It’s been over four months since I left my last post because the option of (true) part-time wasn’t available to me (although if I wanted to take a 33% cut in salary scale I could have dropped to a teaching contract for the rest of the year)
I recently visited a local secondary school and was told the SENCO is part-time (0.7FTE) so you’ll have to make an appointment for when they are back at work. The head made it clear that she had inherited part-time staff and it wasn’t her choice. I can understand some of the issues with part-time leadership posts but should this extend to teaching posts?
Twice I’ve dug down into the vacancies advertised in the TES. I appreciate that fewer part-time jobs are probably advertised nationally than full-time jobs but the figures are startling.
In my first sample, 18% of jobs were tagged as part-time. Of all the jobs advertised, 14% were secondary part-time jobs. Of all the jobs advertised, 1.5% were for part-time secondary science jobs. On drilling down into the science jobs further, several weren’t teaching jobs and many schools advertised for part-time/full-time hoping to snag any science teachers looking for work (but they had a full-time gap to fill)
I returned this week and looked again. Of all the jobs advertised, 18% were tagged as part-time. Of all jobs advertised, 12% were secondary part-time jobs and 1.1% of all jobs advertised were part-time science jobs. (As a comparison, there were ten times as many full-time science posts)
It gets worse because many of the jobs advertised as part-time were wrongly labelled and the actual number of genuine part-time jobs is much lower. Of those part-time jobs advertised 0.5/0.6 contracts seem to be the most common.
We hear that industry loves part-timers. They are flexible, some workers are even on zero-hours contracts so is this true? A quick search of Indeed shows nearly 19,000 jobs within a 25-mile radius of me. Of those jobs only 16% are part-time, this reduces further when you search for science-specific jobs, so the dislike of part-time workers extends beyond education.
Are schools banking on a reduction in workload improving the recruitment situation? (I would have stayed in the profession if my workload could have been reduced, the fact that I was replaced with two members of staff says something about that workload!) With a profession haemorrhaging teachers and suffering from a recruitment crisis, can we really be so short-sighted as to ignore the huge pool of teachers out there who don’t want to or who can’t work full-time?