random anomalous salaries that need to be corrected doesn't change that.

While a teacher earning 60k might have 30 years experience they're also performing essentially the same job as a new graduate or one with 5 years experience.

There are other opportunities to increase the salary by taking on additional responsibility, the same way any professional will seek to increase their salary.

spurious

PhoenixParker wrote: »

There are other opportunities to increase the salary by taking on additional responsibility, the same way any professional will seek to increase their salary.

Part of the problem though is that there are not many of such opportunities and some people (for example in schools with a certain set of changing demographics) rarely get a promotional opportunity, while some very large schools have lots of chances even for still quite inexperienced staff members.

It's not a level playing field at all.

When I retired, I left an AP1 (A post) and a full-time position. That became no post and 3 small hour contracts. No doubt the Department would put a spin on that and say teacher employment had increased drastically, but has it really?

Sonny noggs

evolving_doors wrote: »

I say fair fex to the OP in feeling entitled.
Yes teachers should get more considering the level of education and low hours and insecurity we start off on.

Teachers are too humble and made to feel accountable for every piece of bread they put in their mouths.

60k for a professional after 30 years is pittance.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/fitness-instructor-to-be-paid-160000-to-work-at-dil-gym-used-by-just-one-politician-each-day-38220979.html

Did you read the article you linked to? 160k over 4 years...

evolving_doors

Sonny noggs wrote: »

Did you read the article you linked to? 160k over 4 years...

Believe me I read it.

Jeez if I got 40k a year to teach 1 student part time!

rainbowtrout

evolving_doors wrote: »

Believe me I read it.

Jeez if I got 40k a year to teach 1 student part time!

Nothing to stop you becoming a gym instructor. Again, the gym is available to all Dail staff. The fact that is underused is not the instructor's fault.

evolving_doors

rainbowtrout wrote: »

The OP alludes to moving on to point 14 on the scale soon, which is €53645. Combined with an Hons Dip (1236) and Degree allowance, (4918), gives the OP an annual salary of 59,799. Assuming the OP is on full hours it has taken them 12 years to get to a salary of 60k. Not 30 years. With the 1.75% rise in October it will certainly take that salary across the 60k threshold.


I think teachers deserve to be well paid, but at what point will you be satisfied? 80k? 100k? 120k?


Did you even read the full article you linked to instead of the clickbait headline? It says 160k over a four year period. So 40k a year. Not exactly raking it working in Dublin. Granted the gym instructor doesn't seem to be taxed by the work if only one person uses the gym per day but that's not their fault. Perhaps the government would be better tasked by asking if the Dail needs a gym instructor.

Given the ad hoc internship that I had to go through for 8 years. I think I would be more entitled to 80k. I came in with my eyes open but equating a salary scale with 'actual' years served on low hours and temp contracts by most teachers I think they shouldn't be apologising to anyone for seeing themselves as highly qualified professionals.. and being paid accordingly.

TheDriver

I find it very ironic that we expect big multi nationals to provide all the bells and whistles in workplace and promote wellbeing yet the Dail tries to implement a decent workplace initiative and people question it. It's not as if the money is being wasted on entertainment or catering.

evolving_doors

Each person is different too. The op could have kids hitting college paying 2006 level mortgage maybe in Dublin.

I know teacher in staff room with relatively zero outgoings and second income from inherited property, no holidays, no family to support, giving the poor mouth every week about having no money left after tax. So it's all relative.

But on the whole I think teachers take a substantial hit starting out... and so they should be compensated.

happywithlife

Its all relative isn't it. Different people at different stages of life.
I'd love to see an increase in take home pay. Years of subbing on various contracts ranging from full hours to part time hours & I've finally secured a CID but not on full hours. My take home pay hasn't changed much over the years. Even now its on a par with several years ago in spite of my climbing the point salary scale. Yet I have 3 kids in childcare a boom time mortgage and a child with extra needs requiring SALT OT etc but no funding from the state. I can easily see myself as that middle aged teacher taking on extra SEC work etc to help fund raising teenagers/young adults in college etc. And probably having younger teacher moan at my perceived greediness. We just never know circumstances.
To go back to the OP though I guess at its conception people on the higher end of the payscale were expected to move onto posts of responsibility, managment, maybe publishing, SEC work etc to vary their work and pay?

