Secondary school teacher salary 1980-2024
This was originally published as a blog during the 2010 negotiations. It contains useful information about teacher salary changes from 1980 to 2024
Year to year changes to standard secondary teaching salary (TBS) 1980 to 2024
|
Date |
|
Top of Scale |
|
% increase from |
Government |
|
|
1 Aug |
1980 |
|
$18,054 |
|
- |
- |
|
10 Nov |
1980 |
|
$20,888 |
|
15.70% |
National (Muldoon) |
|
10 Nov |
1981 |
|
$23,950 |
|
14.66% |
National (Muldoon) |
|
10 Nov |
1982 |
|
$23,950 |
|
0.00% |
National (Muldoon) |
|
10 Nov |
1983 |
|
$23,950 |
|
0.00% |
National (Muldoon) |
|
1 Apr |
1984 |
|
$24,367 |
|
1.74% |
National (Muldoon) |
|
10 Nov |
1985 |
|
$34,156 |
|
40.17% |
Labour (Lange) |
|
10 Nov |
1986 |
|
$34,156 |
|
0.00% |
Labour (Lange) |
|
31 Dec |
1987 |
|
$39,105 |
|
14.49% |
Labour (Lange) |
|
31 Dec |
1988 |
|
$39,105 |
|
0.00% |
Labour (Lange) |
|
1 Aug |
1989 |
|
$39,365 |
|
0.66% |
Labour (Palmer) |
|
1 Aug |
1990 |
|
$39,365 |
|
0.00% |
Labour (Palmer) |
|
11 Jun |
1991 |
|
$41,039 |
|
4.25% |
National (Bolger) |
|
11 Jun |
1992 |
|
$41,039 |
|
0.00% |
National (Bolger) |
|
11 Jun |
1993 |
|
$41,039 |
|
0.00% |
National (Bolger) |
|
2 Dec |
1994 |
|
$41,860 |
|
2.00% |
National (Bolger) |
|
2 Dec |
1995 |
|
$41,860 |
|
0.00% |
National (Bolger) |
|
17 Jul |
1996 |
|
$45,000 |
|
7.50% |
National (Bolger) |
|
20 Jan |
1997 |
|
$47,100 |
|
4.67% |
National (Bolger) |
|
20 Jan |
1998 |
|
$47,100 |
|
0.00% |
National (Shipley) |
|
27 Jan |
1999 |
|
$48,600 |
|
3.18% |
National (Shipley) |
|
19 Apr |
2000 |
|
$50,300 |
|
3.50% |
Labour (Clark) |
|
11 Jul |
2001 |
|
$51,306 |
|
2.00% |
Labour (Clark) |
|
10 Jul |
2002 |
|
$52,076 |
|
1.50% |
Labour (Clark) |
|
9 Jul |
2003 |
|
$56,393 |
|
8.29% |
Labour (Clark) |
|
21 Jul |
2004 |
|
$57,803 |
|
2.50% |
Labour (Clark) |
|
20 Jul |
2005 |
|
$59,537 |
|
3.00% |
Labour (Clark) |
|
19 Jul |
2006 |
|
$61,323 |
|
3.00% |
Labour (Clark) |
|
30 Nov |
2007 |
|
$63,776 |
|
4.00% |
Labour (Clark) |
|
2 Jul |
2008 |
|
$66,327 |
|
4.00% |
Labour (Clark) |
|
1 Jul |
2009 |
|
$68,980 |
|
4.00% |
Labour (Clark) |
|
13 Apr |
2011 |
|
$71,000 |
|
2.93% |
National (Key) |
|
23 Jan |
2013 |
|
$71,900 |
|
1.27% |
National (Key) |
|
28 Jan |
2014 |
|
$72,645 |
|
1.04% |
National (Key) |
|
28 Jan |
2015 |
|
$73,000 |
|
0.49% |
National (Key) |
|
2 Sept |
2015 |
|
$74,460 |
|
2.0% |
National (Key) |
|
2 Sept |
2016 |
|
$75,949 |
|
2.0% |
National (Key) |
|
4 Sept |
2017 |
|
$78,000 |
|
2.0% |
National (Key) |
|
1 Jul |
2019 |
|
$80,500 |
|
3.21% |
Labour (Ardern) |
|
1 Jul |
2020 |
|
$87,000 |
|
8.07% |
Labour (Ardern) |
|
1 Jul |
2021 |
|
$90,000 |
|
3.45% |
Labour (Ardern) |
|
3 Jul |
2023 |
|
$95,400 |
|
6.0% |
Labour (Hipkins) |
|
3 Apr |
2024 |
|
$99,216 |
|
4.0% |
Labour (Hipkins) |
|
2 Dec |
2024 |
|
$103,085 |
|
3.9% |
Labour (Hipkins) |
*Most teachers are paid at the top of the scale rate. This is the 'standard' rate for salary comparison and is the rate for the basic teaching job.
