On Tuesday morning, ACT teachers will stop work from 8.30 to 11.30am and rally outside the legislative assembly to demand better pay and conditions. While this reflects fierce disagreement between teachers and the Government, the one thing everybody can agree on is that the disruption of normal classes is highly regrettable. Canberrans, especially parents of school-aged children, will no doubt be wanting to know how it has come to this.
The centrepiece of the teachers’ claim is pay parity with their NSW colleagues. Currently, classroom teachers at the top of the pay scale earn $6000 a year less than their counterparts in NSW while deputy principals earn $15,000 a year less. Relief teachers earn $35 a day less in Canberra than they do across the border. No matter what level a teacher is at in the ACT, they earn significantly less than they would in the equivalent position in NSW.
Poor teacher pay is undermining the quality of education provided to ACT children. Each year, fewer and fewer applicants are seeking to join the teaching profession in Canberra. Schools can’t find relief teachers when staff are absent. There is no counsellor provision at over 20 Canberra schools. Those counsellors that are in the system work across multiple sites and are stretched between a massive number of students. There is 1 counsellor for every 918 students, far in excess of the recommended ratio. As Glenn Fowler from the Australian Education Union (AEU) told ABC Radio recently: ”There’s been an effort to recruit them from all over the world, it has failed… There needs to be an attractive proposition for people to come into that and not go into private practice or other government agencies.”
The last time a pay agreement was negotiated, back in 2009, it was the height of the Global Financial Crisis. In the circumstances, teachers acted responsibly and settled for less than they would have liked. In return, there was an informal understanding that this restraint would be recognised in the next pay negotiation. Rather than honouring that understanding this time round, the Government offered annual pay increases that would not even have kept up with forecast inflation. In other words: a cut in real wages.
In the face of this intransigence, over 2000 Canberra teachers stopped work for four hours on September 1 to demand real investment in our public education system and the professionals that are its lifeblood. The Government reconsidered its position and on September 9 made a new offer which included pay parity with NSW for classroom teachers. However, under the offer, executive teachers and deputy principals would still lag thousands of dollars behind their NSW counterparts. Nothing serious has been presented to address the chronic shortage of counsellors in our system. Relief teacher pay would still be more than $20 a day less in Canberra than in Queanbeyan.
To fund pay parity with NSW for classroom teachers in 2011, the Government is now demanding teachers accept annual increases of just 2.5% in 2012 and 2013 . These would not keep up with growth in the cost of living and do not equate to increases enjoyed by other public sector workers.
Given that the September 9 offer, though unsatisfactory, was a move in the right direction, teachers cancelled planned rolling stoppages and sought, in good faith, to negotiate a deal with the employer. Additionally, teachers have tried to influence the Government with bans that have a less direct effect on students and their parents, like refusing to use personal cash or vehicles for work purposes. Unfortunately, the Government continues to refuse to commit to the serious investment our schools need and our students deserve.
As well as falling short in this fundamental respect, the Government is failing to win public support for its position. A majority of respondents in a Canberra Times online poll support the strike action. An even greater majority support the principle of pay parity. As P&C Council president, Jane Tullis, has said: “step up Mr Barr and let’s see you reward teachers for the high standard of service they are providing.”
Tom Greenwell is a Canberra teacher and a member of the Australian Education Union. The views expressed here are his own.
Loading ...
With all due respect to Mr Greenwell and all teachers (I’m married to one), can someone please explain to the AEU that the ACT is not NSW!!!! Do they have a concept of understanding the size of the jurisdictions invovled and the impact that this has on a Governments ability to pay. I support better pay and conditions for teachers whole heartedly but my question to the AEU is what happens when NSW teachers get a pay rise?? Do ACT teachers simply down tools again and stamp their feet about parity. I have lived with and seen how hard teachers work and do no dispute their right to conditions, my concern is the arguement of juridictional parity is a spiral that will never end.
MrMagoo said :
This is true. The cost of living in the ACT is higher.
I’d like to thank Mr Greenwell for such a clear description of the union’s demands. Usually we just get the ramblings of confused journalists…
Nonetheless, I have one question remaining; why do teachers only ever take half-arsed industrial measures? If parity is so important, why not have a proper strike to resolve the issue permanently instead of piddly little do-nothing strikes on a permanent biennial basis?
