Teaching for the dole

Live at Three

This FAS WPPS thing, how do you sign up to it?

Also does anyone know, could you earn extra money in the school by s&s work etc? Would certainly cover the expenses of getting to work etc.

It's a horrible prospect working for 200 a week and watching my more fortunate peers working for normal money but I think it has to be done.

What are your thoughts? Are many people considering it?

danlen

Live at Three wrote: »

It's a horrible prospect working for 200 a week and watching my more fortunate peers working for normal money but I think it has to be done.

It's a more horrible prospect working for 200 a week and knowing your friends on the dole are getting the same for doing nothing. I know people don't want to be on the dole either and most would like to be doing something. However, if they want me to go and basically work for nothing (as I would be getting 200 a week if I was unemployed) I know what I'll be telling them.

E.T.

I don't think you can be employed by the school if you are doing the FÁS scheme there. Worth checking out, but anything I've read so far has said you definitely can't sub - I think this would extend to any paid employment though.

rainbowtrout

Live at Three wrote: »

Also does anyone know, could you earn extra money in the school by s&s work etc? Would certainly cover the expenses of getting to work etc.

I doubt it. You can't claim dole and work at the same time. And they are allowed get you to work up to 40 hours under the scheme so even if you weren't allowed you wouldn't have any time assuming you're given work to do for 8 hours every day.

TheDriver

the good thing about this is that
a) you gain experience which is soooo invaluable for the cv
b) you are showing the initiative that you are willing to try anything to work, looks good for future reference.

avalon68

TheDriver wrote: »

the good thing about this is that
a) you gain experience which is soooo invaluable for the cv
b) you are showing the initiative that you are willing to try anything to work, looks good for future reference.

But is there really going to be a future in the profession if there's a steady stream of people working for free?

TheDriver

of course there is, schools don't have to take on anyone from this scheme

avalon68

TheDriver wrote: »

of course there is, schools don't have to take on anyone from this scheme

Ah now, if the dept of education can pay someone under 11k to do the exact same job as someone they would be paying 36 or 37k to - what option do you think they will be pushing for?? If you were running a business and were given the option to hire someone for 11k or 36k - which would you choose?

carolmon

avalon68 wrote: »

Ah now, if the dept of education can pay someone under 11k to do the exact same job as someone they would be paying 36 or 37k to - what option do you think they will be pushing for?? If you were running a business and were given the option to hire someone for 11k or 36k - which would you choose?

Agreed - I'd say next year it's goodbye to my few part time hours thanks to this scheme, and goodbye to substitution work etc
This will have a big knock on effect for a lot of teachers without PRPT contracts............
What are the unions saying about it??

TheDriver

we must actually apply to take people on, its not actually that easy.

Rodar08

It's a bloody disgrace the whole thing. I'm outraged!! I am being left with no option but to leave this country, which is not what I want to do. In my opinion I would consider it being the same as walking over a picket line if I did this scheme. I couldn't do it. For the sake of our profession's future, our children and people like me who are fully qualified but without employment.

Substitution has been thin enough of on the ground because of the S&S system but now this???? Unemployed teachers - we can kiss any prospects goodbye from here on in to the foreseeable future between this nonsense and the freeze on jobs. Mary Coughlan is the pitz and needs to be run out of the country never mind the Dail.

I'd rather beg on the street than do this scheme. I am a professional teacher! I've worked hard to get where I am, I've spent a lot of time and money trying to get here and now my career is sliding away slowly but surely.... I'm practically begging as it is for God sake!!!!!!!!!!!

Are we going to see Fas scheme doctors?? ... I certainly hope not.

Lockstep

As useful as it'll be for those looking for experience, I just can't see this being a good system. Bringing in qualified but unemployed people to do exact same work as a higher paid colleage sets a pretty bad precedent. Would be hard for new teachers to get by when they have to compete with others who are willing to work for the dole rather than a teacher's wage.

I'm not a teacher myself though. Just my 2c.

rainbowtrout

There was a report on the news about it tonight and while there was one or two students interviewed who said 'I'll do it, it's my dream to teach etc' the reporter went on to say that despite all the talk about it that Fas haven't had any enquiries from schools or would be/currently unemployed teachers.

ArtSmart

this should and prob will die a quite death. its the worse idea from coughlan yet.

for reasons too many to mention.

( I sympathise with new teachers, but this aint the way to go, trust me)

Live at Three

So it hasn't actually happened yet?

