Teachers vote for industrial action

dave-higgz

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/0307/breaking10.htm

Firstly could someone tell me whether this could be an "anti-government" strike or an "anti-pension levy strike"? I'll support anything to get FF out but I believe the pension levy is appropriate for teachers who enjoy very generous working hours and days off.

I'm in transition year myself and although I'd enjoy a day off:rolleyes:, It could be very selfish for teachers to put at risk the future of the 3rd and 6th years.
Everyday I see teachers in my school leave before 4p.m., enabling them to beat the rush hour and be home before 5. and then even with correcting copies etc they can enjoy their evening without hassle. I know they work very hard and I can honestly say there isn't a teacher in my school that I don't like however with almost all of their positions and pensions secure, it seems only fair that they take a financial hit, like the rest of us.

(sorry if this looks like another Public Sector Bashing post but I think teachers need to be discussed thoroughly)

otwb

Looks like its because of the governments general handling of the economy for the last 10 years... Which funnily enough was heavily influenced by the partnership process... Which the unions were a considerable part of....

...so they are proposing a general "down with this sort of thing" strike because of bad decisions made by their own unions...genious idea...that'll help the country no end.

gaeilgegrinds

I would love to know where you are in school because a third of teachers in the schools I know of, including my own are part-time and never have any security from one year to the next and are on part-time contracts. There are many issues here, least of all in my opinion, the pension levy. Cutbacks are going to hit all students, they are always my primary concern.

Dave!

Could they not just have a protest outside Leinster House on some weekend???

DarkJager

Dave! wrote: »

Could they not just have a protest outside Leinster House on some weekend???

Of course not, that would be too common! Trust the teachers to throw the toys out of the pram like a bunch of spoilt brats. They did it before, and it wouldn't surprise me to see them do it again. To be honest I don't know what they are complaining about. They get more holidays than any of the rest of us, are well paid, and DO have a solid job as education isn't going to be gone anytime soon.

brianthebard

DarkJager wrote: »

Of course not, that would be too common! Trust the teachers to throw the toys out of the pram like a bunch of spoilt brats. They did it before, and it wouldn't surprise me to see them do it again. To be honest I don't know what they are complaining about. They get more holidays than any of the rest of us, are well paid, and DO have a solid job as education isn't going to be gone anytime soon.

What's solid about a years contract? The education system isn't going anywhere, but it is slimming down, more kids in less classes, while more and more teachers are coming out of university every year, far more than are retiring. So each year a large percentage (and getting larger) of teachers have to go back and sign a contract to be given the job they are already doing. If that job is on offer again, it may not be.

DeirdreD

Dave! wrote: »

Could they not just have a protest outside Leinster House on some weekend???

Teachers have been there and done that - in particular last year when highlighting the large class sizes here in comparison to other nations - the governments response...........they actually increased the teacher pupil ratio!!!

This ballot was primarily related to the governments handling of the economic crisis which is including in a very real way education cutbacks

Teachers now teach in some of the largest class sizes in Europe with an increasingly diverse student population, e.g. increased numbers of pupils with special educational needs ( previously many of whom were in special schools), newcomer students etc etc and the response of the government is to increasethe numbers within the classrooms. The primary curriculum advocates nurturing the uniqueness of every child, advocates hands on learning, group work, learning in diverse environments etc etc- a challenging task with 30+ pupils!!As a teacher myself I am more than willing to take the hit re pension levy but when cuts related to increasing the teacher pupil ratio, disbanding some special classes, decreasing the aomunt of language support teachers etc are incurred to save a few bob ( and seem to be the thin end of the wedge) I wonder at the governments plans re saving money to address the economic crisis. This is what many teachers are concerned about - we all know that children are the future of the economy and deserve the best in terms of learning and teaching

In response to an earlier post( student in transiton year)teachers may finish school at an earlier time compared to other professions but remember teachers have to prepare class plans, monthly reports on curriculum taught, pupil support plans for pupils with literacy/numeracy difficulites etc etc ( this all happens outside of school hours)

Again I do appreciate we all have to take some punches as part of a givernmental response to these challenging times ( and personally again have no problem with the pension levy) but question is this just the beginning? And will future generations be the ones that suffer if Batt O Keefe and his advisors continue to cut school supports

jimmmy

DarkJager wrote: »

Trust the teachers to throw the toys out of the pram like a bunch of spoilt brats. They did it before, and it wouldn't surprise me to see them do it again. To be honest I don't know what they are complaining about. They get more holidays than any of the rest of us, are well paid, and DO have a solid job as education isn't going to be gone anytime soon.

Agreed. I bet they will not strike during their summer holidays. I know more than a few teachers who will be off in their foreign holiday homes then ; I know a few other teachers who will be running their lucrative little summer touristy businesses.

old boy

the future of any country is its children, if children are not educated properly it affects our future, if they are highly educated if also affects our future, de velera took science out of the classroom and installed religon, it took until the nintys to recover, an old f.f. ploy, keep them ingorant, then they will then know no better, him and mc quaid have a lot to answer for

irish_bob

DeirdreD wrote: »

Teachers have been there and done that - in particular last year when highlighting the large class sizes here in comparison to other nations - the governments response...........they actually increased the teacher pupil ratio!!!

