Teachers pay and progression survey 2025

The relationship between pay progression and responsibility payments is muddied. Cash-strapped schools discourage teachers from seeking progression, and attach unreasonable responsibilities and workload demands as the price for advancement onto the upper pay range. This leaves teachers with an unenviable choice between damaging their work-life balance for minimal additional remuneration, or declining progression and being swamped by the rising cost of living. It is no wonder recent years have seen an advanced crisis in teacher recruitment and retention.

Overview of statistics

Teachers’ view on pay and progression

Among all respondents:

• 68% have considered leaving teaching because of low pay or the unfairness of PRP;
• 73% of teachers feel underpaid given their job role, responsibilities and workload.

Pay progression for September 2025

Among all teachers:

• 45% said they were eligible for pay progression;
• 37% said they were ineligible due to being at their scale maximum;
• 4% said they were ineligible due to being new entrants to teaching;
• 9% said they were ineligible for “other reasons”, many of which also amounted to progression denial;
• 6% said they were eligible for progression but did not apply.

Among teachers eligible to be considered for pay progression (45% of the total response):

• 48% still did not know their employer’s decision when completing the survey, affected by the earlier survey date this year.
• Overall, 7% of those who knew the outcome of their pay progression decision were denied.

Teachers were more likely to be denied progression if they were:

• In older age groups
• Working part-time
• Black
• Working in primary schools Among those turned down for progression:
• 17% were explicitly told that the decision was due to funding or budgetary constraints;
• 96% were given no indication during the year that they were failing to meet the required standards, including 59% who had no mid-year review;
• 89% felt that the decision was unfair but 85% chose not to appeal the decision.

Combining all responses including those who progressed and those who were turned down, did not apply, believed themselves to be ineligible, or did not know outcomes:

• Progression rates through the MPR will likely be above 80% once decisions are made
• Progression rates onto and through the UPR will likely be around 30-40%.

Progression onto and through the UPR

Among those currently on the MPR:

• 6% said their school allows teachers to progress onto the UPR before they reach the top of the MPR;
• 7% said earlier progression is possible but never happens in practice;
• 33% said teachers have to reach the top of the MPR first;
• 54% did not know.
• 16% said teachers have to spend two years at the top of the MPR before they can progress;
• 9% said in theory teachers can apply after one year but this never happens in practice;
• 10% said there are no restrictions on progression onto the UPR;
• 65% did not know.
• 27% said their school makes them submit supplementary evidence to progress onto the UPR but a reasonable amount that would/did not discourage them from applying;
• 22% said they require an unreasonable amount of supplementary evidence that would/did discourage them from applying;
• 4% said no supplementary evidence is required;
• 48% did not know.

Among those currently on the UPR:

• 52% said teachers have to formally apply for pay progression to the next point on the UPR;
• 13% said the school will progress teachers automatically;
• 18% said the school will progress teachers subject to an appraisal;
• 18% did not know.
• 49% said progression on the UPR is only available every two years;
• 5% said progression on the UPR can occur annually but that it never happens in practice;
• 11% said progression on the UPR can occur on an annual basis;
• 35% did not know;
• 61% said their school expects teachers on the UPR to undertake specific additional responsibilities which are not recognised with a TLR payment.

Teaching and Learning Responsibility (TLR) payments

Among all respondents:

• 30% currently receive a TLR payment;
• 68% do not currently receive a TLR payment;
• 2% do not know.

Of those in receipt of a TLR payment:

• 38% said the payment was about what they would expect, given the responsibility;
• 61% said the payment was lower than they would expect, given the responsibility. Among part-timers who receive TLR payments:
• 27% perform the full responsibilities of the TLR role, and are paid the TLR in full;
• 9% perform part of the responsibilities of the TLR role, and receive a pro-rated TLR amount in line with their part-time salary;
• 57% perform the full responsibilities of the TLR role, but are only paid a pro-rated TLR amount, in line with their part-time salary.

