Victorian Teachers over‑ or under‑Compensated?

Are Victorian Teachers Over‑ or Under‑Compensated? - today the AEU and its members have taken strike action for the 1st time in 13 years! against the Vic ALP Allan government.

If you live in Victoria, you’ve probably felt the ripple effects of today’s teacher strike — cancelled classes, frustrated parents, and a whole lot of heated debate online. Teacher pay has always been a touchy topic, but this strike has pushed the conversation into overdrive.

Are Victorian teachers already well‑compensated… or not nearly enough?

What Teachers Currently Earn — and What’s on the Table

Right now, Victorian public‑school teachers sit roughly in the middle of the national pay scale. Graduate teachers start in the low $70k range, while experienced classroom teachers can earn into the low $100k bracket. Leadership roles climb higher.

The government’s latest offer?

  • 17% pay rise over four years
    • 8% in year one
    • 3% per year for the next three years

Education support staff would see a similar structure, though with a smaller first‑year bump.

The union, however, is pushing for something much bigger:

  • 35% over three years

That’s a massive gap — and it’s the heart of the current standoff.

How the Strike Affects the State

Strikes aren’t just symbolic. They have real‑world consequences:

  • Parents scramble for childcare, often losing work hours
  • Students lose learning time, especially those already behind
  • Schools fall further behind on planning and reporting**
  • The state budget takes a hit, both from the wage negotiations and the broader economic ripple effects

Victoria is already the most indebted state in Australia, so any large public‑sector pay rise becomes a whole‑of‑state conversation, not just an education one.

The Case for Teachers Being Under‑Compensated

To keep this discussion balanced, it’s important to acknowledge the arguments from the other side — and there are some strong ones.

  1. Workload has exploded
    Teachers aren’t just teaching anymore. They’re:
  • managing behaviour
  • completing endless admin
  • writing detailed reports
  • planning lessons
  • supporting student wellbeing
  • dealing with parent communication
  • running extracurriculars

Many report 50–60 hour weeks, especially during peak periods. That’s a lot for a salary that tops out around the low $100k range for most classroom teachers.

  1. Teacher shortages are real
    Schools across Victoria are struggling to fill roles. Some argue that if pay were higher, more people would enter — and stay in — the profession.

  2. Cost of living is biting
    Like everyone else, teachers are feeling the squeeze. Inflation has outpaced wage growth in many sectors, including education.

The Case for Teachers Being Well‑Compensated

Here’s where the debate gets interesting — and where many Victorians feel the conversation has been one‑sided.

  1. The non‑salary benefits are significant
    Teaching comes with a package that many private‑sector workers simply don’t get:
  • 11–12 weeks of paid school holidays**
  • High job security
  • Predictable annual pay progression
  • Generous sick leave and parental leave
  • Public‑sector superannuation

These aren’t small perks. When you add them up, the total compensation picture looks very different from salary alone.

  1. A 35% pay rise is far beyond what other sectors receive
    No other major public‑sector workforce is receiving anything close to this.
    In a state already under financial pressure, it’s a big ask.

  2. The government’s 17% offer is not insignificant
    In most industries, a 17% increase over four years would be considered generous — especially in the public sector.

[Poll] Where Do You Stand?

TL: Teachers have rejected a 17% pay rise deal and are pushing for more flexiable work arrangments and a 35% increase over 4 years the education Union has said they are willing to push more strikes if demands are not met. - the State of Victoria is broke so bowing to the demand of the AEU will continue to hurt the budget bottom line which is looking at 'cuts' not further spending.

My (unpopular) opinion: The teachers have 'every right to strike' for better conditions but they are imho over-compensated as it is and 17% is more then fair - I call out this state government all the time but they are 100% right to now bow to the unions pressure and i honestly hope they withdraw the already generous offer and replace it with a 2.5% pa increase oppose to generous offer on the table. Anyone who uses the 'arguement' the job is 'difficult' is talking rubbish you study to be a teacher it is no secret you will be dealing with kids/parents i do understand the job isnt easy but most jobs have their pros and cons

Poll Options

  • 303
    Teachers deserve a 35% payrise or more
  • 45
    Teachers probably deserve more then 17% but less then 35%
  • 119
    Teachers should take the 17% on offer it is generous
  • 49
    The current offer of 17% is way to generous teachers should be offered less

Comments

Search through all the comments in this post.
  • +73

    Anyone who thinks teachers are underpaid should be forced to do the job for a semester

    • +14

      Even a day, I think most people would be at breaking point

      Having to deal with kids is one thing, but throw in 40 odd parents and you will want to smash your head into a wall and call it a day

      • +7

        Even a day, I think most people would be at breaking point
        Having to deal with kids is one thing, but throw in 40 odd parents and you will want to smash your head into a wall and call it a day

        im not disagreeing with this point but i mean it isnt a secret teachers are going to have to deal with kids and parents? i mean you go into the profession fully aware

        it is like a doctor complaining he is around sick people all the time or a Police officer complaining he has to deal with criminals ….. it is part of the job it isnt a secret people who are teachers knew what they were signing up for? this arguement is valid but it is no excuse for ridiculous demands

        • +8

          I mean, if the classroom situation is worsening (which by all accounts, it is), and this is making the job less attractive then the logical response to this by teachers will be to leave the profession - which many are, hence all the teacher shortages. The question is, as a society, is this a good thing? Do we really want fewer teachers? I feel like teaching our kids something is one of the fundamental building blocks of a stable society?