This ballot was primarily related to the governments handling of the economic crisis which is including in a very real way education cutbacks

Teachers now teach in some of the largest class sizes in Europe with an increasingly diverse student population, e.g. increased numbers of pupils with special educational needs ( previously many of whom were in special schools), newcomer students etc etc and the response of the government is to increasethe numbers within the classrooms. The primary curriculum advocates nurturing the uniqueness of every child, advocates hands on learning, group work, learning in diverse environments etc etc- a challenging task with 30+ pupils!!As a teacher myself I am more than willing to take the hit re pension levy but when cuts related to increasing the teacher pupil ratio, disbanding some special classes, decreasing the aomunt of language support teachers etc are incurred to save a few bob ( and seem to be the thin end of the wedge) I wonder at the governments plans re saving money to address the economic crisis. This is what many teachers are concerned about - we all know that children are the future of the economy and deserve the best in terms of learning and teaching

In response to an earlier post( student in transiton year)teachers may finish school at an earlier time compared to other professions but remember teachers have to prepare class plans, monthly reports on curriculum taught, pupil support plans for pupils with literacy/numeracy difficulites etc etc ( this all happens outside of school hours)

Again I do appreciate we all have to take some punches as part of a givernmental response to these challenging times ( and personally again have no problem with the pension levy) but question is this just the beginning? And will future generations be the ones that suffer if Batt O Keefe and his advisors continue to cut school supports

the reason we have among the largest class sizes in europe is down to the fact that such a large percentage of the budget for education goes towards wages for teachers which are among the highest in the eu , were our teachers to be on salarys more comparable to our european counterparts , we might have more money to spend on facilities , its the same of course with the health service , had we not the highest paid nurses in the eu , we would have more to spend on beds

you can have it both ways

Trotter

First off, I'm tired of the people here who sit around waiting for an anti teacher moment to post a load of rubbish about something they know nothing about.

To put some things straight here, the teachers will not strike alone. It would be done as part of an ICTU action. The ICTU has private sector members too.

The ballot referred to action up to and including strike action, so it may not happen. The strong mandate to strike sends a message to government that teachers are sick of their incompetence in managing education and managing the country in general. The ballot for action was not solely to do with the pension levy. I as a teacher have no problem whatsoever paying that extra money to a government that is fit to hold office. This shower are not fit to hold office.

So.. Before the "Teachers are bad and they have holidays grrrrr" group take hold, reflect on what this proposed action is about.

Its a protest at the disgraceful treatment of our childrens education by a government who cut special needs classes first, and would put a 3rd level of tax for 6 figure earners second.

Its a protest at the unfairness shown by the government in dealing with the existing problem in an inept and socially immoral way; leaving those FF supporting, Galway tent fans to cough up last, while covering the asses of white collars who's acts could be considered treasonous.

Its a protest at the lack of leadership shown by the government and their unwillingness to listen to suggested solutions until their backs were firmly against the wall.

I am, as many are, willing to pay this extra levy and extra tax to pay my fair share for the good of the country. But I wont be taken for a mug by a minister for education or finance who thinks of Irish children as a way to save money as opposed to being the future of our nation. And I wont bother to respond to someone who twists and turns this mandate for action into a reason to bash teachers for having holidays, or to serve their personal vendetta against a profession in general.

I now pay PRSI, PAYE, 1.5% Spouse and Child, 1% Levy, 7% levy, and I earn 39k gross.
I seriously think some people here wished the teachers would work for free, or that maybe criminals would be sentenced to being a teacher to pay for their wrongdoing.. scum that we are.
Im sick of worrying about the welfare of other people's children and then being vilified for having an easy job. Its not easy, its well paid, I work hard, and I pay my taxes. I have nothing to be ashamed of, nor do I owe the anti teacher brigade anything. They had nothing stopping them applying for my job.

Teachers voted yes to strike action in order to push pressure on the government to get their fingers out. I for one having read this forum closely for the last 4 or 5 months, thought that was what we all wanted?

jimmmy

Trotter wrote: »

Teachers voted yes to strike action in order to push pressure on the government to get their fingers out. I for one having read this forum closely for the last 4 or 5 months, thought that was what we all wanted?

With all due respect, I do not think the penny has dropped yet. As another poster wrote, better than I can "the reason we have among the largest class sizes in europe is down to the fact that such a large percentage of the budget for education goes towards wages for teachers which are among the highest in the eu , were our teachers to be on salarys more comparable to our european counterparts , we might have more money to spend on facilities "

Before you accuse me of " bashing teachers for having holidays ", perhaps teachers should be glad of the security, holidays, pension and pay that they have ? Many teachers are good teachers by the way. I also agree with you about the 3rd level of tax for 6 figure earners . In fact, given most people in the private sector earn less than 30,000 per year, I think the tax rate for those who earn more than say 40 k per year should be higher, given the state of our economy.

Trotter

jimmmy wrote: »

With all due respect, I do not think the penny has dropped yet. As another poster wrote, better than I can "the reason we have among the largest class sizes in europe is down to the fact that such a large percentage of the budget for education goes towards wages for teachers which are among the highest in the eu , were our teachers to be on salarys more comparable to our european counterparts , we might have more money to spend on facilities "

Before you accuse me of " bashing teachers for having holidays ", perhaps teachers should be glad of the security, holidays, pension and pay that they have ? Many teachers are good teachers by the way. I also agree with you about the 3rd level of tax for 6 figure earners . In fact, given most people in the private sector earn less than 30,000 per year, I think the tax rate for those who earn more than say 40 k per year should be higher, given the state of our economy.

I agree with a lot of what you've said. If there was ancrease in tax though above 40k, I wouldnt be touched because I dont earn more than that.

I would also like to see where the figures quoted above have come from. Can someone quote a source for those figures that show that Irelands percentage of GDP spent on teachers is more than any other? Is the real problem not that our spend in general in Education is far too low? Was the class size protest taken by teachers not a demand for increased funds for education and not teacher salaries in order to move us off the bottom of the OECD charts for education spending?

