Time to change our attitudes towards gardeners

There can be few other industries, where the knowledge and skills needed to effectively carry out the job, and the resultant pay, are so disproportionate, writes Stephen Titton.

Gardeners are all to often seen as the unskilled odd job men of the outside space; there being few jobs that employers would not, it seems, ask them to do. And yet, not only are they expected to know the names of hundreds of different plants on sight, (how impressed would you be if your gardener looked blankly at the plant you were querying) but also a host of various pests and diseases, and their resultant treatment.

This coupled with a breadth of horticultural knowledge that is so wide it can often seem staggering to the uninitiated. And yet, whilst we venerate them in times of need, as they explain exactly what a vine weevil is, as we look forlornly at what remains of our once vibrant cyclamen, or we proudly show our friends and neighbours our apple tree bent double with the weight of fruit since it was correctly pruned, we also require them to sweep, tidy and pick up; in short, to clean for us. As my design lecturer said to me at college, ‘be careful, otherwise you’ll become nothing other than an outside cleaner’.

The gardener occupies a strange place in the minds of those fortunate enough to be able to afford the luxury of having someone able to look after their treasured outside spaces. In my experience, I tend to find that people will speak of tradesmen using the indefinite article, ‘a’ builder ‘a’ mechanic, ‘a’ plumber. Yet, gardeners tend to be spoken of as a possessive: ‘my’ gardener.

It seems sometimes almost like a modern form of serfdom. The gardener comes once a week or once a fortnight to tend our space. That being the case we build up a relationship with them. They are ‘ours’; they belong to ‘us’. And boy do people tend to take advantage of this perceived ownership.

The lines between horticulture and general handyman/cleaner tend to become blurred. I have been asked to clean pavements outside people’s homes, clean out their gutters, sand their garden furniture and pick up their dog’s mess. Am I above any of these tasks? Well, to be truthful, some of them, yes.

Having given up a good career in theatre where I had worked for almost twenty years, to re-train and study horticulture, I am shocked by how shoddily gardening companies both treat and pay their staff. The industry as far as I can see is crying out for decent horticulturalists, yet their pay is all too often far below the living wage.

Why would one bother to study horticulture at college, when companies will quite happily employ anyone ‘interested’ in gardening, and pay them anywhere between 17-21K per annum. And this I believe is the problem. Until the industry sits up and realises that if you pay low wages you will get a low standard of gardener, the status quo will remain unchanged.

The problem with gardening is that its something that we can all ‘do’. This is a good thing of course. It is not, and nor should it be, the preserve of people with letters after their names. And yet it is this very familiarity and insouciance with which the green-fingered fraternity go about their horticultural business that appears to confuse would be employers when it comes to matters financial. I am talking here solely of ‘gardening’. Tending to peoples’ gardens, be they private or commercial. By and large, this problem with such low pay and such poor public perceptions is not something that affects the rest of what is an incredibly large and diverse sector, worth £9 billion and employing nearly 200,000 people.

There are, if you’ll allow me to paint with a very broad brush, 2 types of gardener, - static and mobile. The static gardener, as the name suggests is employed on a ‘static’ site. This can be anything from a park to a large privately owned garden. He or she will go to the same site every day and will undertake whatever horticultural duties are required. Generally speaking, people who can afford gardeners for their large gardens will require some form of qualification, as they won’t want any old ruffian eyeing up their family jewels. The same goes for RHS gardens and commercial spaces. The pay can range, depending on experience, anywhere between 16K and 30K for a head gardener.

The mobile or ‘maintenance’ gardener, is employed to jump in a van and fulfill the contracts with clients. Usually weekly visits ranging from 30 minutes to whatever is required, although this is most often an hour or two. It is the maintenance gardener whose stock is perhaps the lowest. With competition from anyone with a van and a mower, in order to compete, companies have to charge as low as possible so as to not lose out to these mobile entrepreneurs. This money is ‘recouped’ by paying its staff the pitiful wages that we see today. The government subsidises this poor pay by giving the lower paid tax credits, but it’s a broken system. If the economy is to be kick started, then higher wages need to be paid for all in the bottom end of the market. For a start, increasing the minimum wage from the present derisory £6.31 for 21 and over to a ‘living wage’ that needs not to be subsidized by the state.