As a taxpayer and a parent, I say go hard or go back to work. Teachers are paid more than comparable professions already, which is probably the only reason so many have stayed in the profession under such horrid conditions and ridiculous expectations. So the issue of parity just forces the hands of the other states’ unions, leading to rolling strikes around the states depending on whose turn it happens to be to get paid the least. While I would be supportive of teachers and their unions (teachers are, after all, some of the most valuable contributors to both economic and social capital), this trite game-playing makes me weary, and I can’t be bothered anymore (which is why I’m among the growing number of teachers who’ve left the profession).
I think it’s time for teachers to grow up and stop behaving like petulant children. If you’re going to strike, strike properly. Get off the job and stay off the job until you have an agreement, but stop these silly little morning-time tantrums after which you just suck it up and go back to work anyway.
Trevar, I think they have to get Fair Work Australia’s prior permission to strike . . . and it is unlikely they would get permission to stay off work indefinitely.
I support the teachers’ actions – it is just beyond a joke that teachers are so underpaid in the ACT. They are also ‘expected’ to do a lot of tasks out of working hours (such as camps, concerts, overnight excursions) for no remuneration, under ‘goodwill’. Teachers often pay for stuff out of their own pockets so the kids don’t miss out, eg clarinet reeds, stationery, use of personal cars to transport students and/or equipment, even computer repairs. These are real examples of acts undertaken ‘for free’ by family members and staff at my children’s high school.
I suspect most Canberrans do not even realise that teachers get no formal recognition/remuneration for these things. Equiv positions in the public service are entitled to overtime, flex, etc, and private sector employees would be remunerated appropriately. If I were a teacher, I would be feeling very exploited and ‘second class’ compared with other ACT public servants which, by the way, Andrew Barr is constantly saying they should realise they are).
Jethro said :
According to the always affable Chairman Zed of the Canberra Liberals anyway.
MrMagoo said :
No Zed was wrong because he was ignoring the fact that overall Canberra is a more affordable place than Sydney (cost of living is higher, but so are wages). My point was that the affordability trend doesn’t apply to ACT teachers who are currently some of the lowest paid in the country, yet living in a region with some of the highest costs.
Well if you think the NSW teachers are so well paid, go and work there.
The fact that the Education department cant recruit staff is not a concern for teachers, but for management – It seems management have chosen not to pay staff more to recruit externally. I find it odd in industrial disputes when the main arguments from unions is about how paying their members more will help them. As if they can’t identify the range of strategies to improve teacher recruitment.
Can teachers please stop pretending this is about the future of education, and more about how much they get paid individually.
Plus Barr and Gallagher and always banging on about attracting the “best and brightest” to teaching, with accelerated progression through the payscale up to $100,000. The finer detail, to my understanding, is this scheme is capped and very limited. It’s the equivalent of blowing the salary cap on 1 star player and wondering why the team’s still not winning. It sends the message that rich rewards are available for a select few…
Which is why so many experienced teachers end up at the APS4 or APS5 level in the federal public service. It’s less stressful, far more flexible and much better paid!
Tuesday October 11.Would make more sense
Is being a teacher living hell? Yes – we all know that, we all went to school. Teachers are those strange creatures who despite spending 13 odd years in those prisons, decided to go back.
This does somewhat undercut any belief that they might be intelligent.
I remember teacher’s strikes with some fondness – instead of sitting in a classroom tuning out a teacher’s attempts to ‘help’ the dumbchums, I could sit under a tree and read the classics. If they’d have gone on strike more often, I’d probably be better educated and certainly be more cultured.
If teachers were serious about wanting students to learn more, they’d want independent exams (and no mucking around with it every year to prevent comparisons) so that it was clear how much students were learning. If they actually believed that students learnt anything at school, they’d want exams at start and finish of each term so that you could compare student learning during term time with what students learn during the holidays.
Since they don’t…
However, if they want parity with NSW, it *is* possible to move the ACT – make the corner country or maybe Albury the new ACT, and Canberra would revert to being part of NSW. Easy peasy.
whitelaughter said :
Yep. Much like being a parent, from what I can gather. The horror, the horror (there’s some culture for you from A Classic).
EvanJames said :
But with less authority, respect and more accountability.
krats said :
Why? The ACT teachers are on holidays then.
Most people (myself included) agree that teachers are underpaid but 2 strikes plus the planning day in less than 6 weeks makes many an unhappy parent.
Fuzzy said :
Which is the point. More people whinge, the more likely the government is to act on it.