I know a teacher in the UK who earns 29k sterling. He can buy a hell of a lot more for his 29k than I can buy for my 39k. I don't see the point in basing an argument on figures which are twisted to suit the argument that teachers are overpaid.

You're right though, Im a teacher and I left the private sector so I could have a meaningful job, job security, a good wage, and extra holidays. I'm happy with what I've got. I was happy with what I had when my friends who were on 70k were making jokes about buying me tweed cardigans.

People who are ringfencing the education budget and using the teacher wages percentage of that budget are conveniently ignoring the fact that as a percentage of our GDP, we spent less than most 1st world countries on primary education.

Ireland is spending proportionately less on education that it did 10 years ago, according to the latest figures from the OECD.

A report from the organisation out today also shows that just two countries, Greece and the Slovak Republic, spend a smaller proportion of their GDP on education than Ireland does.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/0909/education.html

diverdriver

To put some things straight here, the teachers will not strike alone. It would be done as part of an ICTU action. The ICTU has private sector members too.

Any real private sectors workers are not going to go on strike right now. They're jobs are not safe enough for that. They don't have the security you have. They risk losing their jobs through stupid behaviour like that.

I'm not a teacher basher but most of my teacher friends admit they're 'comfortable' which is more than can be said for most private sector people.

It's a compromise, you can have high pay with long hours and the insecurity issue or you can have lower pay but a better lifestyle.

Going on strike will once again highlight for the rest of us how out of touch with reality far too many public service workers are.

Alessandra

dave-higgz wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/0307/breaking10.htm


Everyday I see teachers in my school leave before 4p.m., enabling them to beat the rush hour and be home before 5.

Sorry kid, but are you suggesting that they are not free to leave before 4pm?

In case you are not aware teachers do not operate a clocking in/clocking off system. A full time teacher is contracted for no more than 22hours per week. This means they get some classes off during the day. Contrary to popular opinion the staff room is not the place where teachers sit around drinking coffee for half the day..
The 22hour working week enables the teacher to get through mountains of paperwork, copies, mocks, essays, projects, reports be that in the staffroom or the comfort of their own home.

jimmmy

Trotter wrote: »

You're right though, Im a teacher and I left the private sector so I could have a meaningful job, job security, a good wage, and extra holidays. I'm happy with what I've got. I was happy with what I had when my friends who were on 70k were making jokes about buying me tweed cardigans.

Maybe some people do make 70k. I know one employee of a large multinational manufacturing here, who has a third level qualification, who has been with the firm 12 years, and who is on 31 thousand a year. He worked in the public sector before that, but relocated because of marriage, and was - still is - amazed at the different pressure / work culture between the public + private sector.

Trotter wrote: »

People who are ringfencing the education budget and using the teacher wages percentage of that budget are conveniently ignoring the fact that as a percentage of our GDP, we spent less than most 1st world countries on primary education.

Our GDP figures in the past are skewed though, are they not, by some multinationals laundering their profits through Ireland in order to pay only 10% corporation tax ? eg some American firms employing 5 or 10 in some office in Ireland yet turning over 2 billion or something ? So "percentage of our GDP" does not mean a lot.

Fredser

jimmmy wrote: »

perhaps teachers should be glad of the security, holidays

I am a teacher. Listen carefully to what I am about to say regarding the two positives you mentioned above. Are you sure you and all the other ill-informed are listening. Oi, you at the back listen up or you will find yourself on detention......

SECURITY - NONE. Good chance of me having no job this September. See that's not very secure is it. Understand?

HOLIDAYS - UNPAID. I'd rather be working and earning money during the holidays. See?


Maybe some research in future before composing more embarrassing drivel.

eoinbn

More pointless protesting, wonderful.

If ICTU had answers then fine, protest, but they don't. Their ten point plan is full of populist nonsense and contradictions. For example point 3 is about our lack of competitiveness and then point 4 is complaining about the government and employeers reneging on the pay increase!
IIRC correctly there isn't a single cut for ICTU memebers in the plan, just pay increases, higher dole for people that lose their jobs and adding EXTRA costs to pensions by securing private pensions with public money.

Alessandra

Why are teachers the main public sector employees being targetted by abuse?

Teachers are having contracts their contracts ended in May.. Paycuts etc.
Same boat as private sector.

lmtduffy

irish_bob wrote: »

the reason we have among the largest class sizes in europe is down to the fact that such a large percentage of the budget for education goes towards wages for teachers which are among the highest in the eu , were our teachers to be on salarys more comparable to our european counterparts , we might have more money to spend on facilities , its the same of course with the health service , had we not the highest paid nurses in the eu , we would have more to spend on beds

you can have it both ways

yes and we are have lower taxes than most of Europe, how about we raise them instead to pay for decent public services.

jimmmy

Fredser wrote: »

SECURITY - NONE. Good chance of me having no job this September. See that's not very secure is it. Understand?

HOLIDAYS - UNPAID. I'd rather be working and earning money during the holidays. See?

While you are clearly not representative of the average teacher, you have more security than many in the private sector....plus you will get paid I am sure for holidays ( not to mention sick days ) in the meantime eg Paddies day, Easter etc. Self employed people do not. Be thankful the downturn in the education sector is not as severe as many other sectors. People will always need to be educated, every year. Oh, and I am sure you can get the dole if things do not work out. If you were self employed for say 25 years and had collected hundreds of thousands in taxes for the govt, had saved prudently, not gone on foreign holidays, but now found yourself out of work, you would still not be entitled to the dole.

Alessandra

jimmmy wrote: »

While you are clearly not representative of the average teacher, you have more security than many in the private sector....plus you will get paid I am sure for holidays ( not to mention sick days ) in the meantime eg Paddies day, Easter etc. .