I know of a 30 year old gardener who has been in the industry since he was sixteen, and working for his present company for 5 years, who is being paid £18,500. That’s £18,500 for someone who studied horticulture for three years gaining a recognizable qualification, and who has given over a sizeable proportion of his career thus far to a single employer. And we’re not talking a small family business that he’s employed by. This is a large well known company in the heart of fashionable West London, whose managing director is a well known and well respected member of the horticultural community.

I can name probably tens, if not hundreds of plants by site. However, their nomenclature is only a tiny fraction of the skill that a gardener needs. Not only do they need to be able to identify the plant, but once identified, they’ll need to know what soil and aspect they will thrive in; how if a shrub or tree to prune it, and at what time in its life cycle; how to divide it if necessary; how to take cuttings if needed; to know what pests and diseases it is likely to get, and how to prevent them from getting them; how to treat those pests and diseases if they do succumb. And all that knowledge is for each plant. Of course, personally speaking, the more I learn, the more I realise how little I actually know. One of the wonderful things about this business is that there is so much to know, and that you are always learning.

It is this study, this learning of the subject that is at the crux of the matter. Whilst the horticultural industry is happy to employ anyone that can operate a mower or blower, or who ‘really likes plants’, we will continue to be paid sub-standard wages, and engender a feeling amongst those employed that they are as worthless as their pay reflects. The horticultural colleges will struggle to fill their courses, as prospective students begin to realise that they can earn their paltry salary with or without qualifications, and learn ‘on the job’.

A 2012 survey of young people by the RHS confirms exactly these assumptions. It found that they thought horticulture was for dropouts, and was both unskilled and unfulfilling. Over 70% of 18 year olds questioned felt a career in horticulture should only be considered by those who had ‘failed academically’, and of the under 25’s questioned, 50% think of it as an unskilled career.

Until these issues can be addressed we will continue to be thought of as unskilled, and hence paid as unskilled labour. The problem is that on the one hand we have the mouth piece of the horticultural industry, rightly sitting up and making its voice heard over many of these perceptions (I am talking here especially of the RHS and their continued support of these issues). And yet, on the other hand, the industry in its guise of small businesses, lauding Government incentives for more recognition, and then continuing to keep their metaphorical foot on the gardeners’ head by paying our derisory wages and advertising positions for gardeners where no experience is necessary. One of London’s largest horticultural recruitment consultants welcomes applicants with no experience but who are ‘reliable, have good work ethic and like to work outdoors’.

The ability to ‘learn on the job’ has become one of the industries evils. I’m not talking about an apprenticeship here, or even being mentored, but going out and by virtue of not killing everything, ‘learning’ to be a gardener. I know of a gardener whose motto would seem to be ‘if in doubt, cut it down’. And yet he, and so many like him get away with this attitude because it is never questioned. Generally speaking, most people trust their gardeners and assume that they know what they are doing. Yes the plants survive, no one has died, and all is well in the end. I’ve had builders with that kind of attitude, and it usually ends in tears; probably long after I’ve moved out.

It is true we don’t save lives, or design glass edifices for people to marvel at, or even fix boilers and repair leaky roofs, but, without sounding too grandiose, we both create and maintain pieces of this land, that, if done well, make people stop and smile. Make people appreciate the spaces around them. Surely it is not too much to ask that we should be paid a ‘living wage’.

Comments

[Kieran Ray]

I class myself as a landscaper as most of my work is landscape based, but I wholeheartedly agree with this.

The only issue I see is that unless everybody raises their prices at once the lower charging people will win out and keep wages low still.