Grueller

I am a qualified teacher but do not work at it any more. I went into the private sector and am self employed along with running a farm part time.
I have seen both sides of this and it is, as previous posters have already said, all about the stage of life and level of financial commitments that an individual carries. When I was starting out as a teacher I remember being shown a more experienced colleagues pay slip. He was on or very near top of the scale and was giving it bars about this being as good as it got despite qualifications etc. I remember looking at it and seeing €1600 odd per fortnight. I thought to myself, my god how well off would I be if I had that?
I forgot to also ask how well off would I be if I had that along with this mans 3 children in 3rd level, mortgage and an elderly mother requiring a lot of privately paid home help.
I now have 2 kids in childcare, a mortgage and had a wife whom was off work due to ill health for months but is gladly back to full health. My earnings were probably slightly higher than my former colleagues were at the time but I thought of him many times during that period. Walk a mile in my shoes and all of that.
I realise that my post has little to do with the op but what I have realised over the years is that income is not what makes or breaks you, it is outgoings. With that in mind perhaps the op is located in Dublin, struggling to get a deposit together, has massive childcare bills or any other range of financial problems and like my former colleague just needs to blow off some steam.
Apologies for the ramblings and irrelevance

rainbowtrout

evolving_doors wrote: »

Each person is different too. The op could have kids hitting college paying 2006 level mortgage maybe in Dublin.

I know teacher in staff room with relatively zero outgoings and second income from inherited property, no holidays, no family to support, giving the poor mouth every week about having no money left after tax. So it's all relative.

But on the whole I think teachers take a substantial hit starting out... and so they should be compensated.

Same as any other person in any other job.

Pay is not actually the real issue. Conditions are. Casualisation of jobs, 8 hours here, 11 hours there and all schools are guilty of it. If teachers could leave college knowing that they could get a job on full hours (like other public sector workers) then starting on 35k would be a very different prospect.

experiMental

OP : Do you like teaching? Do you want to teach people on the side? If so, do some additional teaching work outside your job, by hosting courses online - here is one suggestion : https://www.thinkific.com/

Alternatively, you can learn how to make the most out of whatever amount of money you are earning, by reading blogs on personal finance : https://www.wealthsimple.com/en-ca/magazine

You also have to re-evaluate your desired goals such as where you want to live, what kind of vehicle you want to own, etc. If you want a high quality of life in Ireland and want to supplement this by being a teacher, you better be top of your game in your profession, by really thinking about how you will increase your impact all over the world.

Blueshoe

Sickening

evolving_doors

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Nothing to stop you becoming a gym instructor. Again, the gym is available to all Dail staff. The fact that is underused is not the instructor's fault.

You're missing the point. I know this case is unique, I know that relatively few gym instructors have 1 client and get paid 40k:rolleyes:

My point was that it was deemed to be necessary because certain people who oversee us feel are entitled to have a an empty gym and gym instructor.

Meanwhile we are made to feel 'self entitled' for thinking we should be getting paid more. And this line keeps on getting spun and spun that we should be happy with our lot, and look at where that has gotten post 2011 teachers, continuously told that they have it cushy too.

I'm just a bit disappointed to see other teachers telling a colleague that they shouldn't be rising above their station.

evolving_doors

TheDriver wrote: »

I find it very ironic that we expect big multi nationals to provide all the bells and whistles in workplace and promote wellbeing yet the Dail tries to implement a decent workplace initiative and people question it.

Multinationals wouldn't entertain an empty gym.
It's not a decent workplace initiative if nobody uses it.... so yes lets question it. Maybe I'll be proven wrong, maybe they'll all tog out and put on a show for the public and use the gym... we'll watch this space.

TheDriver wrote: »

It's not as if the money is being wasted on entertainment or catering.

No that's a separate budget.:)

rainbowtrout

evolving_doors wrote: »

You're missing the point. I know this case is unique, I know that relatively few gym instructors have 1 client and get paid 40k:rolleyes:

My point was that it was deemed to be necessary because certain people who oversee us feel are entitled to have a an empty gym and gym instructor.