Sorry but not all teachers get paid holidays!! Depends on the contract.. Get your facts straight.

Fredser

Alessandra wrote: »

Sorry but not all teachers get paid holidays!! Depends on the contract.. Get your facts straight.

I've already tried explaining that to the poster in question but he can't grasp it. Maybe a meeting with the parents to discuss possible extra classroom assistance is required.

*Honey*

There are many sorts of contracts in education - permanent, pensionable ones; pro-rata ones; contracts of indefinite duration; fixed term; fixed purpose; part-time etc... and each one of these carries different rights in relation to paid holidays, work done outside of the actual classroom etc.

The reality is that, with all this public sector bashing that goes on ad infinitum here, sweeping generalisations only serve to irritate and annoy and show that the poster in question hasn't done their research and isn't au fait with the complexities of the differing employment statuses throughout the education sector (from primary to third level).

The OP states that he is in transition year and then says that teachers should take the hit just like "we" all should. Yeah cos transition year students are really going to feel the pain of possibly losing your job, taking pay cuts etc.

I am not a teacher (but do work in education) and I don't believe teachers should be classed seperately from any other public sector worker.. do get your facts right about your assumptions of what (or not) a teacher (or anyone else in the education sector) actually does so that you get taught.

diverdriver

There are many sorts of contracts in education - permanent, pensionable ones; pro-rata ones; contracts of indefinite duration; fixed term; fixed purpose; part-time etc... and each one of these carries different rights in relation to paid holidays, work done outside of the actual classroom etc.

All of which points to a shambles in the system. Most of us know that many teachers are on contracts which end. Same goes for many university lecturers. But I would wager that the majority of teachers are on permanent, pensionable contracts. The term teacher covers a huge variety of job descriptions in the system. I personally know of one teacher who has possibly the best paid part time job in history. If she had to do a full day's work she would die of shock.

But it's no good to anyone to point out the exceptions. It's the majority that count and in this case it's the majority who are likely to be striking for what? To make the point that they're unhappy with the current situation?
Well welcome to the club!

rainbowtrout

jimmmy wrote: »

Be thankful the downturn in the education sector is not as severe as many other sectors. People will always need to be educated, every year. Oh, and I am sure you can get the dole if things do not work out.

Well my school is in danger of losing 20% of it's staff which is quite severe considering we're not losing 20% of our students to go with it. So it's going to be larger classes and less subject choices. Would you consider that severe?

There are 12 teachers in my school who are not permanent (out of 35), most of them will be gone next year. People always need to be educated for sure, but in bigger classes with less subject choice.

lmtduffy

diverdriver wrote: »

All of which points to a shambles in the system. Most of us know that many teachers are on contracts which end. Same goes for many university lecturers. But I would wager that the majority of teachers are on permanent, pensionable contracts. The term teacher covers a huge variety of job descriptions in the system. I personally know of one teacher who has possibly the best paid part time job in history. If she had to do a full day's work she would die of shock.

But it's no good to anyone to point out the exceptions. It's the majority that count and in this case it's the majority who are likely to be striking for what? To make the point that they're unhappy with the current situation?
Well welcome to the club!

anecdotal evidence is not going to cut it re your friend.

and damb right their making a point that there unhappy with the situation and its going to take alot more people to do that till the current government steps down and allow the people to choose who they want to take us through this situation we are now in.

bobbbb

jimmmy wrote: »

Maybe some people do make 70k. I know one employee of a large multinational manufacturing here, who has a third level qualification, who has been with the firm 12 years, and who is on 31 thousand a year.

isnt he a gob****e then or else he must be crap at his job and not good enough to get a proper job that pays.

dave-higgz

Hey OP here,

Just to pick up on some things.

1. I know that all teachers do fantastic work during their free classes and at home making lesson plans, correcting homework and exams etc. Just to make that clear.
2. When I said about teachers leaving at 4, I should add that many teachers do stay later to help in extra curricular activities and adult education etc. I don't want to generalize all teachers as being out the door with the students when the bell rings.
3. It was said that teachers are no different than any other public sector worker but I feel that they are in some respects. I guess that main one being holiday. Mid-terms, summer, christmas! Only TD's enjoy such breaks (and more) and it's fair to say that TD's are being discussed as a totally separate PS workers.

SkepticOne

Unless I was on a permanent, pensionable teacher's contract then I would not be joining in industrial action against unfortunate but necessary levies on public sector wages. Without state employees taking a hit on their wages, redundancies will have to be more severe and these redundancies will disproportionately affect those on less secure contracts.

Dannyboy83

dave-higgz wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/0307/breaking10.htm

Firstly could someone tell me whether this could be an "anti-government" strike or an "anti-pension levy strike"? I'll support anything to get FF out but I believe the pension levy is appropriate for teachers who enjoy very generous working hours and days off.

I'm in transition year myself and although I'd enjoy a day off:rolleyes:, It could be very selfish for teachers to put at risk the future of the 3rd and 6th years.
Everyday I see teachers in my school leave before 4p.m., enabling them to beat the rush hour and be home before 5. and then even with correcting copies etc they can enjoy their evening without hassle. I know they work very hard and I can honestly say there isn't a teacher in my school that I don't like however with almost all of their positions and pensions secure, it seems only fair that they take a financial hit, like the rest of us.

(sorry if this looks like another Public Sector Bashing post but I think teachers need to be discussed thoroughly)

You probably won't remember this, but when I was in Leaving Cert in 2000/2001, the teachers were on strike for a large amount of the time.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2000/1123/teachers.html

It didn't affect me in the least, as a matter of fact, I stayed home from school on the days they didn't turn up and I did quite well in my Leaving cert, but particularily in the subjects where the teachers were striking.