In my company I charge well so that I can make a profit and pay decent wages too.

[Alfie Bines]

My guess is that every gardener in the country will agree with the main thrust and sentiment of Stephen's argument and I can entirely understand a career changer coming into our industry forming a view that it is the evil horticultural employer who is to blame for the undervalued perception and low wages that are so prevalent.
We are however not unique. I believe the strongest determinant of this situation is the regularity at which gardeners need to be employed by the consumer. Here we share a platform with chefs, nurses (infact the whole care industry), child nurseries and hairdressers, to name but a few, all of which ideally require highly skilled, sensitive and experienced participants to do a great job, but which in the real world have to rely on people who "love their work" or some who are inevitably less skilled.
Contrast these occupations with mechanics, builders, electricians etc who consumers call on only occasionally, or perhaps for one big project and you realize that spending more "per hour" is far more feasible than when it is a weekly or fortnightly outlay.
Next is the ease of entry to our trade. Again we are not unique. Along with decorators and window cleaners for example any bod can turn up and offer their gardening services to a domestic client without training or qualification. This of course brings overall market rates down and make it harder for the more qualified and able firms and individuals to charge as much as trades where no one would dream of using someone unqualified (electricians, boiler engineers etc and "Theatre"!)
And so we come back to the naive comment regarding employers in our industry. Most good employers (and the employers I have met in our industry are generally a far better meaning bunch of people than in many other types of business) want (need) good people to work for them and are prepared to pay as much as they can possibly afford to recruit and retain good staff. But for all the reasons I have mentioned above there is a charging ceiling which prevents our rates going to the levels we would all wish for.
Now this does not mean we sit back and accept the situation. The industry should be constantly educating the public and careers advisers and everyone else who needs to hear that a good gardener is exactly as Stephen says very knowledgeable and highly skilled.
And although I don't think Stephen states in his article whether he is self employed, in employment or seeking employment, I think it is also true that because of the scarcity of skilled people in our industry it is infact possible to make a good living as a single handed gardener for discerning clients, or at management level for a company. Supply and demand does kick in here.
And I genuinely believe that contemporary attitudes and the existence of the web make the possibility of enhancing our standing as good as ever.
So Stephen, keep banging the drum on behalf of gardeners but don't blame the employers. It's just not that simple.

[Stephen Titton]

That reply could only have been written by an employer. And whilst I agree with much of what Alfie says, there is much that is simply stated, in my humble opinion, in order to preserve profits.
Sometimes it is a good thing when someone from the outside comes into an industry, and sees it with fresh eyes, as it were.
Firstly, stingy pay and benefits don't necessarily translate into lower costs in the long run. Low pay leaves workers feeling worthless. Feeling worthless, generally speaking equates to low productivity. Staff move on, temps perhaps have to be used until permanent staff are taken on. Interviews, form filling, etc. All this takes time, and costs money in the long run. Paying better wages gives staff a sense of worth. It helps them feel both validated, and an important part of the process. This means they are less likely to move on, and will be more productive.

Ok, so everyone knows this, and it's hardly a new argument. However, for none of the reasons Alfie mentions, is there a 'charging ceiling'. This has been created by business, because it works for business. It is what is termed as 'irresponsible capitalism', fuelled by irresponsible employers who pay low wages subsidised by the government in the form of tax credits. Paying people what they deserve, really shouldn't be an alien notion. Give people some dignity.
The only naivety in my piece, and this I readily accept, is stating that this pay increase needs to start with small companies. These increases need to start from the top down. The larger companies need to cut their profits in order to pay better wages, until smaller businesses are either able, or forced to by the market. Accepting the status quo helps no-one.
I agree that we, like many of the other professions that Alfie mentioned, also suffer from poor pay and poor perceptions, but that also doesn't in any way make it acceptable. Security and working conditions, as well as decent pay are all part of a fulfilling employment.
I've been in your industry for nine years - long enough to see the inequality in it. Yes, I did work in 'theatre', very happily employed as a lighting technician for the majority of the time. The reason I, and so many of my peers felt no need to move on, was that we were renumerated well. I'm not going to even begin to compare the two industries - suffice to say there's probably a bit more cash floating around in the West End than there is in West Ruislip. However, one of the main reasons we were so well paid is because we had a strong union. Maybe that's what the horticultural industry needs. How many gardeners are actually members of a union? A pretty small amount I would guess. I certainly am, and that's primarily because I am only too aware that my boss would sack me sooner than I could blink, if he even knows who I am.

