A major factor in anti-teacher sentiment.

seavill · 28-01-2015 8:55am

You have absolutely no basis for your opinion that the cpa would have had different outcomes if it had not been for the early 2000s. Everyone had to agree to changes in work practice. What would they have made us do instead for the cpa??? Also are you really trying to say that the alleged bad feeling from the early 2000s by the public was key to the government decisions during talks for Croke park. That seems to be what you are saying ?

In fact your opinion makes less sense to me. If you take one of the concessions was to lose payment for s&s. Had we not had payment in the first place we would have had to give somewhere else. So in fact had it not been for the strikes in the early 2000s we would be way worse off right now than we currently are.

RealJohn · 28-01-2015 9:03am

endakenny wrote: »

It's up to the accuser to prove the accusation. I base my opinion on the presumption of innocence. That is how the legal system works and that is how it should work with regard to making accusations in all aspects of life.

Would you not take this approach in all the other nonsense threads you start then? You usually start with the assumption that teachers are guilty of something and gripe about it.

Actually, that's how you started this thread - you assumed that industrial action over ten years ago was a large part of the reason that the general public have no sympathy for teachers, based on nothing (other than possibly your own resentment).

evolving_doors · 28-01-2015 9:46am

doc_17 wrote: »

Is this thread for real? What's the deal with the non teacher starting a thread that has nothing to do with anything?

This EK is more annoying than the real one

Tis an open forum doc_17.

Don't respond to that warning on-thread

Mod.

evolving_doors · 28-01-2015 11:55am

RealJohn wrote: »

Would you not take this approach in all the other nonsense threads you start then? You usually start with the assumption that teachers are guilty of something and gripe about it.

Actually, that's how you started this thread - you assumed that industrial action over ten years ago was a large part of the reason that the general public have no sympathy for teachers, based on nothing (other than possibly your own resentment).

I think the thread title is a fair assertion... just based on what ive heard in my staffroom. Whether it be right or wrong ,the sentiment amongst some IS hostility against the ASTI for the actions taken back then, and quite a few said it was the point at which public sentiment towards teachers began.
Of course its more nuanced but getting back to the thread title ; I believe it is a factor... maybe not the 'main' factor... but still a factor.
So from that point of view I'm interested in hearing other folks opinion who were around back then (I wasnt teaching then either).

seavill · 28-01-2015 12:12pm

I've never heard any mention of the earlier action in nearly 10 years of teaching from either teachers or the public. I Couldn't agree with you that the two are linked

evolving_doors · 28-01-2015 1:35pm

seavill wrote: »

I've never heard any mention of the earlier action in nearly 10 years of teaching from either teachers or the public. I Couldn't agree with you that the two are linked

Neither had I, until I saw mention of it in an old thread. Even when I asked around the lunch table I sensed a bit of tension between teachers... so maybe thats why folk prefer to bite their tongue.

Unions are a fairly emotive topic and the issues seem to be fairly complicated. There is usually a good bit of background history and politics involved too. It can be as touchy as civil war politics was... (just mention Unions/Waterford Crystal to anyone old enough in Waterford and you can see why some wish to stay silent).

I think someone on here put up a link to politics.ie where the ins and outs of 2000 were discussed at length. Ill try and find it.

Edit: Well here's some background to the ASTI politics of it... and I'm none the wiser after that, but it highlights the above points (HERE)

evolving_doors · 28-01-2015 2:05pm

killbillvol2 wrote: »

Finally it becomes clear.

The strikes of 2000-2003 caused endakenny to miss out on the points required to go into teaching (in his opinion).

His fascination (obsession?) with the profession continues unabated however, and thus we're all treated to his ramblings.

Those ASTI members have a lot to answer for! :P

Ah now KBV2, just stick to the points addressed rather than the person making the point. Making judgements about the personality of the OP is a sign of a weak defence.

Cards will be handed out if members insist on attacking the poster rather than the post.

If it's a closed forum folk are after then educationposts is

>

Do not respond to this FINAL WARNING...

endakenny · 28-01-2015 2:07pm

Armelodie wrote: »

I think someone on here put up a link to politics.ie where the ins and outs of 2000 were discussed at length. Ill try and find it.