          In this scenario, increasing the pay of teachers is a method of helping to offset these negatives. Balancing the things that are pushing them away with things to attract them. Higher pay might even attract more high-achievers, increasing teaching quality etc, which is desirable.

          It's not the whole solution, but a worldview of "they signed up for this" comes with the flipside of having to accept with the consequences if they decide to leave. You are signing up for this. Is that a future you want?

          • +1

            @sequester1111:

            It's not the whole solution, but a worldview of "they signed up for this" comes with the flipside of having to accept with the consequences if they decide to leave. You are signing up for this. Is that a future you want?

            No, and i agree with your point but this isnt what teachers and the AEU are 'fighting for' money doesnt solve the culture issues we have in the classrooms you could give teachers a 150% payrise and your point would be valid

            if the AEU wanted to give teachers/schools more power to deal with bad kids/parents i would support that but that isnt what this is about

        • +4

          It’s one thing dealing with parents, it’s another thing when every second parent thinks their 4 year old is a genius and wants updates on their work 24/7

          • +1

            @87percent: It's not even "dealing"with the children. It's more about the fact that they're not allowed to deal with them - ok, sometimes they can, in very limited circumstances and those circumstances aren't usually very effective.

            At least a police officer has the support of their govt to effectively discipline and manage their criminals if they won't do what they're supposed to be doing and provides them the support required to do the job they're actually supposed to be doing.

          • @87percent: This type of entitlement is society wide and affects any job that involves dealing with customers.

        • +1

          it is like a doctor complaining he is around sick people all the time or a Police officer complaining he has to deal with criminals

          It's really not.

          At a minimum, those professions are provided with support from their employer to help them effectively manage and/or discipline the people to whom they are providing a service.

          A teacher can't "refuse service" or even effectively discipline an unruly student or parent.

          • -1

            @Muppet Detector:

            A teacher can't "refuse service" or even effectively discipline an unruly student or parent.

            once again this is a culture problem not a salary one

            Blame the AEU for not fighting for educator rights

            Also blame the AEU for selling their members out to the Vic ALP last time around

            • +2

              @Checkmate3023:

              once again this is a culture problem not a salary one

              The salary makes it easier to deal with the culture problem because they're not going to even restore past cultures (there are reasons they avoid school exclusions for example), so the discipline thing is not going to change) far less improve them in any meaningful way.

              Additionally, schools now have to have lockdown procedures, some already have full time police officer/security on site and there's some contemplating metal detectors FFS.

              That's just the tip of the iceberg. Wait until you get foster kids or those with guardianship orders where one or both parents disagree as in custody battles.

              Then dealing with the lack of resources…. seriously, it just goes on and on.

              You clearly have no idea what's currently going on in this sector.

              Blame the AEU for not fighting for educator rights

              Children's rights trump the educator's rights.

              Really, saying stuff like what you are just proves how clueless you really are about this topic.

              • @Muppet Detector:

                Children's rights trump the educator's rights.

                doesnt give the students or parents the right to abuse and assault teachers - perhaps im not the one who is 'clueless' like all topic your agenda is clear and your opinion is Swiss cheese

                Just ignoring the issues within the sector is 'exactly' why the culture is the way it is and it is people like you who think 'throwing' money at the issue is the solution that are clueless

                • +2

                  @Checkmate3023: This post is competing with your post about excluding/segregating all children with autism and those with learning "issues" from the mainstream schools.

                  I sort of understand where you are coming from with the learning "issues", but all children with autism? Like WTF? Just because they have access to NDIS funding?

                  Why just the autistic kids?

                  It's the kids with NDIS funding you want in the classes because they're the ones who come with teacher's aides etc.

                  How many kids with ADHD or behavioural challenges do you believe come with teacher's aides? Dyslexic kids? Other PDD's?

                  Even if segregation were legal, where are you going to build these "specialist schools" and how are you going to staff them and then how are you going to pay for all that?

                  You can't honestly think any of that is ok.

