Private school teachers out on landmark strike, as 'nine in ten educators at Britain's largest academy chain claim they have had to take second jobs to make ends meet'
Nine in ten private school teachers at Britain's largest academy chain say they have had to take second jobs to make ends meet because they are paid so little.
They say United Learning's latest pay offer is so derisory in comparison to what their state school counterparts are paid that they were forced out on a landmark strike this week in protest.
Meanwhile unions representing them say they are being 'treated with contempt'.
Staff at Surbiton High School and Banstead Preparatory School downed tools after United Learning, which runs 90 academies and 14 independent schools, offered them pay rises of just two or three percent.
They are incensed that the group, which has net assets of more than £50 million, is offering them around half the statutory 5.5 per cent rise given to the academy teachers.
Now they are lobbying parents at both schools to write to governors and chief executive Sir Jon Coles, who was paid around £300,000 last year, to find out where their fees are going.
At present Surbiton High School, in south west London, has fees of up to £24,000 a year while Banstead Preparatory School, in Surrey, charges parents up to £19,000 a year.
But, according to teachers and unions, this fee income is not ring-fenced for individual schools but is spent across the group. One teacher, who was on the picket line at Surbiton, told the Mail on Sunday: 'The reasoning doesn't make sense.
'The pay is so bad that 90 per cent of teachers are having to take second jobs, such as tutoring, to make ends meet. And, the younger staff, who cannot afford to live near the school, are not getting enough salary to pay their travel.
'It is really tough. Every single person on strike, doesn't want to be on strike because they love teaching. They enjoy being with the children, they enjoy teaching, they enjoy education.
'There is also no transparency. Parents pay the fees, but it goes into a pot of money for all their private schools, and, as teachers, we don't feel that it's going back into the school.
'We're trying to get parents to hold United Learning accountable. They are really supportive on the whole.'
National Education Union (NEU) senior organiser Rachel Evans said: 'Once again, United Learning have offered their independent schoolteachers a pay award significantly below both inflation and the increase afforded to teachers in the state sector.
'By our estimation, this award will mean that the majority of United Learning independent schools offer pay lower than that in local state schools.'
This week's strike came after talks broke down with ACAS and NEU members after ten of United Learning's 14 independent schools voted in March in favour of industrial action.
The move comes in the wake of the news that one of the group's top schools, the £40,000 a year Royal School, in Haslemere, Surrey, is due to close in August. Financial pressures such as Labour's VAT on fees policy are believed to be behind the closure.
NASUWT Acting General Secretary Matt Wrack added: 'United Learning Trust is treating our members with contempt and paying them less than teachers in the state-funded academies they run.
'How can it claim teachers at Surbiton High School are worth less than teachers in their other schools? ULT should not treat hard-working and committed teachers at Surbiton in this appalling way.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
Another fake Net Zero market that nobody wanted is set to collapse
This week came news that UK bioethanol producer Vivergo Fuels is once again on the brink of closure – this time as a result of the UK's trade deal with the US, which removes tariffs on cheaper American bioethanol imports. Its rival, Ensus UK, faces a similarly uncertain future. Vivergo produces enough bioethanol to supply about 30 per cent of the UK's bioethanol needs for low carbon road fuels. Government rules require a percentage of bioethanol to be blended into petrol before it can be sold in order to reduce the carbon dioxide emissions associated with transport – considered to be one of the hardest to abate sectors. This is not the first time that Vivergo has faced closure. Back in 2018 it shut down for four months due to uncertainty over government support. It only reopened when the Government created a subsidy scheme known as the Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (RTFO), which forces fuel suppliers to sell renewable fuels. Bioethanol producers earn RTFO certificates, which they sell to fuel suppliers to help them meet their quotas. And that's the heart of the issue: the UK bioethanol industry wasn't created to meet any actual consumer demand – it exists to satisfy a policy target: the use of green fuel in transport. Now it faces extinction thanks to a different policy priority: that of securing an advantageous trade deal with the US. American bioethanol is cheaper to produce. If it now enters the UK tariff-free, it will almost certainly displace UK-made bioethanol. But once the emissions from transatlantic shipping are factored in, much of the carbon benefit from the RTFO is wiped out. In 2023, the UK as a whole emitted 375 million tonnes of greenhouse gases, about 0.7 per cent of global emissions. Road transport accounted for roughly 100 million tonnes. Using UK bioethanol cuts transport emissions by around 82 per cent, but switching to US imports halves those savings. The impact on global emissions? Negligible – effectively defeating the purpose of the policy. This is a textbook example of how net zero policies can create artificial markets that collapse as soon as political winds shift. Bioethanol was never commercially viable on its own, it was simply created to tick a box. And now, it's likely to be sacrificed for the greater prize of trade access – a goal with arguably broader economic value to the nation. There's no easy compromise here. If the UK wants its trade deal with the US, it's unlikely to be allowed to impose carbon border taxes or other constraints on US ethanol without breaching the deal. But any industry that only survives because overseas competitors are excluded isn't genuinely viable. Unless there's a clear national interest – such as energy security – consumers shouldn't be forced to pay higher prices to prop up policy experiments. The public didn't ask for biofuels, they were pushed into using them by renewable fuels mandates. And now the protections that insulated the UK bioethanol industry from international competition are being lifted, the future looks bleak for the sector. But then, the emissions savings were so paltry on a global scale that it's difficult to see the point of the complex system of mandates, certificates and subsidies that prop it all up. Worse still, both Vivergo and Ensus run on wheat, and together consume up to 15 per cent of UK wheat production when operating at full capacity. Their closure would deliver another blow to a farming sector already reeling from successive policy missteps. This is a cautionary tale. When governments create fake markets, they distort industries, misallocate capital, and raise consumer costs – all for gains that may prove illusory. There are very good reasons why we don't have a centrally planned economy, and it's time ministers stopped pretending we do.