Is this it?
http://www.politics.ie/forum/history/163031-asti-industrial-action-2000-2003-a.html

evolving_doors · 28-01-2015 2:08pm

Ya that's it.

acequion · 28-01-2015 6:06pm

Sorry OP but you're talking rubbish and doing so with rather melodramatic language,"public outcry", "opprobrium" How come I, as a practising teacher,an ASTI member and a striker back then recall no such "opprobrium"?

Granted,the strikes caused inconvenience and were unpopular as strikes always are, but no more so or less so than the current dispute and the dispute exactly 15 years previous to 2000,the dispute which also caused stoppages in 1985.

To suggest that the 2000-2003 disputes were some kind of watershed to which the beginnings of public hostility can be traced and even the CPA, is hilariously far fetched.

Anti teacher sentiment cannot be traced to any one moment or event. It is an attitude shift which has evolved over time,from the days when the local school master was a godlike figure in the community, to today,when he /she is everyone's favourite public enemy. Same thing happened with the church.Go back further and same thing happened with the landowner.It is a cultural thing in this giddy little land of ours where everything is in extremes. The old parish order changed even more during the tiger years when all paddies [teachers included] were partying and the sense of entitlement by many became obnoxious. When the proverbial shyte hit the fan someone had to be scapegoated, so handy enough to blame PS workers in general and teachers in particular.

As for the tension some people sense when talking to older collegues about those strikes,that is because of the resentment ASTI members felt towards the other teacher unions. ASTI action lead to S&S being paid for the first time,from which all teachers benefitted. Everyone felt very let down by the TUI in particular,as they were the good guys not on strike and here we were sticking our necks out. But, as one poster pointed out,they had more guts back then.

killbillvol2 · 28-01-2015 6:23pm

killbillvol2 wrote: »

Finally it becomes clear.

The strikes of 2000-2003 caused endakenny to miss out on the points required to go into teaching (in his opinion).

His fascination (obsession?) with the profession continues unabated however, and thus we're all treated to his ramblings.

Those ASTI members have a lot to answer for! :P

Armelodie wrote: »

Ah now KBV2, just stick to the points addressed rather than the person making the point. Making judgements about the personality of the OP is a sign of a weak defence.

Cards will be handed out if members insist on attacking the poster rather than the post.

If it's a closed forum folk are after then educationposts is
>

Do not respond to this FINAL WARNING...

So on your so-called open forum I'm not entitled to question the motives of a poster who consistently attacks teachers on the forum? That's BS.

You can save your card, I'm out of here.

<Have a read of your post above again, you didn't question the motives in any way what so ever. Anyway, since when did questioning motives of folk (who we have no clue about ) ever get a thread anywhere.

Even at that I didn't give out any infractions, it was just a warning (because others chose to report your post too!)...after another obviously ignored warning.

Mod.>

endakenny · 28-01-2015 6:49pm

acequion wrote: »

As for the tension some people sense when talking to older collegues about those strikes,that is because of the resentment ASTI members felt towards the other teacher unions. ASTI action lead to S&S being paid for the first time,from which all teachers benefitted. Everyone felt very let down by the TUI in particular,as they were the good guys not on strike and here we were sticking our necks out. But, as one poster pointed out,they had more guts back then.

The TUI didn't ask the ASTI to go on strike. Maybe TUI members didn't mind doing S&S without payment.

Chilli Con Kearney · 28-01-2015 6:50pm

Enda, at the CPA talks, other sectors were hit for overtime cuts, additional hours of work, etc.

As none of the changes/adjustments could be imposed on teachers other than a straight pay cut, which was not going to happen really, we were given extra hours to do, in terms of meetings, planning, etc. This was to be done outside of normal hours hence generating 'efficiencies' in our sector.

This way, all sectors were hit. We could not get away without something giving. 2001 strikes or not, this was going to happen.

seavill · 28-01-2015 7:00pm

endakenny wrote: »

The TUI didn't ask the ASTI to go on strike. Maybe TUI members didn't mind doing S&S without payment.

Where does your opinion come from that they don't mind? Is there any basis for it.

Do you care to respond to my earlier questions to you?

endakenny · 28-01-2015 7:05pm

Chilli Con Kearney wrote: »

Enda, at the CPA talks, other sectors were hit for overtime cuts, additional hours of work, etc.