                  • @Muppet Detector:

                    all children with autism and those with learning "issues" from the mainstream schools.

                    alright fair point there would be low level autism t- but these children would/should not be on the NDIS thus would be allowed to mainstream anyone getting NDIS funding for learning issues should not be in a mainstream schooling

                    this would also stop parent who are ripping of the system

                    It's the kids with NDIS funding you want in the classes because they're the ones who come with teacher's aides etc.

                    no it is unfair for the other children and a drain on the main teacher

                    • +2

                      @Checkmate3023: Dude, most kids with autism have average or above average IQ's and a "learning issue" is so uncommon that it's not even part of the diagnostic criteria.

                      Furthermore, stop beating that drum anyway, level 2 autistic kids are currently being transitioned off NDIS and into another program.

                      Now the same kids will be in your classrooms but won't have the teacher's aides anymore.

                      But sheesh, just examples of more stuff you've got no idea about.

                      no it is unfair for the other children and a drain on the main teacher

                      FFS. Now I'm out.

                      You know when they use words like equality? That's for every child, not just for the ones that you approve of.

                      Unfair you reckon it's fair on these kids who need access to the NDIS? You reckon it's fair that they've got ASD or cPTSD?

                      You know how a kid gets cPTSD? And you want to punish them even more by segregating them from their mainstream peers?

                      Don't want a kid with a teacher's aide (do you even know how the teacher's aides are used in the classrooms?) but the ones with ADHD, dyslexia or other learning "issues" or behavioural problems that come with no additional help or support, you're good with them?

                      Let me guess, you met Julia Gillard around August 22, 2012, didn't you? If you didn't, somebody obviously told her about you.

                      • -2

                        @Muppet Detector:

                        FFS. Now I'm out

                        Proceeds to write and essay ranting….

                        Look dude/mama i understand your woke left wing mentality

                        I just dont agree with you thats fine i know exactly what you woll say/post before you post it because you're brainwashed into thinking the world needs to be 'fair' but in reality it is anyrhing but

                        For me i just accept you are delusional/naive and im a realist and perhaps unempethic

                        Have a good afternoon

                        Have a good afternoon

        • Don't bring logic into this, they hate that

      • +4

        Dealing with difficult 'customers' is part of many jobs, doesn't mean everyone gets a 35% raise for that

        • Correct

    • +10

      This is a silly argument.
      There are plenty of jobs I wouldn't want to do - but that doesn't mean they should be paid far more.
      I wouldn't want to be an OF girl - doesn't mean they should be paid more.
      I wouldn't want to be a garbo - doesn't mean they should be paid more.
      I wouldn't want to be a landlord - doesn't mean they should be paid more.

    • +6

      Do you mean overpaid?

      • I presume that or maybe 'are' they meant to say 'aren't'

    • +1

      Same could be said for any other profession

    • With chatgpt nowadays, easy peasy.

      • Riiight, because chatgpt can deal with kids' behaviour effectively

        • +1

          In my experience most teachers are also not very good at this aspect of the job.

          • +2

            @Brianqpr: In my experience it is because parents are not very good at this aspect of their role as parents.

        • -2

          I was referring to prepping of lessons which they claim to have to do after school hours that i have seen complains about.

          • +1

            @mrvaluepack: I have teachers in my extended family and I'm hearing more and more complaints about colleagues using AI for lesson prep and such and they just present AI generated slop. One comment that stuck out was that at least it was reliable when the lazy teachers just photocopied a couple of pages from a textbook.

            • @tenpercent: Those are the smart bunch of people! At least with AI there are some fact checkings and balance opinions.

    • -2

      Nar, do a year. Got to factor in those 12 weeks of school holidays a year to see the value proposition.

      $100,000 over 40 weeks is the equivalent of $130,000 over 52.

      An additional 17% over 3 years is a reasonable hike.

      I don't think they are underpaid, but not on a bad wicket either.

      • +14

        Why are teachers over 40 weeks, taking out their 12 weeks of holiday, but the rest over 52 (not 48?)

        Are you also factoring the 50-60 hour weeks?

        • +23

          50-60 hour weeks

          I had a housemate that was a teacher. They don't do that. Not even close. Loved her job, loved her holidays, and personally believed those stories where union cherry-picking to support the argument for higher wages - that's fine, its what unions do.

          Why are teachers over 40 weeks, taking out their 12 weeks of holiday, but the rest over 52 (not 48?)

          If you want to do your own math feel free, but either way the holidays are part of the value proposition for the role.

          • +10

            @happydude:

            I had a housemate that was a teacher. They don't do that. Not even close. Loved her job, loved her holidays, and personally believed those stories where union cherry-picking to support the argument for higher wages - that's fine, its what unions do.

            i got a few friends that are teachers would never tell them i think they are over compensation but none of them do close to 50 hours a week some say they might do an extra 2-3 hours of planning marking now and then but overall it isnt close to 50 hours p/w

            • +9

              @Checkmate3023: They might be crap teachers.

              • +3

                @try2bhelpful: That accounts for almost the entire Victorian Education system then. It's literally one of, if not the very worst performing group of teachers in any developed country on earth.