Daily Mail
3 hours ago
- Daily Mail
The billionaire US tennis star for whom Wimbledon's £3m prize pot is pocket money: New Yorker Emma Navarro, 23, stands to inherit £3.5BILLION from her tech tycoon father - and she's had fair share of on-court spats
Wimbledon handed tennis stars a major boost in the build-up to this year's tournament by announcing a record prize pot of £53.5million, with singles champions set to take home a cool £3m. The sum represents an increased on the £2.7m taken home by last year's champions Carlos Alcaraz and Barbora Krejcikova, but the Wimbledon title would prove more more significant for one star than the prize money at the All England Club. US star Emma Navarro, who was raised in New York, boasts a personal fortune so vast that the tournament's prize money will be like short change. Emma is the daughter of wealthy American billionaire investment tycoon, Ben Navarro, and the tennis star is quietly sitting on a £3billion ($3.8bn) inheritance. Tycoon Ben, 62, married to Emma's mother Kelly, built his billionaire empire thanks to numerous business ventures, most notably being the founder and owner of Sherman Financial Group, which has assets such as Credit One Bank. Despite her affluent background, Navarro has put the work in on the court to have risen to a career high ranking of eighth in the world last September. The 24-year-old's rise followed a career best run of Grand Slam results having reached the third and fourth round respectively at the Australian and French Opens, before reaching the last eight at SW19. Her run to the quarter-finals at Wimbledon included a stunning win over Coco Gauff, before she was beaten by the eventual tournament runner-up Jasmine Paolini. Navarro's best Grand Slam performance, however, came later in the year when she reached the US Open semi-finals in front of a home crowd but fell to the eventual champion Ayrna Sabalenka in straight sets. A quarter-final run at this year's Australian Open and a first WTA 500 title in Mexico in March have seen Navarro's own personal winnings from the sport reach $4.6m (£3.4m). Navarro had previously ground her way through the challenging US college tennis circuit before turning pro and the American has not been afraid to take on rivals on the court when she has felt the need. She generated headlines during last year's Olympic Games in Paris after being embroiled in a post-match spat with Chinese star Zheng Qinwen. After losing in three sets to the Zheng in the third round of the women's singles event, Navarro grasped her opponents hand during the handshake and had a tense exchange with the Chinese star. Navarro was seen shaking her head after exchanging words with Zheng, who would ultimately go on to claim the Olympic title. The pair posed together at a tournament in March last year before the spat, with Navarro claiming later that Zheng 'didn't necessarily treat me or the sport with respect' In her post-match comments, Navarro did not pull any punches about her view of Zheng, accusing her of being 'cut-throat' and added she was a player she doesn't respect. 'I think she goes about things in a pretty cut-throat way,' Navarro said. 'It makes for a locker room that doesn't have a lot of camaraderie, so it's tough to face an opponent like that, who I really don't respect. 'But, kudos to her, she played some good tennis there at the end. She played better than me, so congrats to her.' When asked about Navarro's comments, Zheng responded: 'She told me she doesn't know how I have a lot of fans. 'It looks like she's not happy with my behaviour toward her. If she's not happy about my behaviour, she can come and tell me. I would like to correct it to become a better player and a better person.' In a perceived dig at Navarro, Zheng then added: 'I'm glad that she told me that, I will not consider it an attack because she lost the match.' Navarro and Zheng has yet to meet since, with the pair narrowly avoiding a showdown at the US Open when the Chinese star was beaten in the quarter-finals by Sabalenka. With Navarro addressing the media prior to Zheng and Sablanenka's match, she was again asked about her comments at the Olympics and doubled down on her forthright opinion of her rival. Despite Navarro's comments, Zheng would ultimately go on to be crowned Olympic champion 'I don't want to go super into the weeds with it, but I think during that match and, you know, on the practice court and the last few times I've played her, I felt just a little bit disrespected by her' Navarro said. 