For example, my English teacher had barely turned up to school for about 3 months out of my last year.
I got an A2 in that subject.

I suppose its less relevant to me, because I had quite strict parents and was quite motivated/terrorised into working hard.
Its more relevant to the people who can't motivate themselves or those who have complacent parents.

Hillel

Fredser wrote: »

I am a teacher. Listen carefully to what I am about to say ...........
SECURITY - NONE. Good chance of me having no job this September. See that's not very secure is it. Understand?
HOLIDAYS - UNPAID. I'd rather be working and earning money during the holidays. See?

Alessandra wrote: »

Why are teachers the main public sector employees being targetted by abuse?
Teachers are having contracts their contracts ended in May.. Paycuts etc.
Same boat as private sector.

Those teachers who are temporary/on non-permanent contracts are in a very similar position to the private sector. I don't think any reasonable person could argue with that. However, teachers who have attained permanent status are in an entirely different, and much more favorable, situation. They are not doing their "temporary" colleagues any favors when they deliberately ignore that position. Stating, and documenting this is not "abuse", it is an important input to the current debate. Lets stop trying to "muddy the water", here.

Alessandra wrote: »

Sorry but not all teachers get paid holidays!! Depends on the contract.. Get your facts straight.

+1 Lets be fair here. It is important to recognise that non-permanent teachers, are in a similar position to the rest of us.

Trotter

I spent a long time as a temporary teacher before getting a permanent contract. If we strike, one of the reasons will be in defence of temporary teachers who will lose their jobs as a result of higher class sizes. The main reason for me is because of the lack of interest or respect being shown to primary education as a whole. Children suffer in huge classes. The levy isn't the reason why I voted yes.

Hillel

*Honey* wrote: »

sweeping generalisations only serve to irritate and annoy and show that the poster in question hasn't done their research and isn't au fait with the complexities of the differing employment statuses throughout the education sector (from primary to third level).

*Honey*, thats extremely harsh. dave-higgz is to be commended for taking a considerd interest in this area, as should any second level student. Would that many more were so motivated! I have been a permanent member of two Boards of Management and I couldn't claim to be "au fait with the complexities of the differing employment statuses throughout the education sector (from primary to third level)".

*Honey* wrote: »

The OP states that he is in transition year and then says that teachers should take the hit just like "we" all should. Yeah cos transition year students are really going to feel the pain of possibly losing your job, taking pay cuts etc.

Cmon, how do you know his family circumstances?

*Honey* wrote: »

I am not a teacher (but do work in education) and I don't believe teachers should be classed seperately from any other public sector worker..

I don't agree. To quote yourself "sweeping generalisations only serve to irritate and annoy...." In any case the public sector is not homegeneous and it is important to consider the reform needed "sector by sector" and "grade by grade".

dave-higgz wrote: »

1. I know that all teachers do fantastic work during their free classes and at home making lesson plans, correcting homework and exams etc. Just to make that clear.
2. When I said about teachers leaving at 4, I should add that many teachers do stay later to help in extra curricular activities and adult education etc. I don't want to generalize all teachers as being out the door with the students when the bell rings.

No need to "over egg" it. We all know that the teaching profession has its own quota of non-performing members. The management team know this too. The problem is that, unlike the private sector, it's next to impossible to get rid of a non-performing public sector worker.
(Don't worry, while not truly annonymous, it's EXTREMELY difficult to identify the location of a poster. They won't know its you!):D

dave-higgz wrote: »

3. It was said that teachers are no different than any other public sector worker but I feel that they are in some respects. I guess that main one being holiday. Mid-terms, summer, christmas! Only TD's enjoy such breaks (and more) and it's fair to say that TD's are being discussed as a totally separate PS workers.

Fair play to you for sticking to your guns. You're absolutely correct. But, they are also different in that they play a key role in the education of students such as yourself. Don't underestimate the level of preparation it takes for a teacher to prepare and correct class materials. (I speak from personal experience.) Teachers who are committed and doing their job, the majority in most schools, have a substantial amount of work to do outside the class contact hours. In most cases they cannot do this at school as the staff facilities are often grossly inadequate.

turgon

Even if temporary teachers have risks like the public sector, theres still the fact that schools are only open just above half of the days of the year, and they close at 4. Its a nice job to be in.

And permanent teachers obviously get it better. My father is one, and he voted no because he viewed the pension levy as everyone taking the shoulder of responsibility, and he saw a lot of the yes voters for what they were: greedy people who just want to hold onto everything. And fair dues to him for his stance.

To poster above who said the plight of temporary teachers was his issue: that has nothing to do with the vote. If the levy had not been introduced there would have been no vote at all. The vote was triggered by, and was thus about, the levy.

SkepticOne

Trotter wrote: »

I spent a long time as a temporary teacher before getting a permanent contract. If we strike, one of the reasons will be in defence of temporary teachers who will lose their jobs as a result of higher class sizes. The main reason for me is because of the lack of interest or respect being shown to primary education as a whole. Children suffer in huge classes. The levy isn't the reason why I voted yes.

It is important that teachers participating in the action for reasons other than the pensions levy/pay cut such as yourself make it clear that they don't agree with the myopic unions leading the industrial action.

Temporary teachers need to understand that any worsening of the public finances such as would be caused by a reversal of the pensions levy (the main demand of unions) would have a disproportionate effect on them. They need to bear this in mind if they take part in industrial action.

Hillel

Trotter wrote: »

I spent a long time as a temporary teacher before getting a permanent contract. If we strike, one of the reasons will be in defence of temporary teachers who will lose their jobs as a result of higher class sizes. The main reason for me is because of the lack of interest or respect being shown to primary education as a whole. Children suffer in huge classes. The levy isn't the reason why I voted yes.