                • @infinite: Yep my daughters school is so poor I'm actually not sure why we send her.

            • +1

              @Checkmate3023: indeed - got multiple friends / colleagues who have spouses that are teachers - they all say it is total bull - they work FTE hours at best during term (often less with the 3:30pm finishes except when planning / marking is required on occasion), and do very little in holidays except just before term starts. Private / boarding school teachers have it even better, they get extra time off at Christmas (basically 2 months), and uni lecturers often the best with flexible hours and postgrad student tutors to help with marking.

              It's a hard job I wouldn't want, but there are lots of those. Yes we should pay teachers well, but expect more of them too, as they are instilling their skills and work ethic into our children - but they want the extra money without the extra output. It's not apples to apples with jobs that are frequently more than 38 hours for 48 weeks per year. I know plenty of people working closer to 50 hour weeks on unpaid overtime and contactable on the 4 weeks of holidays they do get… often they are paid well as it is a free market they choose, but they are giving up their lives/time they will never get back for it. How many teachers are getting asked to work on a public holiday like my boss asked me to because we are behind on a project - even with a request from him I know there's no extra money as he already factors that into my salary on occasion when required and I'm expected to achieve an outcome, not just 38 hours.

            • @Checkmate3023: I don't know where this narrative they do monster weeks come from. It's simply not true.

              • +1

                @drprox:

                I don't know where this narrative they do monster weeks come from. It's simply not true.

                like most lies if you keep telling them, dumb people will believe them

                1 3rd of the country voted Yes to be a 2nd class citizen in their own country 2 years ago - people are dumb esp those who want to look/be 'progressive'

                We had a bunch of people protesting with ayatollah pictures ,,,then the bloke killed 30,000 of his own people - all of a sudden all those protesters lost all credability the movement died

          • +3

            @happydude: Same with my teacher relatives. In laws are both long standing teachers.

            When their kids were little he was home from work around 2-2.30pm most days. When she was single she was at the beach for most of the six week summer holidays and always had a great tan (wisdom of that obvs questionable).

            Their job has got more demanding over the years but so have most other jobs with 48 weeks a year of 8 plus hour days and unpaid overtime.

            All jobs have stresses, teaching doesn't have a monopoly here.

            Also one great advantage of teaching is you won't be made redundant if the economy takes a downturn.

          • +1

            @happydude:

            I had a housemate that was a teacher. They don't do that. Not even close. Loved her job, loved her holidays, and personally believed those stories where union cherry-picking to support the argument for higher wages - that's fine, its what unions do.

            Huh, so is this dude a Union member or is he just telling lies?

          • -1

            @happydude: Congratulations, your housemate was the exception not the rule. It's a very different story in our household and circle of friends.

        • +11

          Teachers don't work 50 hour weeks and most certainly not 60.

          I was CFO at a construction company and was doing 13 hour days for 2 years. Most of my extended family are teachers and their whining would be heard from the moon before they ever did that.

          • +1

            @BartholemewH: Yep, this is so true, the only teacher that works 50-60hrs weeks are the principals because they earn $250k/year. The rest of them don't even average 7hrs a day thanks to the 11 weeks of school holidays + 2 weeks of long service leave + 3 weeks of sick/family leave they get every single year. I think a fair estimate would be an average of 6hrs a day once you factor in the 11 weeks of school holidays but ignore the 5 weeks of sick/long service leave they get every year as that's close to the 4 weeks of annual leave everyone else gets.

        • +5

          50-60 hour weeks is a myth. Sure, may be 5% of the amazingly driven teachers who genuinely care for the students may do, but that's such a tiny minority. Picking that 1 teacher out of a pool of 20 and using it as a norm isn't fair. I know many teachers, who puts the bare minimum effort and has standard templated responses for their PTAs every year, just flowing through the motions of the job with zero motivation about student welfare

          • +1

            @pjbargain15:

            I know many teachers, who puts the bare minimum effort and has standard templated responses for their PTAs every year, just flowing through the motions of the job with zero motivation about student welfare

            And the reason the system has these lazy shitbag teachers is because not many other people who are better than them are motivated by the current pay and conditions.

      • And you've never set foot in a classroom as a teacher.

  • +30

    35% over 4 years = 7.79% p.a.
    17% over 4 years = 4% p.a.

    17% wouldn't even keep up with cost of living

    There is a teacher supply shortage so rationally speaking the price of teachers should increase, in real terms, not just nominal.

    • +6

      17% wouldn't even keep up with cost of living

      Just to fact check you

      Inflation between 2000-2025 averaged 2.78%

      https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/economy/price-indexes-and-….

      • +17

        CPI isn't realistic.
        Nobody buys their basket of goods.

        • +2

          Nobody buys their basket of goods.

          are you saying teachers (or anyone else) dont buy food, insurance or pay rent etc?