'I think she didn't necessarily treat me or the sport with respect. That's why I said what I said after the match. But, yeah, that's it. She added: 'I haven't spoken to her since and no, I didn't surprise myself, I felt that way the whole match. 'Even if I had won, I probably would have said the same thing. It wasn't a sort of in the moment, emotional thing. It was kind of just how I felt. And I think it got a lot more attention than I thought it was going to. 'I think maybe it's just one person's opinion, but it wasn't an emotional outburst. It was kind of just matter of fact, how I felt.' With fans awaiting the next meeting between the pair, all eyes will be on the Wimbledon draw to see when Zheng and Navarro could potential clash. A meeting would undoubtedly be high-profile due to the pair being seeded fifth and ninth respectively, meaning a showdown would be in the latter stages of the tournament. Zheng recently fell foul of British fans at Queen's when she overcame Emma Raducanu, after the Chinese star opted to change her shoes when the home favourite was attempting to save a break point, prompting boos from spectators. The competitive spirit shown by Navarro has run through her family, as her grandfather was ex-Ivy League footballer turned coach Frank Navarro. He was widely heralded for his work at America's most prestigious colleges including Princeton and Columbia. The 23-year-old is not the only athlete in the Navarro family, her grandfather Frank Navarro was a former American college footballer turned coach Frank served as a head coach for Williams College, Columbia University, Wabash College and Princeton University and even introduced the 'Monster Defence' at Williams. Navarro has offered fans glimpses at her life on and off the court through her Instagram, with her following having soared after impressive results over the past year and a half on tour. After heading into last year's Wimbledon with a following of 40,000, there are now over 240,000 tracking her life and progress. Navarro's account is dedicated mostly to the sport she loves, with the odd glimpse into a more luxe life via shots of boutiques and her jet-set life on the Women's tennis tour. There's also plenty of photos of the family pets, including Marti, a shaggy haired black and white dog that seems to hold a special place in Emma's heart. Although the American will be hoping to impress again at Wimbledon, there's certainly no financial pressure firing her on; the impressive family purse means she could retire in luxury tomorrow if she wanted to. Ben has also showed interest in his daughter's passion, investing in the tennis world first purchasing Charlestown Tennis LLC through his Beemok Sports company on 2018 - which holds the longest-running women-only tennis tournament, the Charlestown Open. Before splashing out nearly $300milliion (£237m) in 2022 to obtain the Western and Southern Open, which is a major tennis tournament. The Western and Southern Open saw 19 of the top 20 tennis players compete at the competition back in 2022 and is one of only nine tennis events that is recognised globally as a top-tier tournament for both men and women players. Regardless of her result at Wimbledon, Navarro already has a financial security most players can only dream of before their playing days come to a close. Navarro is reportedly in line to inherit an estimated £3.5billion ($4.8bn) which towers over the tennis greats such as Roger Federer $550m (£401m), Rafael Nadal $220m (£160m) and Novak Djokovic $240m (£175m).