Meanwhile we are made to feel 'self entitled' for thinking we should be getting paid more. And this line keeps on getting spun and spun that we should be happy with our lot, and look at where that has gotten post 2011 teachers, continuously told that they have it cushy too.

I'm just a bit disappointed to see other teachers telling a colleague that they shouldn't be rising above their station.

The OP was essentially asking for tips on how to 'survive' on 60k a year for three years without a pay rise. It has nothing to do with them not rising above their station. OP is taking the piss bigtime.

Have you considered that perhaps it was thought that a gym in the Dail would be a good idea, that it might encourage TDs to exercise instead of propping up the Dail bar? But unfortunately uptake has not been particularly successful?

If you know this case is unique why are you using it to demonstrate your point about teacher wages? If it's not the norm, then it's not a realistic comparison.


The article is from a couple of years ago, but the figures won't have changed wildly.


https://www.thejournal.ie/readme/high-earner-ireland-755580-Jan2013/

Individuals earning 60K or more are in the top 10% of earners in the country. That category includes a lot of teachers.

evolving_doors

rainbowtrout wrote: »

The OP was essentially asking for tips on how to 'survive' on 60k a year for three years without a pay rise. It has nothing to do with them not rising above their station. OP is taking the piss bigtime.

You don't know the OP's financial situation. 1 income, Dublin 2006 mortgage, kids in college maybe!

Do you remember the post here about the teacher considering early retirement because she couldn't afford to send her kids to college. Would you tell her she was taking the piss bigtime if she was concerned that here wages couldn't cover it?

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Have you considered that perhaps it was thought that a gym in the Dail would be a good idea, that it might encourage TDs to exercise instead of propping up the Dail bar? But unfortunately uptake has not been particularly successful?

Yes I have considered that and yes the uptake for politicians has been unsuccessful. And I did miss the part where there were other staff who do use it, so I'll let that go, it's great if it is being used.

rainbowtrout wrote: »

if you know this case is unique why are you using it to demonstrate your point about teacher wages? If it's not the norm, then it's not a realistic comparison.

I wasn't comparing wages I was commenting on feelings of 'entitlement' to better things.

rainbowtrout wrote: »

The article is from a couple of years ago, but the figures won't have changed wildly.


https://www.thejournal.ie/readme/high-earner-ireland-755580-Jan2013/

Individuals earning 60K or more are in the top 10% of earners in the country. That category includes a lot of teachers.

That's in comparison to all workers wages in Ireland. I'd like to know where teachers sit with other professionals after 20 years (assuming of course teachers have worked up the hours to jump onto point 3 from the getgo) . Are they in the top 10% wages bracket of all professionals earners with their 60k 20+ years service?

spurious

Starting to become troll central here.
Any more and we'll be closing it.

spurious

spurious wrote: »

Starting to become troll central here.
Any more and we'll be closing it.

Best to close. The OP by a lot of metrics is showing up the the sense of entitlement held by some. The posts that were deleted weren't wrong, just never going to be tolerated in this forum. Either close or keep monitoring the thread like a Chinese apparatchik and keep deleting.

mycro2013

Is the original poster as per the charter not trolling themselves.

Darc19

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Did you even read the full article you linked to instead of the clickbait headline? It says 160k over a four year period. So 40k a year. Not exactly raking it working in Dublin. Granted the gym instructor doesn't seem to be taxed by the work if only one person uses the gym per day but that's not their fault. Perhaps the government would be better tasked by asking if the Dail needs a gym instructor.

And it seems you didn't read the article either.



Or fell for the classic indo click bait article with the actual information buried in a few words deep in the article.

At least unlike others you realized its 160k over 4 years. And whilst opening hours are 27/week, you like most teachers will know that opening hours/teaching hours are not the same as working hours.

Great sub headline - "used by one politician" perfect to rile the anti politician subsector in society.
Then further down when most of the typical indo readers have read what they want to read, it throws in "used by 400 staff of oirechtas" each month.

So the "one politician" becomes 400 staff users.

Sort of the same click bait as dail bar bull. The number one seller is coffee followed by tea and it's open to everyone who visits. But indo will only mention such items at the very end after their wild headline along the lines of 100,000 pints in dail bar (served over a five year period)

mystic86

60K after 12 years (including allowances), ~17 weeks paid annual leave which is over 3 times the norm, and less working hours per week than the norm for a full time worker. Pre-2011 so pension based on final salary, which is ~70k. A little bit of perspective badly needed by the OP.

