What’s the difference between a lawyer and a teacher?

If this sounds like the beginning of a joke, that is because it is. Only it is not a very good one.

Almost everyone would agree we have too many lawyers. Even some lawyers. Yet as the headlines have been telling us for a fortnight, teachers are in short supply.

Indeed, according to some school principals, we have a crisis. And it seems the problem is worst in Auckland. Not enough millennials want to teach.

Should anyone be surprised? As the proud father of one of New Zealand’s newest lawyers, I know I am not. Last Friday, when my daughter was admitted to the Bar, her employer said she would make a fine lawyer. Naturally, I could not have felt more proud. But she would have made a fine teacher, too.

So why would she choose law? Especially having witnessed firsthand the demands of one of the oldest professions on both her parents. Long hours, difficult work, budgets, performance appraisals and constant compromises, as court and client demands crowded out family commitments.

And despite popular mythology, joining the legal profession is no one-way ticket to riches. It certainly rewards some of its members handsomely. But median incomes for lawyers are slightly lower than median incomes for secondary school teachers. And average incomes are materially lower.

Buying days over
Of course, teaching is also a demanding profession. But it is also a noble one: equipping the next generation with the knowledge they will need to fulfil their potential as adults. Surely this is a worthy rival for the lawyer’s calling to uphold the rule of law?

And it was not as if my daughter lacked familial role models to pursue a career in teaching: A grandmother and two aunts were more than able to point out the relative merits of their vocation.

But it was not to be. Teaching may be a calling but it is not shouting loudly enough. Neither to my daughter nor, it seems, her peers.

I have not quizzed her on why the talented school leavers in her generation seem to choose almost any career other than teaching. But I can hazard a guess.

Millennials may be idealistic but they are not stupid. They know one day they will need to put roofs over their heads. And you do not need a degree in maths to work out the days of teachers buying homes in Mt Eden or Mt Albert – or practically anywhere else in Auckland – are over. There is no weighting for the greater cost of buying a home in Auckland. Yet without it, teachers have been priced out of the housing market.

And it makes no difference that their areas of expertise are in the STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) subjects in high demand in other sectors. There is no recognition of the comparatively greater worth of any speciality. Little wonder that teacher shortages in the STEM subjects are the most acute. Our public hospitals would face a shortage of medical specialists, too, if they could only earn as much as GPs.

Reward talent
The education sector needs to fix these problems. And they must surely be priorities for the new minister of education.

But there is a more profound problem at the heart of the teacher shortage. Under their collective agreement, the salary scales for teachers may guarantee they are not paid less than their peers. But it also guarantees they are not paid more.

At a New Zealand Initiative event earlier this year, Post-Primary Teachers’ Association president Jack Boyle asserted “there are no bad teachers.” Even if that heroic claim were true, it does not mean there aren’t some who are outstanding.

And most professions reward outstanding talent. Whether it is in the boardroom, the courtroom or on the sportsfield, those who excel in their chosen career, reap the rewards of their success.

Not so in the classroom. The collective agreement is one size fits all.

Moral psychologist Jonathan Haidt tells us it is basic human nature to want to be recognised and rewarded for your achievements – for those whose contribution is outstanding to earn more than those whose is not. Yet our teacher unions claim that this would destroy the co-operative environment within our schools that is critical to their success.

But would it? Is Ryan Crotty any less likely to pass the ball back to Sonny Bill Williams because the All Blacks’ second five earns more than his outside centre? Of course not. Competitive salaries do not hinder teamwork when it is a key requirement for individual success.

And perhaps that’s the real difference between law and teaching. Median incomes may not be too different. But in the legal profession superior talent and hard work is rewarded. Little wonder it is a such a draw for so many of our brightest school leavers. 

 All content copyright NBR. Do not reproduce in any form without permission, even if you have a paid subscription.