If they weren't teaching then I would suggest they weren't working - maybe you class laying in the garden drinking pina coladas in the early Summer sun as working - I don't.

The kids could easily have sat their exams in 2020 - the teachers and their unions didn't seem to keen to facilitate that - I wonder why?

Kids were getting a fraction of their normal education - so as we had the same number of teacher delivering significantly less teaching what were the majority of the teachers doing?

Getting paid and working are two very different concepts

Who was running the on line lessons, both in terms of prep and the actual zoom lessons etc ??

I fully accept that not all kids could access them but, once again, you find it easier to slur the teaching profession (ala The Daily Mail) than give any support to the teaching profession.
Also, you are aware that vulnerable children and those of key workers did attend school.
Again, who was teaching/supporting them.

Your whole narrative is so stereotypically right wing, it beggars belief.

Mind you, we've gone from clapping the nurses etc, to kicking them (again) so, it really is no surprise.

Certainly the few teachers that I know HAVE been WORKING but, dont let that spoil your opinion.

It's the voice of someone who has never had to work in a criminally underfunded public sector but absolutely believes the lies they read in the hard-right press.

As with people in all sectors you will have lazy and harder-working people, some who short-cut and some who are utterly dedicated and diligent. I've seen plenty of all types working for me in the private sector. For some reason ZZB can't get past some weird belief that people in the public sector are totally different to all other human beings - indeed as with much right wing media venom, dehumanising people is core to their toxic rhetoric.

Even the unions had to admit teaching during the first lockdown was 'disappointing' both in volume and quality. It had very little to do with access for kids as the lessons weren't there to access. Compare the quality of lesson available at private schools during lockdown 1 to the public schools!! There were a lot of kids who simply weren't educated nothing to do with access. Before lockdown 1 teaching unions actively discouraged on line learning - no wonder they were caught with their pants down when a change of output methodology was needed

I am not disputing schools were open but it was miniscule the numbers that actually attended, lessons were learned and by everyone's admission things were very different during the last lockdown.

We must differ on our views on the teaching profession and especially their union representation. No doubt you will also be suggesting they get a huge increase in payment?

Traffic through the NHS was down 80% through 2020 - that would suggest a lot of nurses had a pretty easy time during the pandemic - why should they get a huge increase for doing less work? By all means reward those at the sharp end with a substantial one of bonus c£10k but to increase the pay to them all doesn't pass scrutiny.

The difference is that in the private sector those that don't pull their weight usually get found and moved on - seldom a job for life - not many non-jobs in the private sector - I bet virtually every public body including councils will have them.. Even ACAS will admit waste through absenteeism is way higher in the public sector - perhaps if these organisations were leaner their funding would stretch further?

I am not disputing there are fantastic people working in the public sector - we can all recall a teacher/lecturer who has had a profound impact on their personal development but why do we think the public sector should be treated differently in terms of remuneration than the private sector that in reality funds it?

You sir are cluess with regards to this, the whole lockdown has thrown a curveball to just about every sector, both public and private - people having to adapt differently- teachers

- Having planned teaching structures completely blown apart
-Re-planning for new structures but this changing sometimes daily
-Teaching pupils in school
-Having to try to teach the same lesson as the above online, or even over the phone where pupils don’t have the online facility
- Counselling pupils who are struggling with adapting/getting behind etc
-Currently planning for pupils to be in school - then due to one failing a test the whole class/ year having to isolate, so therefore having to completely arrange that learning back to an online facility within an hour

How many businesses have worked their nuts off over the last 12 months or so, but not achieved the same results as previous years - it’s the same principle with teaching, indeed probably putting more effort in than previously just to keep their heads above water

As I say your clueless, not just on this subject but your recent comments appear to have no concept of current reality

I agree, it shouldn't. So the repeated discrepancies in public vs private pay rises (public being repeatedly lower for the avoidance of doubt) since 2010 should be addressed rather than perpetuated.

Teachers are no different to most commercial environments - change was needed and quick.

Your opinion is valid but the schools had plenty of time to prepare there are plenty of on-line platforms to copy - most professional study is now done on line.

If all these kids are working to the same curriculum then surely you only need one version of the lesson that could have been put out on a dedicated BBC channel and the teachers could have then concentrated on supporting the children - not rocket science is it? How is that private schools were up and running almost instantly but state schools couldn't get their act together?