Times
3 hours ago
- Times
How Surrey are bucking trend for declining crowds at county matches
In a cricket context, a significant development has been happening in south London. At a time when crowds for domestic first-class cricket have been dwindling worldwide, Surrey are bucking the trend. Their past two home games, against Yorkshire and Essex, have each broken the record for championship crowds at the Oval in the 21st century, a culmination of a determined effort throughout the club to promote the county game. The visit of Durham (a Sunday to Wednesday fixture) is Surrey's fifth home Championship fixture and their last until September 8. During the course of this week's match, it is likely the club will break the attendance figures this year for the whole of last season, even though there will still be two home games to play. It fits a pattern of rising interest and attendances in first-class cricket and rising membership, at a time of decline or stagnation elsewhere. Some numbers, first of all. Over the past decade, Surrey's attendances for championship cricket have doubled, from 33,121 in 2015 to 65,433 last year. This year's average attendance has been 13,206 per game, with a peak of 14,982 against Essex. Total attendance so far in 2025 has been 52,825, so an average gate against Durham should see them past last year's figure. Membership has risen from a little under 10,000 a decade ago to more than 20,000 now. It is worth exploring why. No one would doubt that Surrey have some enviable advantages through a long-term staging agreement with the ECB and a ground that has benefited from significant investment, in one of the great capital cities of the world, sitting on the edge of a wealthy financial district. It would be easy for them to sit on their laurels and yet there has been a concerted effort to promote the less obviously marketable aspects of the county game, to see county members not as a problem to be solved but as their best customers, and to align a successful four-day team with a distinct marketing push. Oli Slipper, the chairman, credits the work of Richard Gould, formerly the chief executive of Surrey now at the ECB, and Richard Thompson, his predecessor as chairman, for their determination not to see county and championship cricket left behind after the introduction of the Hundred. He makes the point that Test cricket remains by far the biggest driver of ECB revenues, and therefore a vibrant championship, as a bedrock for that, is essential. He has no truck with the divisive narrative around county or franchise, red ball or white ball, recognising instead the potential for a virtuous circle, with audiences and interest from one feeding into the other. 'So many people have almost given up on red-ball cricket, because it is difficult, but we see a vibrant red-ball crowd and many white-ball fans converting. We see a good audience there,' he tells me. Their marketing of the championship has involved various recent initiatives, at no great extra financial cost. The Essex game was a designated 'Festival of Red Ball Cricket' match, the second year such an initiative has been held. More than 3,000 of the almost 15,000-strong crowd in that fixture were first-time visitors to the club, and 40 per cent were under 45. Every championship match offers free entry after tea, the club allow spectators to play cricket and wander the outfield in the breaks, and to watch a Test-class team (when at full strength) on the field, they charge only £15 per adult per day and £1 for under-16s — great value when set against the cost of international tickets. Andrew Lane, the finance director, points me to the flexibility of various membership models. Previously, the club found a significant drop-off after the affordable under-16 rate finished, so now they offer a 16-21 membership for £73. For £144, there is a 22-25 age bracket membership, which guarantees entry to every Surrey match and the Hundred for the short-of-money, post-university, just-moved-to-London crowd. Eventually, they hope to transition these to a full membership at £270. Lane is convinced that the quality of the free broadcast stream (viewing figures for the championship this year for home matches are already double that of last year) is an important factor in the rise of championship crowds. Now, the four-day game is easy to follow and watch day-to-day, which allows the narrative to build and supporters to engage with it, encouraging many to pop in during or after work, especially on Fridays. The settled Friday to Monday starts for the early championship programme combined with this year's good weather has been a significant factor. It means that, for Surrey, the championship more than pays its way. Lane says that putting membership receipts to one side and accounting simply for takings at the ticket office, bars, restaurants and shop, then over the course of seven home championship games, match-day receipts should exceed costs by about £300,000. For Surrey at least, four-day cricket is not a loss-leader, but an essential part of their offering. All this is one reason why the club is against a reduction in championship cricket from 14 matches. A domestic schedule review is under way, with various options under consideration amid a strong push from the Professional Cricketers Association and many counties to reduce the red-ball programme. Recommendations, if and when agreed by the 18 counties, are set to be approved by the Professional Game Committee on July 8 and ratified by the ECB at the end of the month. There are five convoluted options on the table, all of which — bar one — would mean the championship programme is cut to 12 (or 13) matches. Surrey's preference would be an elite eight-team top division and a ten-team second division, with 14 matches, as of now. Given there is broad agreement across the county game to reduce the T20 Blast to ten or twelve games (but scheduled on better nights of the week to sell) Surrey's vision for a 14-match championship programme should still be feasible. Behind Surrey's rise on the field has been Alec Stewart, no longer the club's full-time director of cricket but still the most influential cricketing voice there. As one of England's finest players, the DOC behind Surrey's three-timer in the championship, and the man responsible for the production line of England talent from the club, his views should carry weight. He sees a clear delineation between the championship as an elite cricket competition — there to promote best versus best and to help produce England players — and the more commercial offering of the Blast and other short-form competitions. He reckons 14 games is a bulwark against rain and one-innings matches and if scheduled right should be both a good competition to watch and one that provides a thorough grounding to help produce England players. I stand to be corrected, but I cannot believe there is anywhere else in the world that would have doubled their four-day, red-ball support over the past decade. Those who see Surrey as an outlier, with unique advantages, are right to some degree, but there are also lessons to be learnt: they see county cricket as a growth business not a declining one; they see members as an asset, not a problem; there is a 'whole' club determination to push the county game and they have built a brilliant stadium and team. It is a template that is working.