I empathize with your motives, but I don't think it will help. The government simply has no move to manoeuvre. Every time the government backs down, it only brings us closer to the abyss.

And for the record, the public sector is not being unfairly targeted. The private sector, those of us lucky enough to still have jobs, are feeling real pain. I have just taken a 15% pay cut and expect more to follow. That is in addition to the tax increases. Overall I expect my take home pay to fall by 25%+. This is by no means unusual at the moment, many of my friends are in a similar situation. The business environment is truly savage, right now.

Yes, lets all take a fair share of the pain. When times were good teachers had the benefit of benchmarking - to keep them in line with wage increases in Industry. Now that we are in real trouble it is reasonable to expect the public sector to take their share of the cuts. And yes, I do feel for students and temporary teachers, alike. I believe that teaching is one of the most important professions in the country. Those that do it well deserve recognition and reward. However, that reward must be in line with what the country can afford.

Tony Broke

turgon wrote: »

The vote was triggered by, and was thus about, the levy.

Of course, its all about the money and always will be.They dont give a **** about class sizes and all that stuff.

Trotter

SkepticOne wrote: »

It is important that teachers participating in the action for reasons other than the pensions levy/pay cut such as yourself make it clear that they don't agree with the myopic unions leading the industrial action.

I'm very much behind the actions of my union. The people at the head of my union have made a lot of sense to me and although we don't like the idea of handing out more money, I mean.. who does?.. I am and we are willing to do it when there's a fairness to it, and when the money is going to someone we feel can manage it well.

I don't think my union is myopic, I just think that people need to read all that the union states before jumping on the easy bandwagon that this strike is all about 7% when clearly it is not.

We'll pay our fair share when fairness is evident and when the money is going to be used properly. Until then, I support my union's stance on the industrial action, because I believe the union understands that we all have to take pain.

I mean really, whats the point in giving these people 7% of my wages on top of everything else? They're odds on to squander it, and we're well within our rights to protest against that for one reason alone.

turgon wrote: »

The vote was triggered by, and was thus about, the levy.

I'm telling you what the protest is about. Are you in any of these unions? Have you attended any of these union meetings? If the answer is no, then read what I've written. There is more to this protest than 7%. Saying otherwise is simply wrong.

Hillel wrote: »

And for the record, the public sector is not being unfairly targeted. The private sector, those of us lucky enough to still have jobs, are feeling real pain. I have just taken a 15% pay cut and expect more to follow. That is in addition to the tax increases. Overall I expect my take home pay to fall by 25%+. This is by no means unusual at the moment, many of my friends are in a similar situation. The business environment is truly savage, right now.

Yes, lets all take a fair share of the pain.....

I think you and me are being unfairly targetted by the government. There's a sequence that should have been followed here.

If having put a tax on the very wealthy and then increasing the second level of tax, the government came looking for a pay cut of 7%, I'd have said fine! Thank God I'm on a tracker mortgage because I'm lucky enough that it will balance out and I'll afford the repayments.

This isnt and shouldnt be about private sector v's public. Yes I have security in my job. Thats why I went for it! Yes, I'll use that security to take whatever action my union recommends in the interest of you and me and our kids being treated fairly. If me taking a pay cut is fair, then yes! I'll take a pay cut!

BUT.. I will not willingly give a single cent so that this government can continue to fly TD's to trivial meetings with state cars following along. I know of one minister who flew to a meeting last week to be met there by his state car which drove him to the next meeting 15 mins away, and the minister then flew home. How much fuel did the state car use for that 15 minute journey!? I'd say our PAYE for a week wouldnt cover it.

So I will strike if necessary so that you and me will be treated fairly. I wont lose my job because I strike. You might. Therefore its best that the secure ones strike.

I'm laying my honest motivation out here, and I'm representative of the people I work with. Why do we still have to take such abuse for the conditions we have, when I am telling people here that all that I am willing to do whatever is fairly expected of me to stop the government from making your people and mine argue while they go around throwing our hard earned cash down a hole!?

I want to pay my fair share, no more. I want the government to spend that share properly. I want the children to have the best education in small class sizes so they'll grow up and like maths and science and can work us out of this mess. I want to work hard and be well paid for what I do. I want the government to be so prudent and exact with their spending that your jobs become safe and prosperous again.

I want everyone here to realise that the ones we all need to be giving out about are sitting in State MERCEDES laughing while we argue!!

END RANT!

SkepticOne

Trotter wrote: »

I don't think my union is myopic, I just think that people need to read all that the union states before jumping on the easy bandwagon that this strike is all about 7% when clearly it is not.

What precisely then are the demands of your union? Exactly what do you want to see (other than the 7% pay cut reversed - which may bring about redundancies among temporary teachers) from the government before the industrial action is called off?

Hillel

Trotter wrote: »

........The levy isn't the reason why I voted yes.

Trotter wrote: »

We'll pay our fair share when fairness is evident.

The two don’t add up, Trotter. If fairness was the concern the public sector unions would be agreeing 10%-20% pay cuts, in addition to the levy. The levy would apply to permanent, pensionable, public servants, only. Pigs might fly……

Trotter

Hillel wrote: »

The two don’t add up, Trotter. If fairness was the concern the public sector unions would be agreeing 10%-20% pay cuts, in addition to the levy. The levy would apply to permanent, pensionable, public servants, only. Pigs might fly……

If I took 20% tomorrow, you'd want 30%. Why on earth should the public sector unions agree to give this government more money when they've shown they can't manage money! They haven't the guts to close the tax incentives that support high earner's pensions and multiple properties, but they have the guts to close special needs classes. My union is right not to agree to hand money to such people! Whats the guarantee it'll be used properly?