On line teaching is not a new concept - it really isn't - flipping from classroom to on line should be a very simply process.

Loads of businesses have adapted very quickly to a change in circumstances - my wife works a major PLC they have been working from home for over a year that's 60,000 people - it can be done it is just having the desire and skill set to achieve it. How many Zoom meetings have you done - I have done hundreds you have simply just got to make it happen.

These kids are the future - sadly they have been let down by a group of adults who simply didn't react positively enough

I would suggest the majority of workers in the private sector didn't see much of an increase from 2010 - minimum wage apart which is the same in the public sector - as you well know.

The statistics of wage increases prove otherwise.

The fact that you're even asking this question is embarrassing.

The differences shouldn't need explaining. Including but not limited to the levels of funding, the profile of students, the number of students per class and per teacher, the availability of appropriate kit at home, the availability and practicality of parental support.

Having gone through the private and seen the state sector these are two utterly separate worlds. It's mind blowing that you don't know that.

Once again you want to push your agenda - the reason is simple - a desire to ensure kids get educated. In the public schools if they don't perform they lose pupils - sadly there were no real desire in the state sector. No teacher in the state sector is going to either lose pay or jobs regardless of whether kids get educated guarantee if they were things would have been different.

The technology used in both cases was the same so the glacial pace of the state sector was a disgrace. Using Zoom/Teams was free and they could have used the BBC if they had actually got their act together. The unions were more interested in keeping schools closed than educating the kids.

It suits your agenda all things public all good - all things private bad.

Now is your chance to show us - no doubt Politico will have a playbook you can use?

Are you saying the minimum wage only applies to private sector or that the vast majority of public sector staff aren't impacted because their wages are well above the minimum.

20% of all workers are employed in retail - how many of them do you think are earning much above the minimum wage? Of the 5.3m workers in the public sector how many of them are on minimum wage?

Quote ="The Ghost of '99"I agree, it shouldn't. So the repeated discrepancies in public vs private pay rises (public being repeatedly lower for the avoidance of doubt) since 2010 should be addressed rather than perpetuated.'" https://moneyweek-com.cdn.ampproject.or ... -gets-more Hope this helps

Quote ="The Ghost of '99"I agree, it shouldn't. So the repeated discrepancies in public vs private pay rises (public being repeatedly lower for the avoidance of doubt) since 2010 should be addressed rather than perpetuated.'" https://moneyweek-com.cdn.ampproject.or ... -gets-more Hope this helps

Quote ="wotsupcas"https://moneyweek-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/moneyweek.com/economy/uk-economy/602141/private-vs-public-sector-pay-who-really-gets-more?amp_js_v=a6&amp_gsa=1&amp&usqp=mq331AQHKAFQArABIA%3D%3D#aoh=16157202900702&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fmoneyweek.com%2Feconomy%2Fuk-economy%2F602141%2Fprivate-vs-public-sector-pay-who-really-gets-more Hope this helps'" It is an interesting analysis. This what the article refers back to: https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlab ... nings/2019 And it draws in turn from this: https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlab ... nings/2019 A couple of points that jumped out for me are the differences between lower and higher skilled workers across the sectors. Which is probably unsurprising and reflects my own experience. This is also reflected in the mean and median proportions of public sector pay that private sector workers receive. V.similar mean but lower median, reflecting more variety in the private sector. To the point that lumping in Amazon delivery drivers and bond traders feels overly arbitrary.

Quote ="wotsupcas"https://moneyweek-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/moneyweek.com/economy/uk-economy/602141/private-vs-public-sector-pay-who-really-gets-more?amp_js_v=a6&amp_gsa=1&amp&usqp=mq331AQHKAFQArABIA%3D%3D#aoh=16157202900702&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fmoneyweek.com%2Feconomy%2Fuk-economy%2F602141%2Fprivate-vs-public-sector-pay-who-really-gets-more Hope this helps'" It is an interesting analysis. This what the article refers back to: https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlab ... nings/2019 And it draws in turn from this: https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlab ... nings/2019 A couple of points that jumped out for me are the differences between lower and higher skilled workers across the sectors. Which is probably unsurprising and reflects my own experience. This is also reflected in the mean and median proportions of public sector pay that private sector workers receive. V.similar mean but lower median, reflecting more variety in the private sector. To the point that lumping in Amazon delivery drivers and bond traders feels overly arbitrary.