          • +10

            @Checkmate3023: Of course they do those things.
            They just don't generally buy, for example, the specific baskets of foods the ABS uses.
            And generally don't spend in the weights the ABS applies.

            For example the ABS' CPI assumes 21.39% of household expenditure is on housing.
            I know plenty of people spending closer to 0% (mortgage paid off; so CPI isn't accurate for them), and plenty of people where that percentage is double or more (so CPI isn't accurate for them either).
            I also doubt most renters are paying 21.39% of their household expenditure on housing.
            And I would expect if you ran a poll across Victoria's teachers the outcome wouldn't be 21.39%.
            When you look into what components make up the housing expenditure group it makes even less sense to apply it to real individuals (e.g. rents increased 3.9% in the latest data, and new build costs increased 3.5% - both entirely irrelevant to most people with mortgages on their PPoR or to people who own their homes outright. And for most renters the change in new builds cost isn't directly relevant to their cost of living at all so CPI is understating their change in cost of living).

            Not many people fit into their nice and neat multilevel averages or medians for more than one or two expenditure groups.

            • +1

              @tenpercent:

              Not many people fit into their nice and neat multilevel averages or medians for more than one or two expenditure groups.

              yes they do that is why the data is taken the way it is taken

              ill also add teachers with a reasonable amount of experience earn over the average and median salary so your arguement is probably more valid against a crazy pay rise opposed to in support of one

              you can not like CPI/Inflation numbers but they are the 'numbers we have' you dont like the data isnt the datas fault - perhaps you need to check your bias

              • +6

                @Checkmate3023:

                yes they do that is why the data is taken the way it is taken

                Averages of averages of averages generally don't reflect anything or anyone real. CPI has a purpose, but as a measure of cost of living that people can relate to, no.

                Don't believe me? Will you believe the RBA?

                Cost of living
                The CPI is often used to measure changes in the cost of living, but it is not an ideal indicator of this. While the CPI measures price changes, cost-of-living inflation is the change in spending by households required to maintain a given standard of living. The ABS publishes other indexes that aim to provide a better indicator of the cost of living.

                .

                ill also add teachers with a reasonable amount of experience earn over the average and median salary so your arguement is probably more valid against a crazy pay rise opposed to in support of one

                You've already aptly demonstrated you don't understand the numbers, you don't need to ram the point home. I'll accept this is a possible indictment on the education system though.

                • -4

                  @tenpercent:

                  averages or medians for more than one or two expenditure groups.

                  this have mentioned averages and medians and have used them inter-changably showing you dont actually know what you are talking about but sure attack me

                  but the arguement i made still holds true teachers will earn more then then Average and median full time Salary in Australia so why do the need a above inflation pay rise? please dont talk rubbish, you dont like the data for the record i orginally used inflation not just CPI which 17% over 3 years is well above both

                  what is your issue? do you not understand 3-4% pa is >then 2-3%?

                  do you not understand teachers are actually financially in a 'good position'

                  also i dont mean any disrespect im can almost assure you i have a higher level of educational achievement then 99% of the OPs on here

                  • +3

                    @Checkmate3023:

                    also i dont mean any disrespect im can almost assure you i have a higher level of educational achievement then 99% of the OPs on here

                    Then why are you so bad at using spell check? It's not even typos. You make the same mistakes over and over again.

                  • +1

                    @Checkmate3023:

                    this have mentioned averages and medians and have used them inter-changably showing you dont actually know what you are talking about but sure attack me

                    I am not using them interchangeably. They are two different things. The CPI series includes (i) weighted average, (ii) trimmed mean and (iii) weighted median.

                    but the arguement i made still stands teachers will earn more then then Average and median full time Salary in Australia so why do the need a above inflation pay rise?

                    What does teacher incomes relative to other people's income have to do with what they ought to be paid? Apart from their incomes stagnate while other professions incomes keep growing.

                    Even that is not particularly relevant because it is ultimately a supply and demand issue. There is a current teacher shortage.

                    do you not understand 3-4% pa is >then 2-3%?

                    Of course I do. But it's not 2-3%, I assume you mean 'inflation'. For the last calendar year it was actually between 3.4% and 4.1% depending which CPI measure you prefer. Not that CPI is a great measure of cost of living, as I highlighted previously with the RBA quote.

                    also i dont mean any disrespect im can almost assure you i have a higher level of educational achievement then 99% of the OPs on here

                    I appreciate that and I apologise if my previous comment was overly sarcastic.

            • @tenpercent:

              I know plenty of people spending closer to 0% (mortgage paid off; so CPI isn't accurate for them), and plenty of people where that percentage is double or more (so CPI isn't accurate for them either).

              Whoever your teacher was should've gotten a pay rise, because it seems they never got around to teaching you what averages are.

