WOMEN TEACHERS.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVIII, 27 September 1924, Page 5

WOMEN TEACHERS.

QUESTION OF SALARIES

MINISTER’S STATEMENTS

CHALLENGED

Ill© following letter has been sent to the Minister or Education (Hon. u. J. Parr) by Mr H. A. Parkinson, - secretary. of the New Zealand Educational institute':

“I have the honour, by direction of the.executive of the New Zealand Educational Institute, to inform you l that the attention of the executive’has been directed to some, statements regarding the salaries of teachers reported to have been made by you in the House of Representatives when introducing the Education estimates. The executive believes that the statements referred to are likely ,to produce an incorrect impression ori. the public mind with regard to this subject, and has directed me to make the following comments by way of correction:— 1 '

“As reported in tlie daily Press, you are quoted as venturing to say there was no other country ‘in the world in which the women teachers were as well paid as in New Zealand,’ and. later, ‘Nowhere else in the British Empire was. there a better scale of salaries for women teachers.’

“In opposition to this opinion; I am to point out that in many, if not most, of the British Dominions women assistant teachers receive higher 'salaries than irrNew Zealand. England. Wales, Ireland, Queensland, New South Wales, and a good many parts of Canada may be quoted as examples. “With regard to the reported statement that ‘the , salary of the firstassistant master is about £450,’ I have to point, out that the possible maximum under the old scale was £393—-for those only of highest grading—Avith £4O additional if married. Under the present scale the maximum is ‘£384, v plus £4O if inarried, and there are only 125 positions giving that salary. No ordinary first assistant receives, or can receive, £450, the maximum even under the old scale being £433, and under the scale recently introduced this has been “cut” to £424, and even that is for those only who are married and of highest efficiency.

“The other statement to. which I have to refer is: ‘There Avere 2600 women teachers in the sendee, and nearly half of them draw'salaries -of from £5 to £9 per Aveek.’ “It is to he presumed that the 2600 women teachers referred to are assistants, since in . actual fact there are 3791 Avomen teachers in the service, of whom 2669 are assistants. It has to be borne in mind that in New Zealand it is the position that is paid and not the teacher. Taking the figures from the 1924 report, of the 2669 Avomen assistants occupying these positions, 2444 receive less than £5 a Aveek, except that 138 of them in grade 1118 Schools, if they receive the highest possible grading addition, may iust reach the £5-a-week standard, -with-, possibly, a very few of those in schools of grade 111 A. Of the AA’omen assistants only 485 draAV over £5 a Aveek —less than, one-fifth of them— and none of them as much as £7 a. week. Of the infant mistresses in the 101 large schools, so far is it from the fact that ‘quite a number draw over £4OO a year,’ as stated, only three recei\'e as much as £405 a year, and they are engaged in the normal schools. Of the others only 10 receive more than £353 —the prevailing salary—and 37 less than that. The maximum is now £360. “If the head and sole teachers are taken into account it will be found that 465 receive slightly over £5 a AA-eek, 310 others under £7, 148 under £9. onP« other under £9. and only 4 over £9, and one of these is head mistress of a normal school. It will thus be seen that only one Avoman in a thousand reaches the £9 a week mark, and far less than half of them receive £5 a Aveek.

“In the compilation of these figures house alloAvance and highest grading addition have been included, so that tliev present the most favourable view of the Position. “As the statements that gave rise to these comments been published, it is the intention of the executive to hand copies of this letter to the Press.”