SkepticOne wrote: »

What precisely then are the demands of your union? Exactly what do you want to see (other than the 7% pay cut reversed - which may bring about redundancies among temporary teachers) from the government before the industrial action is called off?

Demands of my union are listed in detail on www.into.ie and the ICTU websites. Im not typing them out. They centre around fairness. I've spoken enough on my own view on that already.

I don't want the 7% reversed to be honest. What I want is the 7% used to the optimum level to make sure people keep their jobs, Ireland gets out of this hole, and we start keeping our promises to children and getting them into classes of 20 or less. Thats what I want. It costs money. So do a lot of the idiotic things this government is doing.

Until I perceive that the government is managing the money it takes well, then I'm not going to agree with giving them more. Taking 7% from me and spending it on the expenses for someone flying a lear jet to the States when theres an empty business class seat on Aer Lingus behind it, wont save your job.

When I know that money is being well spent, I won't argue.

Hillel wrote: »

The two don’t add up, Trotter. If fairness was the concern the public sector unions would be agreeing 10%-20% pay cuts, in addition to the levy. The levy would apply to permanent, pensionable, public servants, only. Pigs might fly……

If I took 20% tomorrow, you'd want 30%. Why on earth should the public sector unions agree to give this government more money when they've shown they can't manage money! They haven't the guts to close the tax incentives that support high earner's pensions and multiple properties, but they have the guts to close special needs classes. My union is right not to agree to hand money to such people! Whats the guarantee it'll be used properly?

SkepticOne wrote: »

What precisely then are the demands of your union? Exactly what do you want to see (other than the 7% pay cut reversed - which may bring about redundancies among temporary teachers) from the government before the industrial action is called off?

Demands of my union are listed in detail on www.into.ie and the ICTU websites. Im not typing them out. They centre around fairness. I've spoken enough on my own view on that already.

I don't want the 7% reversed to be honest. What I want is the 7% used to the optimum level to make sure people keep their jobs, Ireland gets out of this hole, and we start keeping our promises to children and getting them into classes of 20 or less. Thats what I want. It costs money. So do a lot of the idiotic things this government is doing.

Until I perceive that the government is managing the money it takes well, then I'm not going to agree with giving them more. Taking 7% from me and spending it on the expenses for someone flying a lear jet to the States when theres an empty business class seat on Aer Lingus behind it, wont save your job.

When I know that money is being well spent, I won't argue. The sooner people realise that they're losing their jobs because of the stupidity of the government the better. I worked to better myself, got a job teaching children that pays 39k, and you'd swear I'd personally taken a 2BN wage cheque that caused a shedload of P45s.

Theres a big attack here on the wrong people and the government are the only ones benefitting. They're inept, and we're blaming teachers, nurses and guards. How dare we strike to put pressure on those that caused private sector people to lose their jobs. How dare we look to take them to account for what they did to private sector workers and small children. How dare we demand our 7% on top of everything else be spent with morality and prudence.

Yes.. we're the enemy alright.

SkepticOne

I actually had a look at the INTO site before I asked the question about the exact nature of the unions' demands. Unfortunately it is not very clear. From their site:

60,000 teachers vote for industrial action

The members of the teacher unions, the ASTI, INTO and TUI, have voted to take industrial action, up to and including strike action, over the government’s handling of the economic crisis.

In a joint statement issued last night, the General Secretaries of the three unions said the decision had been a difficult one for teachers who as well as facing difficult economic circumstances are well aware of the impact of the economic crisis on the communities in which they live and work. The statement said the results showed clearly the anger of teachers at Government’s inequitable handling of the crisis.

“Teachers and other workers expected to be treated in a fair and equitable manner and that the well off in society would contribute their fair share,” the union leaders said. “Teachers want government to re-enter discussions to address the economic crisis with the ICTU on the basis that the burden must be shared by all sectors of society according to their means.” The statement expressed support for the Congress plan "There is a better, fairer way".

The Irish Federation of University Teachers is expected to begin balloting its members on industrial action next week.

Industrial action by teachers will be organised on a co-ordinated basis by the teacher unions in conjunction with the Irish Congress of Trade Unions.

Plenty about how they are not happy about the current situation (is anyone happy?) but very little about their demands in this particular industrial action. The only specific thing mentioned is the levy. Obviously reversing this would put put public finances into a worse situation that it already is but this would only affect those teachers on temporary contracts who would be then be laid off.

Trotter

SkepticOne wrote: »

I actually had a look at the INTO site before I asked the question about the exact nature of the unions' demands. Unfortunately it is not very clear. From their site:Plenty about how they are not happy about the current situation (is anyone happy?) but very little about their demands in this particular industrial action. The only specific thing mentioned is the levy. Obviously reversing this would put put public finances into a worse situation that it already is but this would only affect those teachers on temporary contracts who would be then be laid off.

Alright, well I can't dictate back what was discussed at the last meeting I was at but here's my take on it. We'll pay the money, we'll take the pain. They levy is just a shady way to cut 7% off people, many of whom can't afford it. Are you saying its right to take 7% off a public service cleaner on 19k and not adjust the tax allowances given to people on 100k + who are paying into their own pensions?

The levy in its current form isn't fair. If the tax system is changed so that I pay exactly the same as the levy would take from me, but people who should be paying are also paying their fair share, you won't hear such anger.

I should be paying more tax in days like these.. I cant afford much more, but I'll pay it regardless.

Its fairness.. why should the cleaner pay 7% when ultimately their pensions won't go above that of the state pension anyway!? I keep saying that the design of this levy is all wrong.. not the amount that it causes me personally to pay out.

