ECE teachers deserve more

Ateacher in an early childhood centre, after three years’ study, can be paid as little as half as much as essentially the same person, with the same qualification, teaching children barely a few weeks and months older at a primary school.

That’s the reality for many in the early childhood education (ECE) sector; it’s why they are campaigning for pay parity with their kindergarten and primary school colleagues.

A teaching union survey last year of more than 1000 qualified early childhood teachers revealed a median pre-tax wage of just $25 an hour, or $52,000 a year. That rose to $26.96 an hour ($56,000 a year) for the most experienced staff, with more than 21 years in the industry.

That’s not far off the base salary for a starting primary school teacher, and a fair way off the average wage for an early childhood teacher in Australia – A$31.39 an hour, or A$65,000 a year.

But the disparities don’t end there. Numerous studies have established that development is most crucial in a child’s earliest years. So, that those charged with their development are among the lowest paid in education is telling.

Just a few months ago, thousands of people took to the streets to support the pay claims of primary and secondary school teachers.

That demonstrated a clear and collective campaign to raise investment in Kiwi children, but the movement to match that investment in ECE has been, up to this point, low key and less enthusiastic.

The reasons for that are many: some parents appear to regard these qualified teachers as glorified childcare workers; they talk about the rising cost of childcare, not the cost of teaching their children.

The Government doesn’t help. Its 20 hours a week free for every child is labelled a childcare subsidy, and many recipients appear to treat it as such, diminishing its part in the professional education of their children.

But the sector must share some of the blame. It has allowed the canonisation of the kindy movement, to the detriment of other equally qualified teachers and other equally professional centres. And many of those centres, and the people working in them, could do a better job of communicating that they are, in fact, teachers and not nannies or babysitters.

Education Minister Chris Hipkins insists that addressing the inequity for ECE is high on his priority list, but he also says the sector is complicated.

He is right that direct action might be difficult in an industry encompassing both public and private businesses, and centres run by parents, hospitals, churches and many other organisations.

But Hipkins, perhaps deliberately, underplays the influence of the Government, both through its funding avenues and other mechanisms.

The Crown invested just under $2 billion in the sector last year through various funding schemes, including the 20-hour subsidy. It licenses and vets ECE centres through its Education Review Office and other agencies.

Only last month the Government revealed a $7.5b surplus. It would be right and fair if some of that windfall addressed what is a demonstrable wrong. But it is time also that the rest of us gave our early childhood teachers the credit they deserve.

Some parents ... talk about the rising cost of childcare, not the cost of teaching their children.