Quote ="Mild Rover"It is an interesting analysis. This what the article refers back to: https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlab ... nings/2019 And it draws in turn from this: https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlab ... nings/2019 A couple of points that jumped out for me are the differences between lower and higher skilled workers across the sectors. Which is probably unsurprising and reflects my own experience. This is also reflected in the mean and median proportions of public sector pay that private sector workers receive. V.similar mean but lower median, reflecting more variety in the private sector. To the point that lumping in Amazon delivery drivers and bond traders feels overly arbitrary.'" It is virtually impossible to get a definitive answer to the public vs private pay debate. But what is clear is that the public sector are doing a lot better than they think they are when compared to the private sector. And the gap is widening in their favour.

Quote ="Mild Rover"It is an interesting analysis. This what the article refers back to: https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlab ... nings/2019 And it draws in turn from this: https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlab ... nings/2019 A couple of points that jumped out for me are the differences between lower and higher skilled workers across the sectors. Which is probably unsurprising and reflects my own experience. This is also reflected in the mean and median proportions of public sector pay that private sector workers receive. V.similar mean but lower median, reflecting more variety in the private sector. To the point that lumping in Amazon delivery drivers and bond traders feels overly arbitrary.'" It is virtually impossible to get a definitive answer to the public vs private pay debate. But what is clear is that the public sector are doing a lot better than they think they are when compared to the private sector. And the gap is widening in their favour.

As you say, absolutely impossible to make a simple or direct comparison.
Traditionally, working in the public sector wasn't just as well paid but, it was always seen as the safer option - less risk of redundancy and not exposed to the same pressures as the private sector
and I would say that by and large this is still the case.
You can earn more outside the public sector but, the risks are greater.

As for pay settlements, the same probably applies.
Public sector gives a level of protection against redundancies and pay settlements will usually be below the average, which means doing better than some but, not as well as others.

With regard to NHS settlements, it's all a little bit ugly.
Due to the huge numbers working in the NHS ANY pay increase costs a huge amount of cash overall but, it always will and it's crazy to say that an extra 1% will cost "X" billion
It can and never will be any different and the reality is that if we need to have public sector services, we should be prepared to pay for them - end of story.

Absolutely, and progressive taxation can be used to ensure that those least well remunerated in the private sector who also often face the most problems with job insecurity and poor working conditions aren’t asked to bear an unrealistic share of the burden.

A very good post - but the idea that private sector is way ahead of the public sector simply doesn't ring true - is a simple admin job any better paid in the private sector in fact its probably the opposite. Are their head's of council's that earn what a CEO of huge private business no but as the poster mentioned the private sector risks are huge,

LOL

What you really mean is the Multi year rolling contracts and Golden Handshakes for repeated abject failure are Huge.

I'd say public sector workers on the lower end of the pay structure will earn more than their private sector counterparts as most local authorities adopt the recommended national living wage (£9.50) as their minimum wage, as opposed to the national minimum wage, so cleaners, building attendants, mail room workers etc, probably are paid better than private sector counter parts. However, teachers, nurses, engineers, solicitors, and directors/CEOs, i.e. jobs that require years of higher education and training are most certainly paid more in the private sector. So looking at the overall average isn't necessarily going to give you the full picture.

Don't forget they need one bad year and they are out of work and might not get another job despite years of training/experience - there are significant risks to having the top job.

Despite having the worst death rate in the EU and amongst the worst in the world none of the boss people in the NHS will be at risk in fact everybody is thinking the opposite - in the commercial world performance like would see a CEO out of a job

You must have missed this:

"You can earn more outside the public sector but, the risks are greater."

Local government was always reasonably paid but, never the best but, back in the day, the pensions were among the best available.
The non contributory final salary schemes were unbelievable by todays standards, not to mention the early retirement in the Police, Fire service etc.
These benefits are not open to the average working man/woman in the private sector, unless of course, it's your business.

Your last comment assumes those with degree's actually end up in a job which makes use of them.
In itself, degree is no guarantee of higher pay, you still need to land a position where the reward takes account of your qualification and then be able to actually do the job.

A third of Labour supporters feel that Starmer is doing an awful job. Let that sink in. A third. That is embarassing!