FE pay: why we need to look beyond short-term, targeted incentives

By Laura Kayes, Group Research Practitioner and Teacher at Luminate Education Group, and Research Further Scholar.

The further education (FE) sector in England is facing a critical pay crisis that threatens to undermine the quality of education, our future workforce and the entirety of our sector. Having spent a decade working in colleges, I've witnessed firsthand the growing disparities between school and college teacher pay, the real-terms fall in salaries, and the devastating impact on staff morale, recruitment and retention.

The pay gap between school and college teachers has reached alarming, and frankly unforgivable, levels. A report published by the National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER) in September found that teachers in FE are paid 23% less than their peers across the education sector, with recent estimates from the AoC putting the pay gap at around £9,000 difference. The 5.5% pay rise awarded to school teachers is set to widen this disparity even further.

College teachers have experienced significant real terms pay cuts over the past decade. According to the Insitute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), between 2010–11 and 2022–23, recommended salary levels for FE college teachers fell by 18% in real terms. This sustained erosion of pay has left many college staff feeling financially vulnerable and professionally undervalued. The consequences are severe. The IFS also found that almost a quarter of college teachers leave the profession within their first year, and around half have left within three years of starting. This turnover rate is significantly higher than in schools and other public sector organisations, with 16% of college teachers exiting the profession each year compared to 10% of school teachers.

One of the unique strengths of FE colleges is their ability to offer vocational and technical education taught by industry experts, but current pay levels are making it increasingly difficult to attract and retain professionals who could earn considerably higher salaries in industry roles. The NFER report mentioned above estimated that, in 2021, median earnings for full-time engineering and digital FE teachers were about 11% lower than median earnings in relevant industry occupations.

In an economy forcing many to make decisions on monetary outcomes, an FE talent drain threatens to diminish the quality and relevance of vocational education at a time when skilled workers are in increasingly high demand.

That said, we must be wary of the temptation to throw targeted pay increases or recruitment incentives towards teachers in subjects that align with an educational agenda, specifically, perhaps, those seen to contribute most tangibly to the economy. Whilst enticing teachers into subject areas with persistent vacancies can be effective in the short term, the resulting subject hierarchy risks perpetuating a narrow, marketised view of education that the sector as a whole must unitedly resist.

FE colleges offer a rich diversity of subjects that contribute to personal, academic, social, cultural, and economic growth. The arts and humanities are not an extracurricular luxury. They celebrate and champion cultural heritage and identity. The arts celebrate our shared human experiences, challenge our perspectives, and nurture critical thinking. Beyond their intrinsic cultural value, they also contribute significantly to economic growth and innovation.

The creative industries contributed £115.9 billion to the UK economy in 2019, accounting for nearly 6% of the total. The Local Government Association found that for every £1 generated in the arts and culture sector, an additional £1.23 in gross value added was generated in the wider economy. Prioritising science, technology, engineering, and maths feeds into the neoliberal marketisation of education and undermines the true social, cultural, and economic potential of a democratised curriculum.

As colleges struggle to compete with schools and industry for talent, there's a danger of adopting market-driven approaches that prioritise immediate economic impact over educational quality. This shift could lead to a narrowing of curriculum offerings, reduced support for disadvantaged students, and a focus on short-term outcomes rather than long-term educational benefits.

To address this crisis, urgent, pan-agency action is needed. The government must recognise the vital role of FE colleges in our education system and provide adequate investment to close the pay gap with schools. College leaders, unions, and policymakers must work together to develop a sustainable investment model that democratises our curriculum and values our staff.

We urgently need a broader societal conversation about the purpose and value of education, beyond its economic benefits. Short-term, targeted incentives for certain subjects will only go so far, and at some point these sticking plasters will become a detriment to quality within the wider curriculum. Only by recognising the intrinsic worth of learning across all disciplines can we build an education system that truly serves the needs of individuals and society as a whole.

The views expressed in Think Further publications do not necessarily reflect those of AoC or NCFE.