Of those not currently in receipt of a TLR payment:

• 41% said their current responsibilities should qualify them for a TLR. Teachers were more likely to receive a TLR payment if they were:
• Male
• Working full-time
• Working in secondary schools
• Working in London

Among teachers who receive a TLR payment, median levels were often below the minima set out in the STPCD:

Special Educational Needs (SEN) allowances

Among all teachers:

• Only 7% of teachers receive an SEN allowance;
• In special schools and PRUs 86% receive an SEN allowance, but 13% still do not. Of those in receipt of an SEN allowance:
• 27% said the payment was about what they would expect, given the responsibility;
• 73% said the payment was lower than they would expect, given the responsibility;
• The median SEN allowance is £2,591 in primary and nursery schools, £2,767 in secondary schools, and £2,609 in special schools and PRUs.

Of those not currently in receipt of an SEN allowance:

• 17% say the responsibilities they currently undertake should qualify them for an SEN allowance.
   

Recruitment and retention payments

• Only 2% of teachers say they currently receive a recruitment and retention payment;
• Median recruitment and retention bonuses are as follows:

PRP

Asked about whether their school had said it would end the use of PRP:

• 17% said PRP was dropped for their last appraisal and not used for their September 2024 pay award;
• 3% said their employer has announced it will no longer use PRP, starting from the September 2025 pay award;
• 6% said their employer has said PRP will continue to be used in the future;
• 10% work in an academy that was not using PRP anyway;
• 25% said their employer had not made any announcement;
• 39% did not know.

Among those who said PRP would be dropped:

• 30% said they had announced new criteria for pay progression;
• 39% said they had not;
• 32% did not know.
• 11% said teachers who are subject to capability proceedings excluded from progression;
• 8% said they are not;
• 81% did not know;

Among those who said PRP would be retained, only 5% said their employer had made other changes to progression criteria

Pay structures

Among all respondents:

• 88% say their school retains a six-point scale for the Main Pay Range (MPR) and a three-point scale for the Upper Pay Range (UPR);
• 2% say their school does not use a structure with six points on the MPR and three points on the UPR;
• 10% do not know.

Among those who say their school retains a six-point MPR and three-point UPR scale:

• 79% say they are in line with STPCD;
• 6% say the are lower at some or all points;
• 1% say they are higher at some or all points.

Cost-of-living pay increases

Among all respondents:

• 67% said they had received a pay increase in line with the national increase (heavily reduced because of the early survey increasing “don’t know” responses)
• 1% said they had received a pay increase but that it was less than the national increase;
• 0% said they had received a pay increase but that it was more than the national increase;
• 1% said their school told them that teachers would not receive any cost of living increase;
• 2% said salaries were increased by 4% but allowances were not raised in line with this;
• 8% said no decision had yet been taken;
• The remaining 21% did not know whether or not they had received an increase.

Working time

Among all respondents:

• 79% have kept the same contracted hours as last year;
• 6% reduced their hours in the past year due to excessive workload and its impact on life;
• 3% increased their contracted hours in the past year due to concerns over rising living costs;
• 5% changed their contracted hours in the past year for a different reason. Among part-time teachers:
• 55% kept the same contracted hours as last year;
• 22% reduced their hours in the past year due to excessive workload and its impact on life;
• 6% increased their contracted hours in the past year due to concerns over rising living costs;
• 15% have changed their contracted hours in the past year for a different reason.

Flexible working

• 11% have ever requested flexible working and had it agreed entirely;
• 6% have requested flexible working and had it turned down;
• 9% have requested flexible working and had it agreed in part or with negotiation;
• 74% have never requested flexible working.
• 17% have considered leaving due to problems in accessing flexible working;
• 25% say colleagues have left due to problems accessing flexible working;
• 30% say colleagues have considered leaving due to problems accessing flexible working.

Pay policy and appraisals

Among all respondents:

• 60% say their school made them aware of the school’s pay policy and where to find it;
• 37% think their school’s pay policy is fair;
• 11% think it is unfair;
• 52% do not know what is in their school’s pay policy. Among all respondents:
• 20% say pupil performance is the main driver of appraisal outcomes;
• 36% say pupil performance is one piece of evidence used to determine appraisal outcomes;
• 44% say pupil performance does not form part of appraisal objectives.