Soldiers, nurses, teachers: UK needs to stop feeding these parasites

[Garbarsardar]

Ian Duncan Smith, UK's Secretary of State for Work and Pensions is currently campaigning against the plague of "shirkers and scroungers" that is haunting the UK benefits system.

Analysis of his proposed cuts reveals three categories of parasites targeted by the bill: Soldiers, nurses, teachers who are claiming among others benefits, Child Benefit. Obviously this is the correct initiative since these lecherous creatures should be discouraged from having children who will undoubtedly perpetuate their leech-craft.

[hellheaven1987]

Technically every job should only have same type of benefit.

[Jom]

Technically every job should only have same type of benefit.

Technically according to what set of rules? Nurses and teachers often work longer hours than private sector jobs and therefore need help covering childcare costs, which can be enormous.

[hellheaven1987]

Technically according to what set of rules? Nurses and teachers often work longer hours than private sector jobs and therefore need help covering childcare costs, which can be enormous.

And yet that is the job they choose. Government can, however, set up rules to force those organizations which hire them to pay for their additional benefits, but ultimately government should never use public funds to pay those up.

[Jom]

And yet that is the job they choose. Government can, however, set up rules to force those organizations which hire them to pay for their additional benefits, but ultimately government should never use public funds to pay those up.

It's the job they choose which is in the public sector and vital to society. They're also extremely difficult jobs with relatively low status, but due to how important they are, people need to be encouraged into them and helped along the way. Nurses and teachers get training bursaries; are you going to argue that "technically" everyone, whether they're an estate agent, or a footballer should also get the equivalent of that money tacked onto their salary?

[AqD]

It's the job they choose which is in the public sector and vital to society. They're also extremely difficult jobs with relatively low status, but due to how important they are, people need to be encouraged into them and helped along the way. Nurses and teachers get training bursaries; are you going to argue that "technically" everyone, whether they're an estate agent, or a footballer should also get the equivalent of that money tacked onto their salary?

Are they still considered crap job these days, since many in private sector are not doing well anymore?

[s.rwitt]

It's the job they choose which is in the public sector and vital to society. They're also extremely difficult jobs with relatively low status, but due to how important they are, people need to be encouraged into them and helped along the way. Nurses and teachers get training bursaries; are you going to argue that "technically" everyone, whether they're an estate agent, or a footballer should also get the equivalent of that money tacked onto their salary?

Jom, you're not getting it. If someone CHOSE a job then anything can be taken away from them or done to them and it's technically logical.

[paradamed]

And yet that is the job they choose. Government can, however, set up rules to force those organizations which hire them to pay for their additional benefits, but ultimately government should never use public funds to pay those up.

Yes, it is the job they choose but if the government do not offer benefits good professionals will stay away from a vital area to a society. If the profession sucks only bad professionals will take those jobs for a lack of choice.

[Blaze86420]

And yet that is the job they choose. Government can, however, set up rules to force those organizations which hire them to pay for their additional benefits, but ultimately government should never use public funds to pay those up.

Jesus, where do you pick up logic like this?

Teachers and nurses aren't people society can do without, we need them. If you're going to make it hell for a person to teach or look after the sick then guess what, we have a society of morons and ill people, something we definitely need right?

Teachers don't get paid much, something like 50k for teaching in a high-school here. Electricians make nearly double that, yet it's much more expensive to get a degree in education. Takes forever too. Not necessarily saying we should be paying them more, but hell, you don't want to make their jobs any worse. We already have a shortage; I can't believe combined classrooms actually exist.

[Denny Crane!]

Teachers do work long hours; once the school pupils go home, they have a hell of a lot of marking to do among other things. Likewise, nurses often work long hours as well. And there are also lots of private sector jobs that stick to 37.5 hours per week, too.

Teachers do work long hours but so do plenty of the private workers. Nurses who do more do so by choice and get paid very well for doing so, in contrast there are many who do not.