              • @2212053: Maybe yours ought to have taught you about how to interpret statistics, especially for non-normal or multimodal distributions, or that the average is more often than not merely a statistical fiction and lacks real world relevance, or maybe the Flaw of Averages.

                They also ought to have spent more time teaching you patience and reading. If you had bothered to continue reading then you might have found out it is not just me saying that CPI is not a great way to measure changes in cost of living. According to the RBA:

                https://www.ozbargain.com.au/comment/17454448/redir

                The CPI is often used to measure changes in the cost of living, but it is not an ideal indicator of this. While the CPI measures price changes, cost-of-living inflation is the change in spending by households required to maintain a given standard of living. The ABS publishes other indexes that aim to provide a better indicator of the cost of living.

    • +2

      Another factor that is not taken into account with teachers, is that they don't operate on the free market like other employees do. There is the government sector and the private. And the private sector know that they only have to marginally beat the public sector salary to attract the best teachers. At no stage do teachers get to negotiate their salary. In an environment where teachers are in short supply, where teachers are leaving the profession in droves because the conditions are just awful, they should be able to name their salary.

    • +1

      I don't know a single person that has received a pay raise in the last 5 years that "kept up with cost of living"

      • Sounds like workers need more advocacy.

  • +28

    Underpaid as a class, but overpaid for the minimum standards to become a teacher.

    TLDR: raise the minimum standards and raise the wage.

    • +4

      Ill pay this, that is a fair point

    • +2

      Underpaid as a class, but overpaid for the minimum standards to become a teacher.

      Just raising the point that they keep decreasing the standards to get more people enrolling in the degree.

      On Whirlpool, there's a thread talking about them reducing the ATAR score to 50 in an effort to attract more applicants.

      It's getting to the stage that they'll employ you with the only requirement being that you haven't been convicted as a pedophile in the last ten years or if you have, you've at least cleared any parole requirements.

      50! Wow. Just wow.

      FTR, if a mature aged student has completed grade 12 (including a pass in English) and has done an apprenticeship - that's enough for them to gain entry into the course, regardless of how long ago you received either qualification.

  • +28

    You using chatGPT to post this is exactly why having a strong education system is so important.

      • +14

        They meant an LLM and you knew that.

        Seriously, at the end of your chat before you pressed ctrl-c in your LLM and then ctrl-v into the ozbargain new chat window you should have typed this in: This is stupidly long with a lot of faff that no one wants to read. Rewrite it succinctly so my diatribe doesn't bore people

      • +4

        I'm not going to burn brainpower trying to read your tone here, so if it's witty sarcasm… well done, you got me.

        But yes, your post is 100% AI slop. Great work.

      • Use a lot of em dashes in your day to day life? Hey where is that one on your keyboard again?

        • -1

          Use a lot of em dashes in your day to day life? Hey where is that one on your keyboard again?

          Just type two dashes in a row with no spaces — see it's that easy.

  • +15

    a higher salary should also act as an incentive for more people to start teaching thus improving the overall "pool". generational changes and improvements can come off improved education for our young ones.

    • +21

      Money is not most teachers' primary concern as I understand it. It's the crap they have to do now - essentially child minding, not teaching. Dealing with kids who have parents who take little responsibility for their own kids and like to play blame games. Plus a bunch of bureaucracy/ red tape, much of it to console increasingly risk averse parents and general society, and more to justify various bullshit jobs in positions above them. No amount of money is going to attract new, intelligent, kid loving educators to this current sham.

      This country treats its teachers and nurses (and many other essential workers) like crap. No wonder we're failing so hard in so many ways

      • -8

        bunch of bureaucracy/ red tape,

        You make a great point and if teachers where fighting for less red/woke/green tape i would support them

        This country treats its teachers and nurses (and many other essential workers) like crap. No wonder we're failing so hard in so many ways

        this is true but rarely to their unions fight for better work cultures there is nothing other then pay us more and allow us to work less opposed to lets make the 'work better'

        if the AEU was asking to give Greater powers to discipline bad children/parents i would support this but it isnt even on the table

    • Agreed! We need more talent in our schools, they are the laughing stock compared to Asian schools overseas. They are so bad that parents are willing to pay tens of thousands of dollars for them to escape the public school system and go private. Or hundreds of thousands of dollars to buy into one of the few areas with a good public school. If experienced NSW teachers are all on $130k/year then Victorian teachers do deserve the 35% pay rise for equality. Realistically they will fall on a middle ground between the 17% offered over 4 years and the 35% over 3 years demanded, that's how negotiations work.

  • +14

    That's a lot unnecessary analysis. The answer is almost always under compensated. There will never be an argument against pay rises in the education space for as long as private schools gets public funding.

