Deleted Topic

[willkeddie]

This is a deleted message after complaints Edited April 9, 2008 by willkeddie
Change

[Guest richard]

Compared to the Rochdale job that pay is bad.

[StewartKnight]

If you pay a McWage, I hope you realise that you'll get a McTechnician.

 

Pay peanut, you get monkeys!

You may already have good ICT experience and qualifications

No one who has any experience is going to want a job that pays £10k!

[mrforgetful]

Yeh that's an entry position with no experience or qualifications where the person is expected to do the most basic things, changing mice, cleaning keyboards etc... right?

[Guest kerrymoralee9280]

I support a Network Manager and am still paid a lot more than that.....

 

I'm sure I heard somewhere (like from our Bursar) that the minute an employee uses a computer for their job (technicians obviously need to) then they can be paid no less than a scale 2...... That job sounds like it's only a scale one to me!

[AlexB]

Side note:

 

I suspect being able to find this job advert on EduGeek automatically rules you out for being over qualified at that salary

[wesleyw]

Isn't Langley getting combined with Warley when BSF takes over?

 

 

Wes

[timzim]

Depressing indictment of our State Education system that an "Investor in People" can get away with paying so little.

[crc-ict]

Wow! The Investor in People criteria is much more than pay. It's about progressing careers, giving staff a voice, listening, empowering. Pay - and a progressive and flexible pay review system - is only part of this. Read any Investor in People report and that would be clear.

 

And in my experience, in practice, it means nothing. Maybe for teachers, yes, but not for us. A number of my schools are 'Investors in People' and I haven't had a single training, development or progression opportunity in the year I've been doing this. Other staff get CPD meetings and discussions about progress etc, but not me.

[john]

Wow! The Investor in People criteria is much more than pay. It's about progressing careers, giving staff a voice, listening, empowering. Pay - and a progressive and flexible pay review system - is only part of this. Read any Investor in People report and that would be clear.

 

And in my experience, in practice, it means nothing. Maybe for teachers, yes, but not for us. A number of my schools are 'Investors in People' and I haven't had a single training, development or progression opportunity in the year I've been doing this. Other staff get CPD meetings and discussions about progress etc, but not me.

I totally agree with you there, and then the annoyance is that when they get an IIP review the "random selection" just happens to be all the staff that have either been offered a course and turned it down as they dont want it or been on them, never anyone thats been saying "please sir i want this course" and been ignored etc.

[ReverentCreature]

I surely hope that that advertisement shows the actual wage and not the wage that is being offered before pro rata! Otherwise whoever gets that 37 hour a week job will only bring home about £7,000 a year! You can earn more than that being a cleaner or shop worker. Where is the incentive to learn and get a repectful responsible job?

[Joedetic]

Sorry, but I'm a student...and even I know that's bad pay!

 

Whilst it may be a lovely school to work at and the kids may be a joy...I'd rather have to wear a stab vest to work and get paid an appropriate amount for the skills expected. As it's been said...if you have skills and qualifications you're going to go where they appear to be valued with the higher wages.

 

The redeeming feature of the job is the Microsoft Certifications and CPD.

 

That's my two penneth worth. Did you fill the position in the end?

[Oops_my_bad]

You can earn more than that being a cleaner or shop worker. Where is the incentive to learn and get a repectful responsible job?

Why is being a cleaner/shop worker not a respectable job? :?