Tigerandahalf

The INTO has to take some of the blame for this. I'm coming from the primary perspective. I feel they are simply protecting the interests of teachers already employed. They should be fighting to protect the interests of all teachers. If we had a true union this would not have been accepted. I have spent a long time in uni like many others and do not like the idea of having to work for free. It is extremely insulting and then you see bank boys and top public servants saying they are entitled to their bonuses. It's sad how out of touch some people are.
Teachers in the system will inevitably end up taking this 10% paycut down the line. It is only a matter of time. The gov have already indicated as much - the PT ratio to be increased or take a further cut. Where will the line be drawn? It is in everyone's interest that people resist this. I pity teachers coming into the system...taking a 14% pay cut plus the additional levies already imposed. They will be lucky to be coming out with €450 pw.

freire

I can't see too many schools with proper, right thinking management applying for this scheme. I would be incredibly surprised to see it in our own school. Management will see it for what it is and that's my old cry of completely devaluing the profession of teaching. It wouldn't be good for morale or anything else.

As an idea, it is an absolute affront and should be treated with the utmost derision it deserves. In fact that woman and her backroom crew are beyond contempt.

For shame.

pinkorchid

Live at Three wrote: »

This FAS WPPS thing, how do you sign up to it?

Also does anyone know, could you earn extra money in the school by s&s work etc? Would certainly cover the expenses of getting to work etc.

It's a horrible prospect working for 200 a week and watching my more fortunate peers working for normal money but I think it has to be done.

What are your thoughts? Are many people considering it?

No...it does not have to be done. We can take a stand and say no!
Didn't people die in this country for the right to say NO!

solerina

Schools will probably use this scheme to get lab technicians, IT people etc and not people to fill teaching jobs ( I think the scheme doesnt allow for someone to take a 'real' teaching job)..if nothing else the principal will get to know you and will see what you have to offer to the school, I would imagine that should a job come up in your subject area you would have a good chance of getting it... I hope so anyway....Good luck to anyone who does partake in the scheme

ytareh

Sorry Solerina but it must be said -Those rose tinted spectacles look great on ya!There was a specific scheme for lab assistants before ,this one is def for abusing teachers.(Also as soon as the 'free teacher' 'expires' either contractually or physically-they could after all in theory be teaching 40 hours a week!!!-they will be replaced with another free teacher ...SICKENING.

rainbowtrout

ytareh wrote: »

Sorry Solerina but it must be said -Those rose tinted spectacles look great on ya!There was a specific scheme for lab assistants before ,this one is def for abusing teachers.

That's not really fair. It was stated that qualified teaching graduates, graduates and non-graduates can be employed by the scheme. So my reading of that would be a school could have someone in to work as a lab tech that has a science qualification for example but no teaching qualification.

Here is the text of the Circular issued to schools:

1. The Public Service Agreement 2010-14 provides that there will be full support in the Civil Service and State agencies for programmes and initiatives to support and assist the unemployed, including the FÁS Work Placement Programme (WPP).

2. The WPP is now being launched in the Civil Service, State agencies and other public service bodies. Schools are permitted to participate in the programme. It will allow a school to apply to take on one or more people for a work experience placement for 25-40 hours a week for a minimum period of 2 months and a maximum period of 9 months. The intention is to assist people who are unemployed to retain their skills levels and/or secure work experience that will assist them in finding employment.

3. It is a condition of the programme that any placements should not displace an existing member of staff or be used to fill a vacant post and each school must sign a declaration to this effect. Accordingly, the programme cannot be used to fill posts covered by the moratorium.

4. In considering appropriate tasks, a school should remain aware that it will not be possible to extend the programme beyond the agreed period and, accordingly, there should be no expectation that a person will be retained beyond the duration of a placement nor will additional resources be made available to a school to continue a task of work beyond the duration of a placement. Schools may use the WPP to engage teachers registered with the Teaching Council, including newly qualified teachers subject to part 3 of this Circular. Where a registered teacher is engaged under the WPP he or she may be deployed to undertake normal teaching duties in a school if the Board of Management/VEC consider this appropriate and can make suitable arrangements. Schools may also use the WPP to engage people in non-teaching roles and they should consider non-teaching graduates who may have valuable skills from which a school could benefit.

5. Any person proposed to be engaged by a school under the WPP will be subject to vetting by An Garda Síochána. Schools should, therefore, tick the “Yes” box to the question “Will Garda Vetting be required” in Part B of the WPP Provider Application Form.

6. To become a provider of a work placement a school should apply directly to FÁS using the appropriate form (available here). The Placement Guidelines for Work Placement Programme /Guidelines for Completing Provider Application Form (available here); the Placement Agreement Form and the Placement Q&A may be of assistance. You will note that the "Guidelines for Completing Provider Application Form" state that, for non-commercial public bodies, each application must be accompanied by written approval from the parent department for each placement for which they apply. Please note that this Department has informed FÁS that recognised schools are free to recruit people under the WPP and, accordingly, it is not necessary for a school to seek approval from the Department when applying to be a provider.