Mr Magoo said: “I support better pay and conditions for teachers whole heartedly but my question to the AEU is what happens when NSW teachers get a pay rise??”
Thanks for your support – it’s greatly appreciated. I think there is an understanding that we can only talk about pay parity with other jurisdictions at a particular moment – we don’t know what’s going to happen elsewhere over the life of the agreement. However, teachers want to make demands that are reasonable and that the community can see are reasonable. Comparisons with other jurisdictions, particularly NSW which directly competes with the ACT for teaching staff, help us do that. Moreover, they help everyone understand why the ACT is failing to attract the education professionals it needs (eg. new teachers, relief teachers, school counsellors) to give students the best possible start in life.
trevar said: “I have one question remaining; why do teachers only ever take half-arsed industrial measures? If parity is so important, why not have a proper strike to resolve the issue permanently instead of piddly little do-nothing strikes on a permanent biennial basis?”
I believe my colleagues and I are very determined to get a fair outcome. However, we find taking strike action highly regrettable, not least because it does cause disruption to parents and, particularly, to students. As I see it, we’re trying to take a balanced approach to minimise the disruption and maximise the result.
Fuzzy said: “Most people (myself included) agree that teachers are underpaid but 2 strikes plus the planning day in less than 6 weeks makes many an unhappy parent.”
Fuzzy, I understand your annoyance. We have made every effort to avoid this. As an act of good faith, we deferred rolling stoppages which had been planned in order to try and negotiate a deal with the Government. As I wrote above, we’ve implemented more minor bans to try and influence the Government. Despite this, they’re just not listening and thus we feel this is the only tool we have.
Rollersk8r, miz & Jethro – thanks for your support!
Greenwell and other AEU cronies should stop insulting our intelligence by pretending that this strike is really about better educational outcomes for children. The AEU has spent years disadvantaging school children by fighting against transparency measures (eg threatening to boycot NAPLAN) and resisting performance pay (leading teacher positions and differentiated pay for higher-performing teachers).
If teachers and their union are really motivated by altruistic concerns for student outcomes, rather than naked self-interest and money grabbing, why go on strike at all? Why not settle for 3.5% or whatever the current deal is? If the final sticking points are exec pay, relief teacher pay, and pay for counsellors, surely this could have been resolved by further negotiations or by those particular levels of teacher going on strike, rather than having a general strike of all unionised teachers. As has been noted in previous comments, this is the second day this term which has been disrupted because of of striking teachers and comes on top of a planning day. Three days gone out of a fifty day term.
I’d also be interested in knowing whether any empirical data exist (for example exit surveys) which show that increasing salaries would aid in retaining teachers and attracting new ones. I suspect that this is just a glib assumption being used by the AEU because it suits its agenda. Based upon experiences of friends, my wife, and other Rioters, what drives most people out of the profession isn’t lack of a good salary, but the lack of any real will on the part of school principals to discipline students and the frustration of working your arse off and getting paid no more than a teacher of equivalent experience who does the bare minimum and couldn’t care less about students. In fact, I’m pretty certain that most teachers would take a pay cut if their job satisfaction could be ratcheted up a notch or two, and addressing issues like these would be a good first step.
Regarding pay parity with NSW, NSW teachers work more school days each year than ACT school teachers. They also, generally, have inferior teaching facilities, larger class sizes, and can be required to move long distances for work. In any case, why should ACT teachers automatically be paid the same as NSW teachers? It’s like arguing that a public servant working for Defence should automatically be paid the same as one working for DEEWR or Environment, and reflects a way of thinking that the rest of the world abandoned in the 1980s. (Of course, the AEU’s hidden agenda is to have every teacher in the nation on the same payscale, so that it can gain maximum leverage by bargaining nationally, but that’s another story…) ACT teachers who want the same wages as their NSW colleagues can move to NSW and get higher NSW pay and inferior NSW working conditions, any time they want.
Morgan said :
Unfortunately inability to recruit is a concern for teachers – it means that some ACT schools, particularly those out of the inner regions, are very hard to staff which adds to the burden of teachers when they can’t staff classes, individual classes have multiple teachers in the same year and relief staff are impossible to get some days which leaves classes collapsed and staff in the school working over hours and stressed just to get through the day. As a teacher it is NOT about how much I get paid individually but the ability of my school to function effectively on a day to day basis.