As none of the changes/adjustments could be imposed on teachers other than a straight pay cut, which was not going to happen really, we were given extra hours to do, in terms of meetings, planning, etc. This was to be done outside of normal hours hence generating 'efficiencies' in our sector.

This way, all sectors were hit. We could not get away without something giving. 2001 strikes or not, this was going to happen.

I'm aware of that. When I said "there might not have been CP hours", I should have said "there might not have been CP hours in the current format". I'm aware that teachers have gripes about the lack of flexibility of these hours for various reasons (though a small amount of flexibility was granted to all teachers after the ASTI accepted HRA), i.e. the hours cannot involve continuous professional development or giving extra classes while other public sector workers, in their extra hours, are simply doing more of the work that they always do, e.g. nursing, policing.

endakenny · 28-01-2015 7:09pm

seavill wrote: »

Where does your opinion come from that they don't mind? Is there any basis for it.

Do you care to respond to my earlier questions to you?

I didn't hear of TUI members complaining about S&S or lobbying their leadership for a ballot for industrial action back in 2000.

As for the possibility of having to give something somewhere else if there never had been payment for S&S, what do you think that something somewhere else might have been?

Chilli Con Kearney · 28-01-2015 7:55pm

endakenny wrote: »

I'm aware of that. When I said "there might not have been CP hours", I should have said "there might not have been CP hours in the current format". I'm aware that teachers have gripes about the lack of flexibility of these hours for various reasons (though a small amount of flexibility was granted to all teachers after the ASTI accepted HRA), i.e. the hours cannot involve continuous professional development or giving extra classes while other public sector workers, in their extra hours, are simply doing more of the work that they always do, e.g. nursing, policing.

As far as I am aware, a major issue here was that the JMB pushed for the current format. They did not want nor considered that their members had time to be running around, compiling and tallying individual CPA hours for teaching staff. Consequently, the format of everyone in one room was arrived at.

Sure, it is a pain for teachers and is a waste of time in many cases (most 2 hour meetings with 40 people in a room are). But from the Principals' point of view, their job has become so difficult, so time-consuming and in some cases almost untenable, that this was another task they weren't willing to do. The government (DOE&S) are not going to go against the school managers. Sure then there would be all-out war.

acequion · 28-01-2015 8:12pm

endakenny wrote: »

The TUI didn't ask the ASTI to go on strike. Maybe TUI members didn't mind doing S&S without payment.

Oh would you please get real!! Just because they weren't striking didn't mean they didn't object to doing unpaid work.

However, in the late 90's I worked part time in a VEC school which would be TUI. I had about 8 set hours per week but I used to earn a decent weekly wage from subbing in the same school. All substitution was covered by part time and casual teachers for which they were paid. Contracted teachers did do yard supervision,but that's all. I remember being peed off by having to do both unpaid when I switched over to voluntary secondary. So,that probably explains why TUI teachers they didn't feel as aggrieved as the ASTI ones.

The subsequent introduction of paid,voluntary S&S put everyone on an equal footing. .

endakenny · 28-01-2015 8:38pm

acequion wrote: »

Oh would you please get real!! Just because they weren't striking didn't mean they didn't object to doing unpaid work.

However, in the late 90's I worked part time in a VEC school which would be TUI. I had about 8 set hours per week but I used to earn a decent weekly wage from subbing in the same school. All substitution was covered by part time and casual teachers for which they were paid. Contracted teachers did do yard supervision,but that's all. I remember being peed off by having to do both unpaid when I switched over to voluntary secondary. So,that probably explains why TUI teachers they didn't feel as aggrieved as the ASTI ones.

The subsequent introduction of paid,voluntary S&S put everyone on an equal footing. .

Why didn't the ASTI consider legal action with regard to S&S on the grounds of the constitutional right to equality?

katydid · 28-01-2015 10:02pm

endakenny wrote: »

The answer to that question: teachers of JC and LC courses constitute a minority of the members of the TUI.

How do you work that out? The FE sector was pretty small back then (still is)and is still relatively small, and the third level sector, which tends not to be so vocal in the union. I go to union events and I can assure you that as a teacher in the FE sector, the the majority of those I encounter and the tenor of most discussions tends to be aimed at second level.

doc_17 · 28-01-2015 10:09pm

endakenny wrote: »

I didn't hear of TUI members complaining about S&S or lobbying their leadership for a ballot for industrial action back in 2000.

