Education Payroll Roundtable: Navigating Change Together

After building relationships with education payroll professionals over the years, one thing has become clear: these are some of the most dedicated, knowledgeable people in the sector. Yet they often work in isolation, tackling complex challenges with limited support and even less recognition.

That’s why we created our Education Payroll Roundtable – a safe space where professionals can connect, share experiences, and tackle the unique challenges of education payroll together. Working alone or in small teams means these conversations are invaluable, providing both practical solutions and the reassurance that others face the same struggles.

Our latest session – chaired by Satwinder Phull from Royal Academy of Music and supported by Samantha O’Sullivan from CIPP – brought together payroll professionals from across the sector – from nurseries to universities – for an open, honest discussion. While we had a rough agenda, the conversation naturally evolved as participants explored what matters most to them right now.

The Changing Landscape of Pay Structures

With both National Minimum Wage and National Living Wage increasing again in April 2026, the conversation quickly turned to one of the sector’s most pressing issues: the traditional salary banding system.

Here’s the reality: statutory minimum wage rates have been rising sharply – often 7-10% per year – while pay rises for senior roles have been much smaller (typically 3-4%). This creates an uncomfortable squeeze where Pay Administrators might earn only marginally less than their managers.

The hierarchical structure and restrictive pay bands that work so well in theory are creating problems. Some institutions are exploring alternatives – ‘side contribution points’ or spot salaries – though these come with their own challenges around promotion panels and pay progression. It’s a problem without easy answers. Or is it time to ask: are traditional pay bands simply outdated, and should they be scrapped altogether?

When Legislation Exposes Knowledge Gaps

One of the more honest discussions centred on how major legislative changes often reveal gaps in our understanding of existing rules. Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) was a perfect example.

Key takeaways from the room:

• Test your system thoroughly – especially if you pay company sick pay that might mask SSP calculation issues
• The complexity around SSP rates changing across the April 6th tax year boundary caught many off guard
• Zero-hours contracts remain particularly tricky for SSP calculations

The message was clear: even experienced teams can struggle with these nuances, and that’s okay – as long as we’re learning and sharing knowledge.

The Reality of Hybrid Working in Education

While many sectors have embraced flexible working, for many, education remains stubbornly office-based. Most participants reported their teams work five days in the office. However, for those institutions that have hybrid working arrangements, new and unique challenges are emerging.

One institution shared a telling detail: their staff use a WhatsApp group to check car park availability before deciding whether to come in. Infrastructure strain is real, and it’s getting worse as campuses open parking to students, creating insufficient disabled parking and forcing some institutions to pay for spaces elsewhere.

Multi-campus working adds another layer of complexity, with staff sometimes working at different locations without clear visibility or coordination. For those encouraging office-based working, the practical barriers aren’t always about policy – they’re about parking spaces and desk availability.

Zero-Hours Contracts: The Questions That Won’t Go Away

The management of zero-hours contracts sparked considerable discussion and, frankly, revealed ongoing confusion across institutions:

• Is having a schedule sufficient, or do you need to input fixed hours into the system?
• Who should be monitoring the 12-week threshold?
• What are the compliance implications of getting this wrong?

These fundamental questions about contract management highlight how complex even ‘simple’ employment arrangements can become in practice.

Looking Ahead: Benefits in Kind and the Death of the P45?

The upcoming April 2027 changes to Benefits in Kind reporting generated interesting discussion. Most institutions have chosen not to adopt voluntary payrolling yet – and those moving forward in April 2026 should be aware they’ll need two implementations. There were concerns that system providers might be delaying communication to avoid implementing changes twice.

As conversations often do in roundtables, the discussion took an unexpected turn, leading to a broader conversation about payroll paperwork in general – and that’s when someone raised an intriguing question about P45s. With the updated new starter checklist from April 2026 containing all necessary information – including student loan details that P45s never captured anyway – several participants questioned whether the form serves any real purpose anymore. It’s one of those pieces of payroll bureaucracy that might be quietly fading into history.

Recruitment: Finding Good People in a Broken System

This discussion struck a chord with everyone in the room. The frustration with lengthy hiring processes – 2-3 months of bureaucratic hoops for permanent positions – was palpable.

Many institutions are increasingly using temporary-to-permanent arrangements as a workaround. It’s not ideal, but it allows temporary workers to become embedded in the business while the business case for a permanent role is being built.

There was a strong view that for recruitment agencies, a better understanding of legislation and asking more probing questions about passion and motivation – rather than just technical skills – could help identify stronger candidates.

A structural barrier also emerged: HR and Payroll teams are often excluded from Preferred Supplier Lists (PSLs), which are typically held by procurement or operations teams focused on volume recruitment rather than specialist positions. Participants suggested sharing strong CVs might be one way to work around these restrictions, but the question remained: shouldn’t payroll recruiters be on institutional PSLs?

The Value of Connection

What struck me most about this roundtable was the visible relief on participants’ faces as they realised others shared their challenges. From navigating pay compression to managing infrastructure issues and recruitment barriers, these conversations help payroll professionals feel less isolated.

Key themes from our discussion:

• Education payroll teams face unique challenges, but many concerns are universal across institutions
• Bringing professionals together creates invaluable opportunities to share experiences and solutions
• The sector needs better recognition of payroll’s complexity and strategic importance
• Knowledge-sharing helps teams feel more equipped to advocate for necessary changes

We’re proud to provide this forum for meaningful discussion, and we’re already looking forward to the next roundtable. The education sector’s payroll professionals deserve more support, recognition, and opportunities to connect – and we’re committed to providing that space.

Interested in joining our next roundtable or learning more about how we support payroll professionals in education? Get in touch – we’d love to hear from you.