In a business… if you get it wrong you’re out of a job.

Well, unless your a banker, or some other senior management figure, in which case you'll be largely immune to the consequences of your own f*ck ups, however much money it drains from the economy.

If people are going to start arguing that the private sector represents better value for money, they could start by illustrating it from our experience of the railways, Royal Mail and the water companies.

Hora – don't worry, you can watch Secretary as homework.

Bankers aren't in a magical job you know.

The big figures you hear about them making. its called Trading. **** that, you might make big money but it depends on LONG hours, stress and the City-culture. People are churned/burnt out after a couple of years. Only the 'survivors' last longest.

Well, unless your a banker, or some other senior management figure, in which case you'll be largely immune to the consequences of your own f*ck ups

No mate that's really not true and I can tell you I've seen the casualties from the finance sector in the last two years. Those guys are no longer there I can assure you.

it depends on LONG hours, stress and the City-culture. People are churned/burnt out after a couple of years. Only the 'survivors' last longest.

Bunch of wimps! The only stress they have is what **** Porsche to buy next! And if they didn't do so much Charlie, then maybe they'd be a little calmer…

Seriously, try working in an inner-city school, with some proper violent kids, not to mention the parents. Kids who are being abused. Kids with learning difficulties. Bullying. Having to meet performance targets. Walking on eggshells re H+S. Trying to get the little shits to realise the only way out of the holes they are in, is through education, when they're all too busy listening to Beyonce.

Stress? Those bankers are soft as shite. Ponces.

"What would the PA of a CEO of a company employing more than 100 staff get paid? "

Most companies of 100 staff (ish) won't have a full time PA to the CEO.

"What do you think a head does? Deal with thousands of (buzz word alert) stake holders, manage a multi million budget, accountable to government, lead a team of hundreds and to be honest that is scratching the surface. "

Surely the big difference between a head and a CEO is that the head doesn't raise the millions they get given to spend. Spending money is considerably easier than having to earn it.

There's also the question of competency here – many CEO's don't have full time PA's now – and even in very large companies (FTSE10) with hundreds oif thousands of staff the CEO will typically only have one CEO – Terry Leahy (Tesco) is one such person. So why does a school head with less than 100 staff need one if not to cover for that person not being terribly well organised?

You've never worked in sales have you.

Bunch of wimps! The only stress they have is what **** Porsche to buy next!

Mate I like that you're engaged in the debate but you're getting a bit offensive here. There are maybe 100,000 people working in the city of London that are in the really high earner category, i.e. the sort of earnings that could allow them to buy a porsche if they wanted. But they do work pretty **** hard. I know, I've seen it first hand and trust me I wouldn't want to do that job regardless of the money. But the more relevant point is that it's 100,000 out of around several million people currently employed by the banks. You're not being particularly discriminating when you make that statement.

I was making a point about the traders that Hora refers to; I've no doubt it's a moderately stressful job, but no more stressful than most, and far less stressful than others. People's greed puts them under 'stress'.

I know several people that work in the City. They have far less real stress in their lives than any of the teachers I know. And get paid a lot more. And by their own admission, are of less 'value' to society.

As for 'offensive'; I find that a bit rich, coming from someone who obviously values themselves above someone else whose job they have no knowledge about.

who obviously values themselves above someone else whose job they have no knowledge about.

When did I ever make that statement? And as I have already pointed out, I am pretty well informed about the job market and the role of a PA. I couldn't and wouldn' make the same claim about teachers, nurses or police men because I am not as well informed about them.

I think you think I am having a go at teachers and I am not. I support what they do entirely and think that whatever they are paid, frankly it's not enough. It's one of the hardest jobs I think you can take, one of the most valuable to society and one of, if not the, most undervalued in terms of pay.

But we're not talking about teachers, we're talking about a PA.

I couldn't and wouldn' make the same claim about teachers, nurses or police men because I am not as well informed about them.

But then you've posted this:

I support what they do entirely and think that whatever they are paid, frankly it's not enough. It's one of the hardest jobs I think you can take, one of the most valuable to society and one of, if not the, most undervalued in terms of pay.