    • -6

      There will never be an argument against pay rises in the education space for as long as private schools gets public funding.

      i know this is a different conversation but the Private school sector saves the public sector billions of dollars despite having to adhear to the guildlines set out by the education department

      if we had 'fully' independant private schools it would cost way more then the current system it would also give private school kids (who can afford it) a much larger advantage

      Its important to learn the facts not the headlines

      As for the 'payrise' no one is saying they shouldnt get a rise the arguement is the rise should be reasonable and 35% isnt reasonable id argue 17% is too much

      • -2

        Its largely a cost shifting excersise.
        It costs government far less to educate a kid in a private school than a public one - because they shift a significant chunk of the funding burden directly to the parents.

        • because they shift a significant chunk of the funding burden directly to the parents.

          This absolutely nails it.

          It's the funding from the parents that provides the buildings, infrastructure, maintenance and resources to educate the children.

          Land, buildings and infrastructure owned and maintained by private parties.

        • -5

          Yes what is often missed is the private schools are rold what needs to be taught

          They are not independent thus they certainly deserve funding if anything they should be funded the same as public schools

          • +2

            @Checkmate3023:

            Yes what is often missed is the private schools are rold what needs to be taught

            Jeez, how do you continue to get this so wrong, so often?

            Private schools are told the minimum which needs to be taught.

            Private schools don't even have to abide by any policies that public schools are required to.

            For example, how many public schools are allowed to use corporal punishment? Most of them are rarely allowed to even suspend or expel a student.

  • +13

    Jesus, what did you feed ChatGPT to get that level of slop? Teachers have only just started doing admin, planning and managing behaviour? What was the baseline, 1930?

    Anyway, the problem is how far behind every other state Victoria is on salaries. Victoria has a fast growing population and the lowest teacher wages, you'd expect the second most populace state to at least be somewhere near the middle. Sure, it's cheaper to buy a house here, but that shouldn't define wages.

    • -5

      2 extra public holidays a year compared to NSW and after the wage rise of 17% they would be ~somewhere in the middle of the pay grade compared to other states?

      What is you arguement?

      it's cheaper to buy a house here, but that shouldn't define wages.

      housing cost has nothing to do with CPI - rent in Victoria is some of the lowest in the country

      • +4

        17% over 3 years, the other states aren't standing still during that time. Oct 2027 the NSW entry wage will be $95,669.

        housing cost has nothing to do with CPI - rent in Victoria is some of the lowest in the country

        Housing is most certainly a part of CPI.

        And yes, rent is also cheaper along with houses being cheaper (no surprise). What's your point there?

        • -3

          17% over 3 years, the other states aren't standing still during that time. Oct 2027 the NSW entry wage will be $95,669.

          this would be 'fair' if Victoria wasnt way more in debt then NSW with way less revenue

          based on the current economic climat there is no way Victoria should be paying teachers more then other more financially viable states

          • +1

            @Checkmate3023: The fact that you use ‘then’ rather than ‘than’, while arguing that Victorian teachers aren’t important enough to be paid more is quite ironic.

            • -2

              @Devils Advocate:

              The fact that you use ‘then’ rather than ‘than’, while arguing that Victorian teachers aren’t important enough to be paid more is quite ironic.

              yes the gramma nazi point a true sign you're clueless, anyway maybe they arent that important in your life you clearly cannot read, no where did i say teachers arent important

              there are lot of important professions not asking for a 35% wage increase…..

              • +3

                @Checkmate3023: You’re right, I implied the ‘non-important’ part based on you saying they don’t deserve a pay rise.

                I’m glad you agree they are important, so let’s add that to the facts:
                - Important job.
                - High workload and high stress.
                - 4 year university degree required.
                - Poor conditions, understaffed, subject to abuse at times (from kids and parents).

                Now let’s link that to the pay band of $70,000-$105,000. There are no other jobs with that high of expectations with that low of pay.

                Victorian teachers would still be the lowest paid teachers in the country after 17% over 4 years. With inflation currently at 3.8%, a 4% p.a. pay rise is a real pay rise of 0.2%.

                No wonder there is a teacher shortage. Why would anyone start a 4 year degree with this at the end of it? Also makes sense why 50% of teaching graduates leave the profession within their first 5 years. The current system isn’t sustainable.

                • -1

                  @Devils Advocate:

                  You’re right, I implied the ‘non-important’ part based on you saying they don’t deserve a pay ris

                  i never said they didnt deserve a pay rise i said 35% was way to high and the 17% on offer was generous and more then fair - dont imply anything i dont say the best teachers IMHO deserve a lot more then 35% and they generally get that in the private sector

                  Now let’s link that to the pay band of $70,000-$105,000. There are no other jobs with that high of expectations with that low of pay.

                  this is incorrect the pay band for graduates is $79,589 – $91,056 going all the way to $123,966 – $129,544

                  now i know you not to good at reading but add 35% on that they are on average earning more then professions with a lot more then 4 years of education not to mention much higher standards then getting into an education degree

                  • Poor conditions, understaffed, subject to abuse at times (from kids and parents).

