Jump to content
Home
Forum
Join Us
Articles
About Us
Tapestry

Wages in 2016


thumperrabbit
 Share

Recommended Posts

At present:

Manager £8.10

Deputy £7.85

Level 3 £7.25

Level 2 £7.20.

The last min wage increase has put level 2 up so everyone else has to go up too now!

Birmingham council have just increased funding to £4.03 for 3 & 4 yr olds so we can fullfill their demand that all contractors pay their version of living wage as a minimum, of £7.85.

I worked it out to be 9% for everyone ? Fab for the individual, not so fab fr playgroup.

 

They're all keyworkers, except manager but that might be changing.

Edited by Rea
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well since the minimum wage became the old living wage at £7.20 the new living wage has become £8.20 so we will never really have a minimum wage that is the actual perceived living wage! Many companies feel the need to pay all their staff a minimum living wage to be ethical. This is great if your business can afford to do it, but not many businesses actually can.

 

£7.20 in my opinion is a decent hourly rate for a level 3 qualified member of staff at the age of 25 or above. Key worker or no key worker. The majority of staff are usually key workers, right?

 

If a staff member brings more value to your business ie higher qualifications and is a great role model and team leader, ie room leader, then rightly so the wage should reflect this in comparison to other staff.

 

The problem still exists that the minimum wage has increased so much it is putting pressure on all wages and the price of the service we provide. This is true for many business sectors and the cost of living therefor increases to compensate OR quality of staff is reduced to compensate. i feel personally, that increasing the minimum wage each year is a pointless thing to do and serves no real benefit to anybody in the long run. We end up no better off and it puts pressure on many businesses that could lead to a negative result for employees and consumers due to the negative effects on the employers business financially.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No objection to sharing

Mangager - Negotiable (All our settings are different size and opening times so depends on level of responsibility)

Setting Lead/Deputy 9.50

Room Leader 8.10

Level 3 - 7.45

Level 2 - 7.30

Apprentice - 5.25

 

Flexibility supplement £40 per month for those doing split shifts (Nursery am/After school pm)

Plus everyone gets £20 per month for 100% attendance

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

£7.20 for level 3 - or anyone else come to that!! Can just about afford it this year - but I doubt very much for next year! Especially if they decide to raise the MLW again!! Sadly some of my staff will become a victim of the increase - because I haven't had an increase in funding!!

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

....

i feel personally, that increasing the minimum wage each year is a pointless thing to do and serves no real benefit to anybody in the long run. ....

But surely higher wages benefits the government in that more people will be paying taxes on the higher wages and less people eligible for Working Families Tax Credit, etc ... :huh:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In theory that's right but while we're unable charge what we need to pay for these rises it just ends by putting people out of work. Other sectors can raise fees, charge extras!

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

£7.20 for level 3 - or anyone else come to that!! Can just about afford it this year - but I doubt very much for next year! Especially if they decide to raise the MLW again!! Sadly some of my staff will become a victim of the increase - because I haven't had an increase in funding!!

Similar pay rates here Rafa - ONLY it won't be a case of if the MLW goes up - it will have to go up every year for the next 4 years to reach the £9 minimum (set by the government) in 2020.

 

So my calculations look like this

 

2016 LV = £7.20

2020 LV = £9.00

 

Difference = £1.80 therefore equal split of 45p per hour each year should do it e.g.,

 

2017 LV = £7.65

2018 LV = £8.10

2019 LV = £8.55

2020 LV = £9.00

 

For a term time only worker working say 30 hours a week for 38 weeks of the year this means a year on year increase of £623.70 (including holiday pay but not including national insurance and pensions on costs) per year to your wages bill for the next four years.

 

So for this one individual an increase in their wages bill of £2494.80 or 25% in four years time.

 

Unless funding rates increase by 25% (can't see that happening any time soon) then I suggest that many of us will either

a) Shut up shop

b) Take the government up on their kind suggestion to decrease our staffing levels by 15% (their response to the funding questionnaire) or

c) Adopt the "optimum" business model to enable us to wharehouse small children - education and care be damned!

 

For information the optimum business model looks like this

 

26 children per session aged 3 to 4 enabling ratios of 1:13

 

1 x early years teacher - preferably under 25 years of age prepared to work for less than the Living wage rate per hour with a contract that terminates when s/he hits 25 years old - good luck finding one!

 

1 x level 3 - again preferably under 25 years of age prepared to work for the minimum wage rather than the living wage - s/he is more affordable that way! Maybe a good idea to give this one a contract that terminates when they hit 25 too!

 

1 (or if you are now feeling flush) 2 apprentices - definitely aged under 25 but preferably under 21 with contracts that end as soon as they qualify so that you can take on some more apprentices at this "cheap rate".

 

It goes without saying that the children of government ministers will not endure the "optimum business model" as I can't see any of them accessing just their "free" entitlement - I suspect that they will go to "nice" early years settings offering enough extra hours or additional extras to make them sustainable.