BarryD2

Bruno Mealy Ginkgo wrote: »

It's a big demotivation I think OP. It was definitely a big factor in why I quit last year. The salary scale in teaching starts well but it is far too long and the increments too small.

Well my suggestion to all who struggle with this is to try being self employed for a while, with little or no certainty about your next weeks income, never mind next year. Might put a different gloss on it for you..

rainbowtrout

evolving_doors wrote: »

You don't know the OP's financial situation. 1 income, Dublin 2006 mortgage, kids in college maybe!

Again, lots of people are in that situation, some who earn far more than the OP and some who earn a lot less. Most earn a lot less.


'I have a mortgage' is not a justifiable reason for a national pay rise. Salaries are based on what the market will pay (private sector mainly) and the perceived value of a job/qualifications, not the potential outgoings of individuals.

evolving_doors wrote: »

Do you remember the post here about the teacher considering early retirement because she couldn't afford to send her kids to college. Would you tell her she was taking the piss bigtime if she was concerned that here wages couldn't cover it?

No I wouldn't tell her she was taking the piss. Now if she was close to retirement it would be fair to assume that she was on the upper end of the payscale rather than the lower end. There's a bigger problem in the country if a person in the top 10% of earners in the country can't afford college.

evolving_doors wrote: »

That's in comparison to all workers wages in Ireland. I'd like to know where teachers sit with other professionals after 20 years (assuming of course teachers have worked up the hours to jump onto point 3 from the getgo) . Are they in the top 10% wages bracket of all professionals earners with their 60k 20+ years service?

A comparison with all other workers is a fair comparison. It puts quite a lot of teachers in the top tier of earners in society, regardless of what other professions are earning.

Teachers are not comparable with other professionals after 20 years. We are public sector workers. There is a set payscale. There are few teachers working in the private sector in comparison. Anecdotally they would not have comparable conditions (not paid in summer, no access to public sector pension etc, in some places paid a flat rate with no pay scale).

What professions do you want to compare them to? Are you going to compare them to people who entered that profession and stayed in the same job for 20 years (for a fair comparison) or are you going to compare them to senior accountants, senior engineers, consultants in hospitals? Because while there aren't a huge amount of opportunities for promotion in teaching, they do exist. So you would need to compare like for like if you want to go down that road.

r93kaey5p2izun

BarryD2 wrote: »

Well my suggestion to all who struggle with this is to try being self employed for a while, with little or no certainty about next weeks income, never mind next year. Might put a different gloss on it for you..

I was self employed before teaching and am self employed again now after a stint back in the private sector to reestablish myself. In my opinion teaching in the Dublin area when you have to support yourself is a lifestyle choice I can't afford. If teachers generally are willing to continue for the wages they're on then it will never change but it's just not an option for me.

BarryD2

Bruno Mealy Ginkgo wrote: »

I was self employed before teaching and am self employed again now after a stint back in the private sector to reestablish myself. In my opinion teaching in the Dublin area when you have to support yourself is a lifestyle choice I can't afford. If teachers generally are willing to continue for the wages they're on then it will never change but it's just not an option for me.

Well there is a certain attraction in a guaranteed PS wage and guaranteed PS pension.

r93kaey5p2izun

BarryD2 wrote: »

Well there is a certain attraction in a guaranteed PS wage and guaranteed PS pension.

Sure. To follow your own advice, why not give it a try and see whether it still holds the same appeal? I've experienced both and I know which one I choose.

evolving_doors

BarryD2 wrote: »

Well there is a certain attraction in a guaranteed PS wage ....

Sure and moths are attracted to a flame.
How long do you think it's taken myself and most of my colleagues to 'guarantee' their wages.

BarryD2 wrote: »

and guaranteed PS pension.

and what's so great about that. You're only getting about 15% back on top of 85% that you paid in... and that's assuming you start off on full time job out of college (you know, the one with the 'guaranteed' wage that people are on about).

evolving_doors

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Again, lots of people are in that situation, some who earn far more than the OP and some who earn a lot less. Most earn a lot less.