So Alfie, I shall keep banging the drum on behalf of gardeners, and I shall blame the employers, because it is the employers who have the power to change things.

[Alfie Bines]

Hi Stephen,
It sounds like you're in the "Us and Them" camp.
Yes I'm an employer but I am also a gardener and like the vast majority of small business owners in our industry, started working for someone else and then went self employed on the tools before employing others as the work load grew. A good relationship with the staff is 100% essential. You make this very point yourself but then imply that employers ignore it. A good small business retains key staff long-term.
And you will be well aware that our industry is significantly represented by small businesses.
So to suggest that there is some conspiracy to create a charging price ceiling frankly doesn't make sense.
The contradiction is this - we have a scarcity of highly skilled gardeners (perhaps partly because of poor pay) whilst at the same time for reasons I have already given there IS a charge out rate beyond which we cannot realistically go. Larger firms generally gain their work by competitive tendering, and smaller firms may tend to be in the domestic market where consumers will also compare prices. At the same time decent firms will want to pay their employees the best rates they possibly can and also to provide the best working conditions or good people will simply jump ship.
Every trade, profession, commodity, service has a price ceiling. Market forces / supply and demand dictate that just as in the theatre if the ticket price is too high there will be empty seats, in garden services if we try to charge too much our order books will empty.
My argument does not remotely represent an acceptance of the status quo. We should all be constantly promoting our skills and selling ourselves in the most positive and professional way to our clients and customers to increase our perceived value in comparison to other trades.
And I also do think this has been happening over recent years. Publicists such as James Wong are busy selling the horticultural industry to the young and the main trade bodies such as the RHS are acutely aware of the issue.
Finally despite agreeing with you on the general undervaluing of gardening and garden services I nonetheless do think that there are plenty of opportunities for skilled people to earn a sensible living in horticulture. For example a good single handed self employed gardener should be able to charge themselves out at the same rate as a company would charge but without the company's overheads.
It's also the recruiting season and employers will be desperate to recruit new blood. Take a look at what's on offer - they may not be the majority, but you may be positively surprised at some of the opportunities.

[Stephen Titton]

Alfie, you make some very good points. All I have to say is this: I'm willing to admit that I may not always be right, but I am never wrong. All the very best of luck with your business.

[Jonas Spring]

I do agree there are low barriers to entry and low wages for regular garden maintenance. The following changes in my community pesticide bans, popularity of organic foods, interest in native plants and urban agriculture have created a niche for a more knowledge based approach. Monetizing the experienced gardeners "eye" is not easy but can be done. I posted an article about the new gardener ethic http://ecoman.ca/the-new-gardeners/ let me know what you think.

[Alfie Bines]

Stephen.
Good man.
Ultimately the cause is the same!
(How do I get into the theatre? !!!)
Best,
Alfie

[robin AINSWORTH]

And after the years of enjoyment by the owners we add many thousands to property prices on resale ! :)

[Tara Dillard]

Add $$$ to your article.

As a Landscape Designer I increase property value, reduce HVAC costs, don't poison groundwater with fertilizer/insecticide, to begin with.

Also have a licensed/insured landscape contracting team with home construction. Widens my net, and bottom line.

Alas, all you write about public perception of gardeners is true. Too true.

Garden & Be Well, XO Tara