Well, my child is going tomorrow and will have to be part of the ‘minimal supervision’ after planning days and 2 strikes I don’t have leave left to take the morning off.
gumby34 said :
You mean “extremely” minimal supervision. I called last time to ask what that actually meant. And was told there would be 2 teachers in total at a school with over 400 kids enrolled. They had no idea how many would turn up. I took my 6yo to the office instead, which I will be doing again this morning.
2604 said: “If teachers and their union are really motivated by altruistic concerns for student outcomes, rather than naked self-interest and money grabbing, why go on strike at all? Why not settle for 3.5% or whatever the current deal is?”
As I explained in the article, the Government has offered 2.5% annual increases (not 3.5%). These increases would be below forecast inflation and below what other public sector workers have been awarded. I make no apology for fighting for a fair day’s pay for the hard work I do. However, it is also the case that underpaying teachers is harming the quality of education delivered to students.
c0mm3nt3r makes the very good point that our job is made that much harder by the failure of the employer to recruit people to the profession:
“…inability to recruit is a concern for teachers – it means that some ACT schools, particularly those out of the inner regions, are very hard to staff which adds to the burden of teachers when they can’t staff classes, individual classes have multiple teachers in the same year and relief staff are impossible to get some days which leaves classes collapsed and staff in the school working over hours and stressed just to get through the day.”
2604 said: “If the final sticking points are exec pay, relief teacher pay, and pay for counsellors, surely this could have been resolved by further negotiations or by those particular levels of teacher going on strike, rather than having a general strike of all unionised teachers.”
As noted above, the sticking points relate to every person covered by the agreement (only 2.5% annual increases that would not keep up with inflation). Moreover, the notion that teachers should accept the agreement and defer unsatisfactory matters to further negotiation is either very naive or disingenuous. We would then be in a position of having given up any bargaining power we have and be begging for the Government to be nice and do what they had refused to when we did have some bargaining power.
2604 said: “I’d also be interested in knowing whether any empirical data exist (for example exit surveys) which show that increasing salaries would aid in retaining teachers and attracting new ones. I suspect that this is just a glib assumption being used by the AEU because it suits its agenda.”
My argument here is not that pay is the only factor that affects the appeal of the profession, just that it is a significant one. The assumption that the level of pay affects the attractiveness of a job is a wholly uncontroversial one shared by all seriously involved in the debate. Only actually existing data – rather than idle speculation – which conflicted with this assumption would warrant questioning it.
TomGreenwell said :
That is 2.5% per year in 2012 and 2013 on top of the increase in 2011, which is well above 2.5%. Stop being so dishonest, and give the full picture.
TomGreenwell said :
Again, where is the proof of this?
TomGreenwell said :
In other words, you don’t need any existing data to back up your own opinion, but anyone who wants to challenge your opinion needs to bring existing data? What a cop out.
Enjoy your morning off.
Teachers work extremely hard and deserve a raise. In six years of observing them work at a primary school, I have only met one who was doing the minimum necessary and no more. This is all the ‘data’ one really needs to make an assessment of the validity of their claims. We expect a lot from teachers, and overwhelmingly, they deliver. It’s a question of simple justice that their pay should recognise the effort that they put in.
I am not a teacher, by the way.
poetix said :
+1
Why don’t you tell us what teachers actually earn, rather than complaining that it’s not as much as NSW? I couldn’t care less about parity, but I do care that workers are paid what they are worth.
Tell us what teachers in the ACT actually earn and let us decide if we want to support your demands based on that.
Mysteryman said :
One of the main arguments being made is that, without at least a movement towards pay parity, that decent teachers will leave the ACT and teach elsewhere (where there is better pay and conditions).
You may not care about parity, but many others do.
poetix said :
Really ? You are talking about a Primary school teacher who works 40 weeks a year goes home at 330, still gets sick and maternity leave during the term and teaches our kids some basic maths and english.
Valuable work but only a part time job really….
Mysteryman said :
Or, you could just google it yourself…public service pay rates are no secret.
http://www.det.act.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0014/102371/Payrates_2009-2011.pdf
Jim Jones said :
It looks like we still have quite a lot of teachers. There hasn’t been a mass exodus and I very much doubt there will be.
So.. I’m still waiting for Greenwell to tell us what they earn.
Mysteryman said :
And do you think the standard of teachers would go up or down based on salary levels?
thatsnotme said :
Thanks for the link.
Those seem like pretty decent pay levels. Especially when you consider the amount of time off each year.