Hillel

Trotter wrote: »

If I took 20% tomorrow, you'd want 30%.
Why on earth should the public sector unions agree to give this government more money when they've shown they can't manage money!

Because, if we really are in this together we'd all be sharing the pain right now. Otherwise its just rhetoric and all this talk of worker solidarity is just that, talk!

Trotter wrote: »

They haven't the guts to close the tax incentives that support high earner's pensions and multiple properties, but they have the guts to close special needs classes. My union is right not to agree to hand money to such people! Whats the guarantee it'll be used properly?
Until I perceive that the government is managing the money it takes well, then I'm not going to agree with giving them more. Taking 7% from me and spending it on the expenses for someone flying a lear jet to the States when theres an empty business class seat on Aer Lingus behind it, wont save your job.

They're two entirely different issues. The prolifigate waste, lack of governance and general greed at the top table, is well covered in other threads. This is not the preserve of politicians, either. It cuts accross the Public Service, Industry, some charities, unions... That is the culture WE allowed develop during the good days. It absolutely needs to be addressed - BUT, it won't address our current spending deficit. Either public servant's pay will have to be cut, or numbers reduced.

SkepticOne

Trotter wrote: »

Alright, well I can't dictate back what was discussed at the last meeting I was at but here's my take on it. We'll pay the money, we'll take the pain. They levy is just a shady way to cut 7% off people, many of whom can't afford it. Are you saying its right to take 7% off a public service cleaner on 19k and not adjust the tax allowances given to people on 100k + who are paying into their own pensions?

The levy in its current form isn't fair. If the tax system is changed so that I pay exactly the same as the levy would take from me, but people who should be paying are also paying their fair share, you won't hear such anger.

I should be paying more tax in days like these.. I cant afford much more, but I'll pay it regardless.

Its fairness.. why should the cleaner pay 7% when ultimately their pensions won't go above that of the state pension anyway!? I keep saying that the design of this levy is all wrong.. not the amount that it causes me personally to pay out.

What we need to see is public statements on their website along those line before we can say that this is the union's stance on the issue. If I was a temporary teacher I would be very wary of supporting the current action.

They can say many things at their meetings but this does not mean they are the the official demands behind their industrial action. We still don't know what they are.

Trotter

Hillel wrote: »

Because, if we really are in this together we'd all be sharing the pain right now. Otherwise its just rhetoric and all this talk of worker solidarity is just that, talk!

This won't be popular but I do think theres a bit of jealousy in that statement. I lost my tennis ball so you should lose yours etc.

Would you cut the wages of teachers, guards and nurses across the board before you reduced the number of back office positions created needlessly in the last 10 years?

sock puppet

I'm in second level education and it's pretty obvious that the strike is only over the pension levy. Teachers are saying it's about more than that. Well I've been in my school 6 years. We've had the same government with the same policies through all those years and yet this will be the first time I'll miss school because of a strike (providing it goes ahead). Why wait until now?

Trotter

sock puppet wrote: »

I'm in second level education and it's pretty obvious that the strike is only over the pension levy. Teachers are saying it's about more than that. Well I've been in my school 6 years. We've had the same government with the same policies through all those years and yet this will be the first time I'll miss school because of a strike (providing it goes ahead). Why wait until now?

Same policies?!!? Have you not seen the outrage at the change in policies over the last year??

Class size policy has changed in the last year. Funding of practically everything has been reduced! I know one school who will most likely lose transition year and the leaving cert physics class will no longer be available.. ALL because of policy changes in the past 12 months.

I'm going around in circles in this thread so I'll leave it at this.. I'm willing to pay my fair share and I won't apologise for having a very good, steady job. I sincerely hope you all keep yours, and that your kids will have space to learn in their classrooms.. and that we'll have a government that the majority of us don't despise for their sneaky underhand and immoral minding of their rich friends.

Can I just appeal to people here though not to cloud their judgement with hatred of the teaching profession. Christ I try my best in my job and all I've got in the last year is abuse from all angles. I cant speak for everyone but I do my best for the children I teach, and I want the government out because of their treatment of us, and their abuse of power and our money.

Slán

Hillel

Trotter wrote: »

This won't be popular but I do think theres a bit of jealousy in that statement. I lost my tennis ball so you should lose yours etc.

Would you cut the wages of teachers, guards and nurses across the board before you reduced the number of back office positions created needlessly in the last 10 years?

Thanks for your honesty. At least now its clear where we stand with no bull$hit.

And, yes I would, accross the board. Thats what true benchmarking is all about - it goes up with Industry and down with Industry. Nothing at all to do with jealousy, but thank you for acknowledging that your situation is far better than the private sector. Rather, it is to ensure the future prosperity and viability of the country.

sock puppet

Trotter wrote: »

Same policies?!!? Have you not seen the outrage at the change in policies over the last year??

Class size policy has changed in the last year. Funding of practically everything has been reduced! I know one school who will most likely lose transition year and the leaving cert physics class will no longer be available.. ALL because of policy changes in the past 12 months.

I'm going around in circles in this thread so I'll leave it at this.. I'm willing to pay my fair share and I won't apologise for having a very good, steady job. I sincerely hope you all keep yours, and that your kids will have space to learn in their classrooms.. and that we'll have a government that the majority of us don't despise for their sneaky underhand and immoral minding of their rich friends.

Can I just appeal to people here though not to cloud their judgement with hatred of the teaching profession. Christ I try my best in my job and all I've got in the last year is abuse from all angles. I cant speak for everyone but I do my best for the children I teach, and I want the government out because of their treatment of us, and their abuse of power and our money.

Slán

But even during the boom weren't class sizes still larger than in most other EU countries? Hell one primary school I went to had 4 teachers.