 

Oops was that a bit cynical!

  • Like 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I put wages up 50p as I thought it was fair everyone had the same raise. I am now going to take this off my wage as our rent has gone up again and even though our numbers are good for Autumn term, we don't have a big enough income to pay the rent and wages, let alone anything else. Really worried about our sustainabilty at this point!

 

I know we aren't supposed to charge anything extra, but don't see how we can survive if we don't.

Edited by MegaMum
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So come on everyone, what are we going to do to rectify this absolutely ridiculous scenario that SueJ has so eloquently shared with us.

I for one are not prepared to sacrifice the nurturing and care environment we have strived for many years to achieve for the children. Parents/carers choose us for this very reason. We actually have a very healthy waiting list, but that's another dilemma for us.

Any thoughts.:(:(:(

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So come on everyone, what are we going to do to rectify this absolutely ridiculous scenario that SueJ has so eloquently shared with us.

I for one are not prepared to sacrifice the nurturing and care environment we have strived for many years to achieve for the children. Parents/carers choose us for this very reason. We actually have a very healthy waiting list, but that's another dilemma for us.

Any thoughts.:(:(:(

Not sure, be we certainly need to unite!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

l pay my two level threes £9 p/h, one level two £8 p/h and the other level two £7 p/h (under 25). But I am in London. On the other hand, I've only just started paying myself and I get less than minimum wage.

Edited by MarshaD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Me neither, we should at least all write, tweet, email or MPs with the facts and ask how we will be able to continue.

Agree with you Rea - think we should ALL contact our MPs - let them know - NOW! Early Years is heading into a crisis situation!! Hopefully one or two may have the 'ballyhollocks' to stand up and announce it during Primeministers Questions!!!!

Mr C needs telling !!!!.............but will he listen.....will he care? We can but try............

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll come back with my figures for this ...don't have them to hand and can't remember exactly this morning!! however both myself and my deputy are on a salary not paid hourly....this appears to be unusual from the replies !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Me neither, we should at least all write, tweet, email or MPs with the facts and ask how we will be able to continue.

Do you think we should put together a letter and post it on here, so it's easy for people to copy it and we can all send it to our MP's?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you think we should put together a letter and post it on here, so it's easy for people to copy it and we can all send it to our MP's?

Good idea Megamum - SueJ seems to know what she's talking about!! Or we could start a thread and all add a line or two of points that need voicing.......?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll come back with my figures for this ...don't have them to hand and can't remember exactly this morning!! however both myself and my deputy are on a salary not paid hourly....this appears to be unusual from the replies !

 

When on a salary you will still have an hourly rate and contracted hours.. should be shown somewhere in contract and get a letter when it increases/ changes.. How else do you know that you are earning above the minimum required?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

When on a salary you will still have an hourly rate and contracted hours.. should be shown somewhere in contract and get a letter when it increases/ changes.. How else do you know that you are earning above the minimum required?

yes im aware of this ...just don't think about it like this any longer. !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But surely higher wages benefits the government in that more people will be paying taxes on the higher wages and less people eligible for Working Families Tax Credit, etc ... :huh:

 

Well this is the illusion.. and I do agree that the idea of a "Higher Wage...Lower Welfare State" is amazing, although it will never work due to any funding saved is just allocated into a different area ie over spending on Foreign Aid this year alone!

 

The Tax threshold increases each year thus less tax is actually collected or it stays at a similar level.

 

With the wage increases it might be true that less Working Tax Credits are paid out and the payments are being reduced in 2017. The idea of getting more people back into work could potentially increase the amount of claimants. So again the level of payments would not decrease. With the levels of Immigration being much higher than the "official figures" claimed, this would also have an impact on welfare payments.

 

In theory the idea that the current government have sounds amazing but in reality it is impossible to achieve :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems the only business model that is going to work financially is a Pre-School only setting employing a cheap EYT or QTS like mentioned, to achieve the 1:13 ratios! Children will all have to sit on the carpet for the majority of the day for safety reasons OR we find a manufacturer willing to donate soft play furniture and equipment to pad out our rooms.

 

The annoying thing is that many people accept these Austerity measures!

 

We are talking under funding to sectors that are most needed - and for what exactly? All for MONEY! Why does a Country have a debt anyway! We should simply just get the things we need regardless of money! We are talking education, illness, health, crime and our lives here!

 

How have we accepted that money is worth more than any persons life? If we take it back to basics and actually think about it, we are all human beings. The very fundamental laws are "to cause no harm to another human being" "to cause no loss to another human being" and it's as simple as that.

 

it can be argued that an education is not actually required thus not providing children with early education does not cause harm or suffer a loss to them. The fact is that we have the means to offer education to children from a young age. The only limit on this process is money... thus, "financial restraint" is actually causing a loss to children and breaking a fundamental law.

 

Just a few changes to this system of finance could make a huge difference.

 

Peace!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. (Privacy Policy)