True, but we're talking about professionals. Well, that's if you consider teaching a profession anyway! It's as close as you can get to a comparrison to compare professionals. It's nuts to be comparing a teacher's wage to a TV repair man.

rainbowtrout wrote: »

'I have a mortgage' is not a justifiable reason for a national pay rise.

Yes it is, it's called the cost of living index.

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Salaries are based on what the market will pay (private sector mainly) and the perceived value of a job/qualifications, not the potential outgoings of individuals.

And what should 'the market' pay for education? Is 60k too much. I say it isn't given the time served and comparison with other professionals.

rainbowtrout wrote: »

No I wouldn't tell her she was taking the piss. Now if she was close to retirement it would be fair to assume that she was on the upper end of the payscale rather than the lower end.

Yes it would be perfectly reasonable to assume that it was a teacher on the upper end.
And it would be perfectly reasonable for that person to ask advice about making provisions when they know their wage wont cover the cost of living (and sustaining a family).
And it would be courtesy not to berate them and tell them that they were 'entitled' for looking for alternative means.

rainbowtrout wrote: »

There's a bigger problem in the country if a person in the top 10% of earners in the country can't afford college.

..and there's an even bigger problem of crocodiles tearing people to pieces in North Queensland.

But anyway, being in your top 10% pushes them outside the qualification threshold for a grant. But if we could compare this profession to other professions I'd like to see how difficult other professionals on better money find it difficult. Are teachers in the top 10% of earners amongst all other professionals?

rainbowtrout wrote: »

A comparison with all other workers is a fair comparison. It puts quite a lot of teachers in the top tier of earners in society, regardless of what other professions are earning.

Well yes and the average zebra is grey if we average out all the colours.

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Teachers are not comparable with other professionals after 20 years. We are public sector workers. There is a set payscale. There are few teachers working in the private sector in comparison. Anecdotally they would not have comparable conditions (not paid in summer, no access to public sector pension etc, in some places paid a flat rate with no pay scale).

True, and i think they should be paid more... or maybe you would argue it would make everything balance out if teachers in the public sector got paid less.

rainbowtrout wrote: »

What professions do you want to compare them to? Are you going to compare them to people who entered that profession and stayed in the same job for 20 years (for a fair comparison) or are you going to compare them to senior accountants, senior engineers, consultants in hospitals? Because while there aren't a huge amount of opportunities for promotion in teaching, they do exist. So you would need to compare like for like if you want to go down that road.

Yes, lets compare then to senior accountants, senior engineers and consultants, they all bring a body of knowledge and experience with them as time goes on. The same as teachers do.

or do we teach and interact the exact same way as we did when we came out of college?

Blaizes

rainbowtrout wrote: »

evolving_doors wrote: »

You're missing the point. I know this case is unique, I know that relatively few gym instructors have 1 client and get paid 40k:rolleyes:

My point was that it was deemed to be necessary because certain people who oversee us feel are entitled to have a an empty gym and gym instructor.

Meanwhile we are made to feel 'self entitled' for thinking we should be getting paid more. And this line keeps on getting spun and spun that we should be happy with our lot, and look at where that has gotten post 2011 teachers, continuously told that they have it cushy too.

I'm just a bit disappointed to see other teachers telling a colleague that they shouldn't be rising above their station.

The OP was essentially asking for tips on how to 'survive' on 60k a year for three years without a pay rise. It has nothing to do with them not rising above their station. OP is taking the piss bigtime.

Have you considered that perhaps it was thought that a gym in the Dail would be a good idea, that it might encourage TDs to exercise instead of propping up the Dail bar? But unfortunately uptake has not been particularly successful?

If you know this case is unique why are you using it to demonstrate your point about teacher wages? If it's not the norm, then it's not a realistic comparison.


The article is from a couple of years ago, but the figures won't have changed wildly.


https://www.thejournal.ie/readme/high-earner-ireland-755580-Jan2013/

Individuals earning 60K or more are in the top 10% of earners in the country. That category includes a lot of teachers.

Google Brightwater salary survey for 2019 and the top earners are on way more than 60k. 60k is respectable but no way the top, looking at those salaries quoted there, the top end is higher. This doesn’t surprise me I know a few people in those categories earning six figure sums.