7. As you may be aware, the Renewed Programme for Government provides for the taking on of 1,000 third and fourth level graduates to provide additional capacity and skills across the public service and to provide valuable work experience. In line with this commitment, you are specifically urged to facilitate the placement of graduates. In this regard please note that the programme will not displace existing graduate placement programmes.

8. Please contact FÁS (www.fas.ie) for further information on this matter.

9. This circular can be accessed on the Department’s website under www.education.ie - Home – Education Personnel – Post-Primary/Primary – Circulars and Information Booklets – Programmes & Initiatives.
Dalton Tattan

Have a look at point No. 4 the last line in particular.

freckly

Have a look at some of the positions advertised on fas.ie. One secondary school looking for teachers with certain subject combinations. The candidates will also be required to do supervision and substitution. Bye bye subbing for unemployed NQTs, or indeed for those of us who are not NQTs, but who have been on the maternity leave and career break service. Seriously, do we really need to learn from the experienced teachers, as the ad suggests? And why to the people on the fas scheme do 25 hours, when the paid teachers do 22? Could it be that they will be meeting kids off the buses, answering phones at lunchtime and being the general dogsbody? I dont really agree with the WWP scheme for highly qualified people. There may be benefits to some professionals of getting some non-academic, on-the-job training, but teachers have done this during their dip. If we accept this, we are basically shooting ourselves in the foot. Do it for one year and what happens then? The subbing hours will be taken up by the next unpaid worker.

rainbowtrout

freckly wrote: »

Have a look at some of the positions advertised on fas.ie. One secondary school looking for teachers with certain subject combinations. The candidates will also be required to do supervision and substitution. Bye bye subbing for unemployed NQTs, or indeed for those of us who are not NQTs, but who have been on the maternity leave and career break service. Seriously, do we really need to learn from the experienced teachers, as the ad suggests? And why to the people on the fas scheme do 25 hours, when the paid teachers do 22? Could it be that they will be meeting kids off the buses, answering phones at lunchtime and being the general dogsbody? I dont really agree with the WWP scheme for highly qualified people. There may be benefits to some professionals of getting some non-academic, on-the-job training, but teachers have done this during their dip. If we accept this, we are basically shooting ourselves in the foot. Do it for one year and what happens then? The subbing hours will be taken up by the next unpaid worker.

I'm not defending the scheme but you don't have to apply for it.

Also it was said when the scheme was launched that a person on the scheme could be asked to work up to 40 hours per week. It has no link to teaching hours. A person on the scheme cannot take a vacant position.

I just had a read of those ads myself. A number of ads for one school in particular. My reading of it is that the school have obviously decided to go for the scheme and if they get any suitable applicants they are going to use them to take a small number of students out of classes for resource or possibly for discipline problems.

If it goes belly up and the person walks midway through their time in the school the students are still part of a regular class. It's really the only way the scheme can be implemented in a teaching setting. No principal can risk putting extra class groupings on the timetable for which he has no allocation and give them to someone on the scheme. If they leave, he is fecked.

I do agree on your point about S&S. For any school availing of the scheme, there will be little or no S&S available to subs or to teachers within the school.

freckly

rainbowtrout wrote: »

I'm not defending the scheme but you don't have to apply for it.

Also it was said when the scheme was launched that a person on the scheme could be asked to work up to 40 hours per week. It has no link to teaching hours. A person on the scheme cannot take a vacant position.

I just had a read of those ads myself. A number of ads for one school in particular. My reading of it is that the school have obviously decided to go for the scheme and if they get any suitable applicants they are going to use them to take a small number of students out of classes for resource or possibly for discipline problems.

If it goes belly up and the person walks midway through their time in the school the students are still part of a regular class. It's really the only way the scheme can be implemented in a teaching setting. No principal can risk putting extra class groupings on the timetable for which he has no allocation and give them to someone on the scheme. If they leave, he is fecked.

I do agree on your point about S&S. For any school availing of the scheme, there will be little or no S&S available to subs or to teachers within the school.