😆

What I think and what I can speak knowledgably about are not the same thing.

In the absence of any information to the contrary, I am prepared to believe that teachers have a difficult job that they are unerpaid for. It's not the same thing as saying, I know this to be relatively true.

What I think and what I can speak knowledgably about are not the same thing.

I concur.

I'm not sure what the relevance is of teachers of violent inner city kids, we're talking about a PA in Milton Keynes, sure the place is a shite-hole but I doubt he/she will have to wear body armour whilst taking minutes.
My parents are ex-teachers and my sister-in-law teaches now and I wouldn't (and nor do they) call their jobs stressful. Especially once you've taught an entire year and have class notes already done.

I concur.

Touche! 😆

This is nothing to do with the thieving scum (sorry my autism ruining my chance of ever being diplomatic) in the City – they need lining up and shooting. I just think, to get back to the original question, that £38,000 is too much for a secretary / PA. In MK I would expect it to be about 26-30,000 assuming a 52 week year (I imagine there is still alot of organising to be done even during school holidays). Comparison with our secretaries and PAs here (central London – £28-32,000, moderately hard working); teachers themselves, police, military, clerical staff typically and so on suggests, to me at least, that £38K is more than needs to be offered even for an exceptional person. Its true I don't know the precise job spec but the clue is in the name – organising mainly, some typing. Not an easy job but not a £38k job.

The public sector needs to get real over the excess of pubic spending since 2002. Believe it or not I am a Guardian reading Liberal voter but the clear out is going to be big and its long overdue.

Stress? Those bankers are soft as shite. Ponces.

You sound quite bitter – have you considered retraining as a banker? Apparently the most stressful thing they have to do is working out what sort of Porsche they are going to buy.

That is pretty stressful though. Have you seen the options list???

In a business… if you get it wrong you’re out of a job.

I don't buy this private sector = efficiency argument one little bit. Some of the easiest jobs I've ever had were working for private enterprises. My GF's dad works on the railways for private contractors and the tales of waste, inefficiency and ludicrous multiple layers of subcontracting there are absolutely shocking.

he clear out is going to be big and its long overdue.

The hardest hit will be the poorest and most vulnerable people in our society.

As long as the bankers are ok though, eh? 🙄

yep, teachers should get paid more, I agree.

But, and I admit I could be wrong here, this isn't public sector gorn mad is it? Isn't it the school deciding what budget they have available to pay for this post, rather than some union demanding higher wages for PA's?

And some job's just pay more. I've got a job in a hospital, and a post-grad qualification is essential. But I get paid less than a bin man. But there's less demand for my job, so they can offer a lower wage.

I reckon the public sector is applying market forces on the sly.

My point was that this is a small organisation, it's 1000 pupils, it's not a large massively complex orgnisation

It takes a team of 4 people (including a part timer, me, a chair of governors) to run a primary school of nearly 160 pupils (foundation to yr2) our budget is nearly £1.5 million, there literally aren't enough hours in the day to do what we need to do. If I didn't run my own business and so dictate largely my own hours I don't know how I'd fit the work i need to do in my day, and we're a successfully performing small school in a reasonably well off town with no major problem children. A secondary school with a 1000 pupils? in a large urban setting? Yep I'd want at least that sort of money to be a PA to a head…

People in the public sector haven't yet woken up and smelt the coffee when it comes to the recession. There can't be many private companies that haven't stopped wage increases, bonus, asked staff to take a 10% pay cut, sacked people, etc. The public sector just seems to want to carry on as normal and doesn't seem to get it that they should be doing the same for less. Everyone else has so why not them.

How about this for a job advert
Bristol based charity teaching under privileged and disabled children to ride bikes. Great idea which I do support, however!!
Co-ordinator wanted, 2 days per week, work from home and choose your hours,
Remember this is a charity
£19,000 fixed 2 year contract

if you are so jealous apply for the jobs FFS as you point out its free market, if you dont want it **** off and stop moaning would be my advice.

If the Public Sector's so cushy and well paid it's a miracle that it hasn't sucked all the top talent out of the Private Sector.

