Why do teachers get automatic pay rises based of years of service?

There's no scope for performance related pay or bonuses, so teachers have to get increases based on something.

Tenure is a reasonable choice, IMO.

I have no issues with the system as it is, but there is scope. The director of the school should know how his/her teachers are performing. It should be their job to assess and distribute performance based increases and bonuses. It's no different to the role of a manager in a private company. It's not exactly fair that a top performing teacher should get the same salary as a poor performing teacher.

How do you measure performance.

You might be in a school in a disadvantaged area, or an area of privilege. You might have a lot of special needs kids. You might have kids who won't be sitting exams etc..

As someone who tried to home school 3 children during lockdowns, teachers are not paid enough.

What are you basing their inadequacy on?

Lots of ways:

• Self appraisals
• Peer/Student/Parent Feedback
• Management by Objectives
• Reviews
• etc.

Not everything is about exams, it's time Ireland moved on from that.

I have to laugh at the privileged position the OP is in and doesn't even know. Very few private companies increase salary they way they are experiencing it. Pay rises for many people don't happen once a year and is dependent on the company's success and nothing to do with the effort and knowledge of the employee. Worked for a company that was always struggling when the economy was booming and when the company was doing well they would point to the industry not doing well as a way not to pay raises.

Teachers have group negotiations due to there not being a fair metric and work up to the top salary. Lots of private companies used to do this. Back in th day as jobs were for life the expectation was the person would get married and have more responsibilities so would pay more the longer you stayed. They also didn't want their experienced staff being poached so it was another reason to pay more.

The entire civil service has the same set-up as teachers with salary increases so not sure why teachers are being singled out

Or maybe not every pupil is meant to get an A or B? They were mixed ability groups, that does not mean the ability of the groups was distributed evenly.

OP, while I share your sentiments and that it does seem crazy that pay increases are based on length of service rather than performance resulting in a poor teacher with 20 years service being paid substantially more than a good teacher with 5 year's service, the answer is pretty simple - what's the alternative?

I have had this debate many times with friends and family who are teachers.

At the foundation of all this is that a teacher can't quit and go to the private sector - there is only one employer and that is the state (unlike an accountant who could work in the civil service but easily leave to join the private sector). Likewise, if a teacher is "let go", they have nowhere else to go. Therefore, job-for-life is seen as essential for people in that career. The result of that is that you end up with the good and the bad mixed in together. When it comes to performance, while it is obvious in some cases as to who is a good teacher or a bad teacher (but could be subjective in others), it is very hard to put that in an empirical formula. There's been plenty of posts above regarding measuring based on exam results, so what else do you use? Ratings from students/parents? That just results in a popularity contest with the strict (but good) teacher performing badly and the easy-going (but poor) teacher getting massive pay rises. Likewise, how do you ensure consistency both within schools and across schools?

Ultimately, it's the only way it can be done until someone thinks of a better (and practical) alternative.

On the flip side, I do wish teachers would accept that the above also causes them critical challenges. When operating in a heavily unionised environment, and with the benefit of guaranteed pay rises, job security and excellent pension, they can only move at the pace of the slowest in the herd. That is why I get frustrated when the unions (especially ASTI) start rattling their cages. I have no problem with the idea of good/great teachers getting paid substantially more. But as long as they are all in the same boat together with the mediocre/poor/terrible teachers, then they are going to have a hard time convincing anyone that they (collectively) "deserve" more.

That's mostly subjective. How is that better?

Well you can say that. But you should pro-rate the pay to actual hours worked in order to compare like with like.

As a programmer, I'd imagine that you are always learning and trying to keep up to date? Something with (many) teachers don't really have to worry about. It's not as if Shakespeare is churning out new plays or that the grammar rules of Irish are due for a backwards incompatible upgrade

Just because teachers themselves don't know how to do it, doesn't mean it could not be done.

There would be simple statistical tests to identify outliers. Once you have the data, you could set up a confidence interval of say 99% and when someone is identified as an outlier (good or bad) then the manager/principal has to otherwise justify or explain it to prevent it being acted upon.

I mean, even as students in school ourselves, we knew that there were teachers whose classes did better than the other ones. You'd know that Mrs. Murphy's class was more difficult because she made the students work but that they always did better in their exams etc.

I see on Appendix 1 that there are 25 incremental points. But teachers are stuck on the same salary for a lot of those years. And after 25 years there is no possibility of any further increase. Apart from any possible future National Pay Agreements type settlements. Which in the past have reduced salaries as well as increasing them.

https://www.education.ie/en/Circulars-and-Forms/Active-Circulars/cl0060_2020.pdf

• Management by Objectives

Hardly subjective if you have objectives!

Some schools do it. Its called streaming.

Streaming is controversial in that you are labelling kids as they enter a school.

It tends to work out well for the top performers as they get hot housed. However the weaker students can become almost ghettoised for want of a better word.

Using mixed ability classes can help have a positive impact on some of the weaker students. Putting students working together in group activities can allow the weaker students to learn from their peers.

It can also help from a social aspect as students get to know each other who otherwise may not. Remember, schools are not just about getting high grades.