OP,

If you're interested in a serious discussion start a thread in work problems. You'll get the full gambit of responses, whereas robust replies here will not be tolerated and considered trolling.

What I can say here is that teaching is an incredibly difficult job in 2019, especially so for a conscientious teacher. More so than many work places (from what I can tell) it can be a toxic work environment. Having a strong, competent principal is important. Working in a Deis school (rather than a special unit) should attract a higher salary. Some posts above calculate DIP allowance as part of Gross salary, which is incorrect. That's an archaic allowance that doesn't apply to teachers for many years.

However, re pay scale etc. That requires a robust conversation.

evolving_doors

[Deleted User] wrote: »

OP,

If you're interested in a serious discussion start a thread in work problems. You'll get the full gambit of responses, whereas robust replies here will not be tolerated and considered trolling.

Jeez who died and made you king :pac:

Ya do that op... as long as you don't mention you're a teacher.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

What I can say here is that teaching is an incredibly difficult job in 2019, especially so for a conscientious teacher. More so than many work places (from what I can tell) it can be a toxic work environment. Having a strong, competent principal is important.

Thats not what the OP is concerned about.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Working in a Deis school (rather than a special unit) should attract a higher salary. Some posts above calculate DIP allowance as part of Gross salary, which is incorrect. That's an archaic allowance that doesn't apply to teachers for many years.

The op is pre 2011 so dip allowance applies.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

However, re pay scale etc. That requires a robust conversation.

The OP can't change the payscale no matter how much robust conversation is had. The op is looking for suggestions as to what approach or viewpoint others take when the increment stops and their capped.

evolving_doors

evolving_doors wrote: »

The op is pre 2011 so dip allowance applies.

Who qualifies for this rate? It's not for those that simply do the H Dip. As I said, it's archaic.

As for the other points :rolleyes:

rainbowtrout

Deleted User wrote: »

OP,

If you're interested in a serious discussion start a thread in work problems. You'll get the full gambit of responses, whereas robust replies here will not be tolerated and considered trolling.

What I can say here is that teaching is an incredibly difficult job in 2019, especially so for a conscientious teacher. More so than many work places (from what I can tell) it can be a toxic work environment. Having a strong, competent principal is important. Working in a Deis school (rather than a special unit) should attract a higher salary. Some posts above calculate DIP allowance as part of Gross salary, which is incorrect. That's an archaic allowance that doesn't apply to teachers for many years.

However, re pay scale etc. That requires a robust conversation.

It's not incorrect. Anyone who is on the Pre 2011 payscale is entitled to the dip allowance if they have the dip. Which is still the vast majority of teachers. And the OP says they are close to Point 14 which means they have been working in teaching for at least 12 years. So at the earliest started in 2007, which means they get the dip allowance and degree allowance. Any teacher that started pre 2011 counts both of those as core pay. You get them automatically once you have the degree and dip.

There are few teachers teaching without a dip as it was not a requirement for VEC schools until 2013. But the reality is that most teachers had it anyway.

gaiscioch

gaiscioch wrote: »

Looking at the Pre-2011 salary scale here I'm very close to landing on one of those salary points that don't change for years - i.e. no increment at all for 3 years, then an increment, then none for 4 more years, then an increment, then none for 4 further years. Then, you get one final increment where you will spend the rest of your teaching years without a salary increase. As retirement is currently 68, and will probably be at least 70 by the time I get there, that's a great number of years at the same final salary.

What was the initial logic behind structuring pay points like that? It sounds very depressing to have no salary rise at all for years, which when inflation is taken into account sounds like your salary will in fact be decreasing in those years of ostensible 'stagnation'. Does reaching this point of staring at salary stagnation become a bit of a mid-life crisis for some teachers? Career change? Time to take early retirement? I'm certainly feeling older just thinking about being (almost!) at a place which once looked so far away. I googled for survival guides and blogs but to no avail. Is there any financial solace at all in these years, or advice to triumph over this financial disincentive to continue?

If any non teacher started such a mis-leading thread, we would be banned.

The salaries are not stagnant.

There was two increases this year and will be two next year to your net pay with Levy threshold increase and salary increases.