Yet there hora remains…

woody74 – is that job ad not pro rata?

Also – lots of people in the public sector have taken pay cuts, lost bonuses, had reduced hours etc

woody74 – Member

Remember this is a charity

So why then, give it as an example when slagging off public employees who are paid by the government ?

Woody might have chosen a poor example, but he is right. The public sector is going to experience a lot of pain. This is not schadenfreude, it's just that it is going to happen.

The Institute of Fiscal Studies today said that none of the three main parties has got even close to addressing the very real spending cuts that we are going to have to make. The Tories have identified £6bn; the lib dems around £18bn. The IFS says we need to make around £45bn in savings. It is going to have to come from somewhere, (well everywhere actually)

It was not a poor example. It was a wrong example.

Nice work if you can get it!

It does seem odd that a headteacher's PA would be paid more than most of the teachers.

if you are so jealous apply for the jobs FFS as you point out its free market, if you dont want it **** off and stop moaning would be my advice.

What a load of BS. That's like saying why complain about MPs abusing their expenses system – just all become MPs if we want free duck houses. This PA is being paid with tax payers money so to me that's enough of a reason for tax payers to want to whine about it on an irrelevant forum. It's not about jealousy it's about not wanting public money being wasted paying public sector roles at a higher rate than their private sector equivalents.

FuzzyWuzzy has a point.

He's the corollary to that argument. As the holder of a private pension that is invested in various funds, provided by the financial services industry, I have a vested interest and therefore a legitimate grievance with the wrongs that have been wrought in that industry and even without tax payers money being used to support that industry, I have a right to say how that industry is run and how its leaders are compensated.

You see I am ideologically promiscuous and sometimes I like to make other peoples’ arguments for them!
😉

It does seem odd that a headteacher's PA would be paid more than most of the teachers.

+1.

If it is anything like our head of department's PA (university), I imagine this kind of administrative role is much harder than you would think, and might involve a lot more responsibility than being a PA in the private sector. The difference between academia / education, and a standard PA, is that in academia, the PA is supporting someone whose focus is both on education (or research in a university), and also on the general running of the school, which in practice gets pretty much entirely done by the support staff. Whereas in a business, there is one clear focus, and the PA is basically a purely administrative person, looking after diaries, booking plane tickets etc. for someone who has the job of making the business run.

Now, if schools hired professional managers as heads, rather than teachers, then perhaps this would be different, although I'm betting they'd not be anywhere near as efficient as the combination of someone who has a clue about education in the actual leadership role, and a decent administrator.

Joe

It's not about jealousy it's about not wanting public money being wasted paying public sector roles at a higher rate than their private sector equivalents.

Firstly you have no idea what the job entails so you dont know what the equivalent is and secondly what is the principle that makes you assume a public sector job should be paid less than a private sector job?

y what is the principle that makes you assume a public sector job should be paid less than a private sector job?

How about guaranteed final salary pension schemes; extraordinarily generous redundancy terms; greater job security and better working hours.

Will that do you?

FWIW I don't think that PS jobs are worth less than private secctor. No one on this thread did. This thread was always about the point that this PS job was paying MORE than an equivalent PS job.

How about guaranteed final salary pension schemes; extraordinarily generous redundancy terms; greater job security and better working hours.

Better working hours? What do you base that on? How many parties are talking of pension reform in the public sector, is job security better given impending cuts? Or are you just making assumptions?

Firstly you have no idea what the job entails so you dont know what the equivalent is and secondly what is the principle that makes you assume a public sector job should be paid less than a private sector job?

As a very very rough rule – Private sector makes money, public sector spends money. And in my experience (running a company that deals with both sectors) it's easier to spend than make money.

Our local Council head gets paid well over £200k. In the UK's poorest county. And from a Council that's riddled with issues. "They" say they need the "best" people – I rarely see any evidence of this massive level of competence from the numerous cock ups made by every big public sector organisation.

It's a culture of job security, waste and a huge pension in many cases.

You fail in business – you close down. You fail in public sector or banking – you get a big payout. That doesn't compute.