                  i agree this needs to change but this isnt what the union is fighting for i would support teachers having strong abilities to discipline parents and students - the AEU is focusing on money which doesnt fix this problem id argue it probably makes staffing levels worse as schools have to high more contract workers and less full time staff

                  Victorian teachers would still be the lowest paid teachers in the country after 17% over 4 years. With inflation currently at 3.8%, a 4% p.a. pay rise is a real pay rise of 0.2%.

                  the long term inflation tread is is around 2.6% ill note the 17% rise is 8% in the 1st year then 3% the years after it more then covers inflation

                  also 35% is 3x the long term inflation

                  Victorian teachers would still be the lowest paid teachers in the country after 17% over 4 years. With inflation currently at 3.8%, a 4% p.a. pay rise is a real pay rise of 0.2%.

                  no they wouldnt TAS would but i would agree they should be higher paid then 2nd last but no where near WA or NT - Vic teachers do get 2 extra public holidays to their NSW counter parts

                  Important job.

                  i agree it is important it is also a high head count job it isnt niche being important doesnt mean you should be paid crazy numbers

                  and like i have said in other comments private school teachers can make over 180k pa the best teachers end up with good salaries there is no need for the public sector to over pay teachers the best ones can the option to earn great money if they are upto the task

                  like ANY profession the best people ended up doing very well and the lazier or less competent ones do poorly the current EBA system only rewards the lazy teachers and punishes the good ones

                  • +2

                    @Checkmate3023:

                    this is incorrect the pay band for graduates is $79,589 – $91,056 going all the way to $123,966 – $129,544

                    $129,544 is for level 2 band 6 in Victoria, which can be reached after 10 years of full time teaching experience. That's not fresh out of uni. And that is rather low when compared to other professions or trades with 10 years of experience.

                    now i know you not to good at reading but add 35% on that they are on average earning more then professions with a lot more then 4 years of education

                    You are implictly assuming that those other professions pay isn't going to increase over those 4 years. But of course it will.

                    And can you please identify some of these other professions who earn less than teachers after 10 years of full time working experience?

                    and like i have said in other comments private school teachers can make over 180k pa the best teachers end up with good salaries

                    And as I pointed out to you previously, you are mistaken. The $180k you reference is for a classroom teacher with additional duties in leadership positions. And most of the private schools, even the elite ones, are paying the same or less than the public system for classroom teachers. You really must compare apples and apples.

                    • @tenpercent:

                      $129,544 is for level 2 band 6 in Victoria, which can be reached after 10 years of full time teaching experience. That's not fresh out of uni. And that is rather low when compared to other professions or trades with 10 years of experience.

                      1st off 80k straight out of Uni is 'great money' legit cant think of another profession that has a 60 ATAR score that will get you that day one on the job, i probably conceed 120k (however it is hardly struggling to survive money) after 15 years might not be great but like you said above their are options to get paid more if you take on additional duties this isnt too different to most profressions

                      Ill note entry level Lawyers start on 65-80k pa

                      But lets compare professions

                      Almost, No other profession earns 120k pa for 40 weeks a year of work on a full time basis - some might earn that on contracts but you have 'glossed' over the 12 weeks teachers dont work a year

                      lets stick with 120k pa - 120 / 40 = 3k p/w with the 17% raise that takes that up to 3.5k p/w - tell me how many professions are making 3.5k a week in Australia? with full job security, fully paid PH and no weekends?

                      Now with a 35% raise it takes them to over 4 grand a week on a 40 week working year. That is more then most senior Lawyers, Engineers, Accountants will earn with 10 years experience…….you might think 'teachers' in the public sector are worth that and honestly speaking the best teachers are worth more then that but the worst ones arent worth half of that - the way the EBA structure is it encompasses all

                      • +1

                        @Checkmate3023: I know someone who got an OP 1 at school, went to uni on scholarship for 5 years, aced engineering, wrote a thesis, got first class honours and awards, and is now 20+ years into engineering career and a 'senior engineer' but stayed crunching numbers and refused a management position … so has capped out at a circa $120K FTE ceiling also. I know architects in the same boat or less and that's a hard degree for like 6+ years to be fully qualified too. Only people who become contractors or managers running a business get more in lots of highly qualified professions. Tradies often earn more but are working huge hours, often away from home and a hard slog with safety and injury risks too and benefited often by strong upward pressure by public infrastructure jobs with union negotiation for their in-demand skills. Whilst there are exceptions, only way most are earning more is by extra overtime and effort.

                      • @Checkmate3023: What is a "working week"? How many hours?

                        • -1

                          @tenpercent: for more professions it is 38 hours a week?

                          in jobs that get paid at the levels you are talking about the expectation is usually 60-90p/w legit this is what Lawyers and many doctors do are you saying teachers who do no extra duties should be paid the same at them?

Login or Join to leave a comment