(TBS is top of basic scale)
The top salary for a secondary teacher was 1.73 times the average wage in 1980
In 1980, under the Muldoon Government, the top of scale salary for a secondary teacher was 1.73 times higher than the average wage. In 1985 this rose to 1.93 times the average wage under the Lange Government.
The fall of the teacher salary rate to 1.32 times the average wage created a damaging teacher shortage in the mid-90s
During the 1990s, a succession of national governments (in which English was a member) cut secondary teacher numbers (1991/2 and 1994/5) and allowed the secondary teacher salary rate to fall to a low of 1.32 times the average wage, creating the damaging teacher shortage in the mid-90's.
National were forced into a temporary salary boost in 1996, lifting the TBS to 1.43 times the average wage, still significantly below the comparative rate in the Muldoon years. From then they allowed the relative rate to steadily fall again.
When Labour took control of the front benches in 1999 it was faced with ongoing and systemic teacher supply problems. A pitiful pay offer in 2001 completely misread the teacher supply situation and led to widespread industrial action when schools found themselves unable to attract or retain staff at that pay rate. An independent panel chaired by Dame Margaret Bazely was convened to look at the evidence provided by both sides in the dispute and recommended a staged 13% increase in the rate.
The Ministerial Taskforce on Secondary Teacher Pay and Remuneration recommended an objective salary mechanism
The subsequent Ministerial Taskforce on Secondary Teacher Pay and Remuneration (2003) - also chaired by Dame Margaret - recognised the teacher supply problems continued and recommended (amongst other things in a 10 year plan to improve the attractiveness of teaching as a profession) that an objective salary mechanism should be applied to prevent teacher salaries from again falling behind and limiting the need to take industrial action to keep salaries current. A steady increase in rates to maintain relativity with other wage and salaries was seen as preferable to the boom-bust sequence of low or no increases leading to critical teacher shortages, responded to too late by a one-off boost to salaries and then back to a phase of negligence.
By 2004 stage salaries were only 1.47 times the average wage, significantly below the relative wage rate that the Bolger government inherited.
The Arbitration panel of 2023 also recommended an alternative way of finding agreement on secondary teacher salaries
The following are extracts from the final report of the 2023 arbitration panel.
12. In the arbitration hearings the panel has discussed with the parties two of the several options available to them for establishing a structured environment to address issues regarding pay and conditions that can usefully be addressed between bargaining rounds.
A standing committee or similar body
13. One is the establishment of a body in the nature of a standing committee comprised of representatives of the parties with an independent chair. We stress the need to appoint an independent chair to such a body. That person would have responsibility for ensuring that a respectful working environment exists between the parties and that topics raised for consideration by the committee are discussed and actioned in a timely manner.
14. We regard the establishment of such a body as a matter that should be given the highest priority by the parties and that the impending general election does not provide any impediment to the parties reaching agreement on what form that body should take. We also suggest that the claims of the PPTA identified by the panel in this report as benefiting from further discussions should be the basis of the first set of agenda items for the committee.
15. We suggest that the body should set “report back” dates along a timeline that will support both parties in their 2025 bargaining and minimise the risk of further industrial action.
16. We recognise that there would be a cost in the creation and support of such a body. We do not attempt to pre-empt the decision of the pares, working with the Independent Chair, about a resourcing mechanism. We observe, however, that meeting such a cost may be considered preferable to the financial and reputational cost of long-running disputes and industrial action, such as those which have preceded this arbitration.
17. .......
18. The following observations address the comments of the parties about a long-term solution to the determination of appropriate rates of pay that would minimise the need for industrial action in future bargaining rounds.
19. We refer to our discussions with the pares in the arbitration about the Ministry of Education School Teachers’ Review Body (STRB) in the United Kingdom. This is an independent body, established in 1991, that provides advice on the pay and conditions of schoolteachers in England to the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for Educaon. Specified in the Education Act 2002 (UK), the STRB is responsible for advising on pay and conditions for teachers in England. The report provides evidence-based recommendations and is presented to the Parliament. Before making recommendations, the STRB is required to consult certain organisations: teacher unions and associations, organisations representing school governing bodies, and local authorities. The government and the unions are not bound by the recommendations, but the provision of well researched, evidence-based recommendations provides a strong foundation for all pares to begin negotiations.
20. The panel acknowledges that any suggestions for legislative change for a similar body in New Zealand would require policy work approved by the Minister and consultation prior to the presentation of any proposal to the government of the day. We also acknowledge this could be a lengthy process, but we do not consider there needs to be any delay in beginning discussions about any such proposal.
Estimated 11% increase required in the top of scale pay rate in 2025 to restore it to the relative pay teachers were receiving in 1985
Since 2003 salaries have generally been edging back from levels needed to recruit and retain adequate numbers of qualified secondary teachers. A conservative estimate is that the TBS will be 1.56 times the average wage at the point of the December 2024 increase and that it would require at that point a further increase of 11% to bring the normal teacher salary back to the relative salary level it was at under the Muldoon government and restore the recruitment and retention power of the salary.