I don't think that in many areas they do. We frequently hear about shortages of teachers in certain STEM areas, for example, and that we need to be attracting high quality STEM graduates into this area; however, the salaries offered to teachers in this area are much less than what the graduates we need to attract can earn in industry. Teaching has a reputation of being a fall back option for those who weren't good enough for industry, and graduates that do want to become teachers are seen as having to make large financial sacrifices. It shouldn't be like this.

That is a very simplistic look at it and I don't buy it for a second. Every study I've ever seen that looks into teaching (and nursing I might add that is better paid than it ever was previously but with lower morale) doesn't find pay as the big problem.

Its an American study but:

He cites the misinformation on the shortage of math and science teachers. In a given year, the United States produces four times as many new math and science teachers as leave the classroom due to retirements, Ingersoll said.

So, while he applauds President Obama’s plan to add 100,000 new science and math teachers over a decade, Ingersoll said, “We lose 25,000 math and science teachers each year.” Of that number, he said only 7,000 are due to retirement. He does not believe that incentives — performance pay or bonuses — are enough of a carrot to reverse the trend.

As two recent studies suggest, paying teachers bonuses doesn’t appear to lead to higher student achievement. Yes, teachers would love a $1,500 performance bonus for meeting targets, but a new RAND study out of New York and a National Center on Performance Incentives at Vanderbilt University last year out of Nashville both found that many teachers are already pedaling as fast as they can under new accountability systems and the bonuses appear to have no impact on student achievement.

“We tested the most basic and foundational question related to performance incentives — does bonus pay alone improve student outcomes? — and we found that it does not,” said Matthew Springer, executive director of the National Center on Performance Incentives.

The RAND study was commissioned by New York City, which wanted to find out if $56 million in performance bonuses to school staffs over the last three years improved student performance. The finding: No improvement.

What teachers want most, Ingersoll said, is to be regarded as professionals and valued for their judgment, their intellect and their ability to think on their feet and problem-solve.

On scales of motivation, teachers and nurses are the highest for wanting to do good with their lives rather than earn a lot of money.

http://blogs.ajc.com/get-schooled-bl...ers-each-year/

And what is this pay that isn't enough? How much is enough? 100k per teacher? 200k?

At £23,010, the average starting salary in teaching is high compared to the average graduate starting salary. Experienced teachers can earn up to £64,000 in London and £56,000 outside London, while head teachers can reach a salary of between £42,379 and £112,000.

http://www.education.gov.uk/get-into...ng/salary.aspx

Average classroom teachers currently receive £34,700 a year.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education...erformers.html

That is significantly higher than the national average so I stand corrected on my previous assertion that they receive the average.

I disagree. Besides which, wasn't the deficit supposed to be fixed by now?

Small matter of a world economy in freefall to consider.

Many, if not most, junior clerical staff are on modest wages, some just above minimum wage. There are people lobbying for them to be offered what is called the living wage. . The 1% pay offer, follwing 2 years of pay freezes will be entirely swallowed up, and then some by increases in pension contributions this year and the next. Coupled with losses in working benefits ( which affect all in their income bracket) I am wondering how wretched my support staff will become over the next two years.

As for the squaddies due for compulsory redundancy this coming year, God help them.

The one area of cuts that will never lose my support is the military. The rest of what you say, well life is god awful for many people around the UK but the one group I am not feelings sorry for when you discuss this is doctors, nurses, teachers...ordinary government workers aren't living the dream on half or less than these other peoples wages.

There is a problem with multinationals, turning over massive amounts of money in the UK over many years and yet not paying a single penny in Corporation Tax. Sums involved? 10s of billions of £. The is a case not to raise taxes at all, just get some buggers to pay up like everyone else.

I'd agree. Naming and shaming is free and actually seems to work.

Jesus, where do you pick up logic like this?

Teachers and nurses aren't people society can do without, we need them. If you're going to make it hell for a person to teach or look after the sick then guess what, we have a society of morons and ill people, something we definitely need right?

Teachers don't get paid much, something like 50k for teaching in a high-school here. Electricians make nearly double that, yet it's much more expensive to get a degree in education. Takes forever too. Not necessarily saying we should be paying them more, but hell, you don't want to make their jobs any worse. We already have a shortage; I can't believe combined classrooms actually exist.