As for the possibility of having to give something somewhere else if there never had been payment for S&S, what do you think that something somewhere else might have been?

Oh, and I suppose you were at TUI meetings in every branch up and down the country? You didn't hear it happening therefore it didn't happen. Well, I'm sold. What nonsense.

seavill · 28-01-2015 10:57pm

endakenny wrote: »

Why didn't the ASTI consider legal action with regard to S&S on the grounds of the constitutional right to equality?

Who knows and who cares it was nearly 15 years ago and completely irrelevant, I can't believe we are even having this discussion, its far from where you originally started this thread

doc_17 · 28-01-2015 11:32pm

seavill wrote: »

Who knows and who cares it was nearly 15 years ago and completely irrelevant, I can't believe we are even having this discussion, its far from where you originally started this thread

It's very interesting that someone who is anti-teacher starts up a thread about the anti-teacher sentiment. I think therapy would be a better way to get it off their chest.

endakenny · 28-01-2015 11:48pm

katydid wrote: »

How do you work that out? The FE sector was pretty small back then (still is)and is still relatively small, and the third level sector, which tends not to be so vocal in the union. I go to union events and I can assure you that as a teacher in the FE sector, the the majority of those I encounter and the tenor of most discussions tends to be aimed at second level.

Institutes of technology are large organisations and my local FE college has approximately 90 teachers - much more than any of the secondary schools in the area.

Chilli Con Kearney · 28-01-2015 11:50pm

This thread is becoming ludicrous!

Enda, at first I used to think you were trying to familiarise yourself with the Irish education system.

But as I see more and more of these obscene comments and threads, I think you are throwing grenades. I mean, some of the stuff is nuts.

The comment last week in the strike thread about first years shows a complete lack of familiarity with the mind set of first years and consequently how we work with them

"If teachers warn pupils that there's a likelihood that the industrial action will mean that the continuous assessment won't take place and tell them to work as though all of the marks will still be for a terminal exam, then pupils will be prepared for that scenario. Therefore, if the issue is resolved before the assessment take place, then the pupils will still do well in the terminal exam as well as the assessment. I believe that, if I was a first-year secondary pupil now, I would be prepared for both scenarios."

The constant references to your alma mater as if it somehow represents the entire system are tiring too. This highlights a problem teachers encounter - everyone feels like they are teaching experts because they went to school.

It is clear that this is, once again, a thread set up with another sweeping generalisation that returns to the same old scatter gun approach of antagonising teachers.

km79 · 28-01-2015 11:52pm

doc_17 wrote: »

It's very interesting that someone who is anti-teacher starts up a thread about the anti-teacher sentiment. I think therapy would be a better way to get it off their chest.

for the very first time on boards I put someone on ignore. just do it. the less people that interact the better

spurious · 28-01-2015 11:53pm

endakenny wrote: »

Institutes of technology are large organisations and my local FE college has approximately 90 teachers - much more than any of the secondary schools in the area.

You think they are all in TUI? This is getting silly.

katydid · 28-01-2015 11:53pm

endakenny wrote: »

Institutes of technology are large organisations and my local FE college has approximately 90 teachers - much more than any of the secondary schools in the area.

There are not that many FE colleges and few with 90 teachers. There are community colleges and other vocational schools all over the country. They form the majority of TUI members.

The IT's tend, in my experience, only to involve themselves in their own issues, and not all of their staff are TUI members.

purplecow1977 · 29-01-2015 12:00am

I feel I must have suffered a blackout. I did my LC in 2004 but don't recall any strike days! I went on to do primary teaching so can't have affected me that much!

Many parents take their children out for a week or more to go on holidays ( cheaper during term time) so if teachers strike for a few days, it doesn't have much of an overall effect.

endakenny · 29-01-2015 12:01am

katydid wrote: »

There are not that many FE colleges and few with 90 teachers. There are community colleges and other vocational schools all over the country. They form the majority of TUI members.

The IT's tend, in my experience, only to involve themselves in their own issues, and not all of their staff are TUI members.

The TUI represents most of the teaching staff in second-level and thrird-level educational institutions that are under State authority (as opposed to the voluntary secondary schools). Furthermore, I'm aware that some community and comprehensive teachers are ASTI members.

A major factor in anti-teacher sentiment.

Comments