Well this is to do with the UK and the hell of their work has nothing to do with the pay which is pretty good.

Oh FYI you say we can't do without teachers or nurses, we can't do without anyone. Good luck teaching and healing if there are no electrics, no plumbing and no one cleaning out the .

I fundamentally despise this attitude that certain groups in society should be placed on an untouchable pedestal. It might not be as skilled, it certainly is paid a third or a quarter or a tenth of what other people in that hospital are getting paid but the humble cleaner is making one very valuable contribution to society. We all do what we can and no one group is so much more valuable than another.

And no free haircuts for doctors.

[Denny Crane!]

Technically according to what set of rules? Nurses and teachers often work longer hours than private sector jobs and therefore need help covering childcare costs, which can be enormous.

That is a load of crap.

I know nurses who do overtime and get damn well paid for it but thats choice, I know others only doing 30 hours a week. Teachers are not poorly paid.

There are plenty of examples of people earning 12-25k a year with the same or more hours and a lot less benefits.

[removeduser_4536284751384]

That is a load of crap.

I know nurses who do overtime and get damn well paid for it but thats choice, I know others only doing 30 hours a week. Teachers are not poorly paid.

There are plenty of examples of people earning 12-25k a year with the same or more hours and a lot less benefits.

Most Nurses and Teachers will be in the same position for life though. Most private sector jobs have far more capacity for promotion.

You also have to remember not to think about fairness but about the quality of teachers and nurses you want. If you lower the pay, the quality will drop, simple as that.

[Denny Crane!]

Most Nurses and Teachers will be in the same position for life though. Most private sector jobs have far more capacity for promotion.

For some not for all and certainly not for the majority in fact certainly around the North East where I live that national average of £28000 a year is actually well out of the reach of the majority up here and nurses and teachers can comfortably expect that with all the added perks of public service on top, security, pensions etc.

So realistically what isn't mentioned in this thread is that a huge section of the public in the private sector are on minimum wage or slightly higher but lower than teachers and nurses and don't have a pension and struggle to afford one.

And there are less pay rises and waaay less chances of getting one.

You also have to remember not to think about fairness but about the quality of teachers and nurses you want. If you lower the pay, the quality will drop, simple as that.

Rather the exact opposite since these are vocational professions.

[Knight_Of_Ne]

Most Nurses and Teachers will be in the same position for life though. Most private sector jobs have far more capacity for promotion.

Although there isn't much room for promotion for teachers (save those who become headteachers and inspectors and etc..) they do have the benefit of being in a job that is pretty much secure whilst being pretty well payed. Something which I consider to be far more important than the possibility of promotion.

[Whukid]

Technically according to what set of rules? Nurses and teachers often work longer hours than private sector jobs and therefore need help covering childcare costs, which can be enormous.

Teachers work 180 days out of the year. Give me a break.

[MarcoPollo]

Teachers work 180 days out of the year. Give me a break.

I'm a teacher and I teach 210 students for 200 days of classes a year. But, I also have a master's degree in education and I do a pile of marking and lesson prepping every day and in the summer. The public forgets about the work we take home every day (summer included).

[Nikitn]

Teachers work 180 days out of the year. Give me a break.

Don't underestimate the amount of work they have to do after hours, or during vacations.

[Gaidin]

Don't underestimate the amount of work they have to do after hours, or during vacations.

He doesn't appreciate what it means to be in a position like a teacher or any (typically) salaried position for that matter. Hours don't matter. Days don't matter. If there's not much to do, good for you. But if there's stuff to do, you damn well do it. It doesn't matter if it's supposed to be summer vacation(assuming a contextual difference between vacation and a Vacation you arrange) or not. Screw overtime as well.

[Himster]

Woah, I was just about to emigrate to the UK for a teaching job. Fat chance now: I'm off to China there's no children problem there.

[humvee2800]

Not sure about in UK but in Canada nurses and fire men are payed quite well. Their child care should however be their own responsibility. Regarding teachers I can only sigh.