What about the provision that the unpaid teacher has to be prepared to take direction from permanent staff? Obviously, this has to happen but I really dont like the way it has been phrased in the ads. It really emphasises the fact that this scheme introduces a tiered system. What do people think of the fact that one school has specifically advertised for a French&Business teacher. Why this specific combination? Could their existing French&Business teacher be experiencing difficulties and the principal is prepared to pass the book to the unpaid staff? I dont know anything about the school in question ot the teacher, so this is pure speculation.
If the unpaid staff member takes small groups and possibly disruptive students, the problems facing schools will just be covered up and we will never get the funding back! Maybe Im selfish but I would no more be happy or motivated to take the bold or difficult kids from a paid member of staff.
You are correct in saying that nobody has to do the scheme, but will it damage future job chances by being unemployed when this scheme exists?

rainbowtrout

freckly wrote: »

What about the provision that the unpaid teacher has to be prepared to take direction from permanent staff? Obviously, this has to happen but I really dont like the way it has been phrased in the ads. It really emphasises the fact that this scheme introduces a tiered system. What do people think of the fact that one school has specifically advertised for a French&Business teacher. Why this specific combination? Could their existing French&Business teacher be experiencing difficulties and the principal is prepared to pass the book to the unpaid staff? I dont know anything about the school in question ot the teacher, so this is pure speculation.
If the unpaid staff member takes small groups and possibly disruptive students, the problems facing schools will just be covered up and we will never get the funding back! Maybe Im selfish but I would no more be happy or motivated to take the bold or difficult kids from a paid member of staff.
You are correct in saying that nobody has to do the scheme, but will it damage future job chances by being unemployed when this scheme exists?

I'm actually familiar with the school in question. I know some of the teachers there and have examined there several times in the last few years. It wouldn't be a school with major problems.

My reading of the 'taking directions from a permanent teacher' is that if you are given a few students to look after as resource or through team teaching or whatever, well you have to do the work that their main teacher sets so therefore it does involve taking direction from that teacher.

As for the subject combinations, it could be that there are subjects that have very large classes due to cutbacks and an extra person in the room would ease the pressure. It could also be that the principal held a staff meeting, put forward the proposal of taking on WPP people and asked staff for their opinion. A number of staff may have specifically said they didn't want or need another person in their class and some may have said they did. I'm just speculating too.


Will it damage future employment prospects? I have no idea. I suppose it really is down to how many schools offer the scheme. If it becomes widespread then unfortunately it may become the norm. If nobody does the scheme I can't see how it would damage a person's prospects. I think while there are principals out there who would be willing to abuse this scheme I also think that there are principals out there who realise that working 40 hours a week for €188 is slave labour and that doesn't take into account that person's expenses. A person in that position would be better off keeping their dole money and doing grinds at home, or working any minimum wage job which would pay better

freire

If people start working for nothing then isn't the perception going to be ''hey, why pay these people in the first place, they'll do it for gratis''.

It's a bloody dangerous precedent.

And I know they'll get their social welfare, but they'd get that at home on the couch.

brightspark

Perhaps it would be better if they employed them on a part-time basis.

I don't know what the hourly rate for teaching is but the money that social welfare currently spend paying the weekly jobseekers allowance/benefit to unemployed teachers could be used to pay the part-time wages instead.

To be clear I'm not suggesting that they work for minimum wage! Just that surely it makes more sense to pay them for working part-time then to just pay out social welfare, especially to those on whom the state has already spent a considerable amount during their college years.

As a country we can no longer pay people to 'sit on the couch' and even if we could, is it right that income is taken from those who are getting up every morning and just handed to those who don't?

As long as the hourly rates (and other benefits)are the same as those paid to people in full time positions I see nothing wrong with 'workfare', and it's not as if the unemployed teachers are being asked to sweep the streets.

rainbowtrout

brightspark wrote: »

Perhaps it would be better if they employed them on a part-time basis.

I don't know what the hourly rate for teaching is but the money that social welfare currently spend paying the weekly jobseekers allowance/benefit to unemployed teachers could be used to pay the part-time wages instead.

To be clear I'm not suggesting that they work for minimum wage! Just that surely it makes more sense to pay them for working part-time then to just pay out social welfare, especially to those on whom the state has already spent a considerable amount during their college years.

As a country we can no longer pay people to 'sit on the couch' and even if we could, is it right that income is taken from those who are getting up every morning and just handed to those who don't?

As long as the hourly rates (and other benefits)are the same as those paid to people in full time positions I see nothing wrong with 'workfare', and it's not as if the unemployed teachers are being asked to sweep the streets.

How would that affect currently employed teachers jobs? There would still be no job security and if a school was to 'employ' teachers in this way outside of the school's normal allocation what would stop them upping and leaving during the year for a better job whether it be in teaching or otherwise. Also as the dole is now €188 you wouldn't get any of these teachers for more than 4 hours a week.

Also if you're suggesting that they get the same benefits as teachers in employment I assume you mean holidays and pension benefits... well then they'd have to pay into the pension and pay the Universal Social Charge. There wouldn't be much left out of 188 when you take both of those out. I couldn't see how it would work.

brightspark

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Also as the dole is now €188 you wouldn't get any of these teachers for more than 4 hours a week.

Wow €47 per hour at that rate its €1833 for a 39 hour week leading to an annual €95,316!! or do teachers actually work much less hours? (including prep time)

I knew teachers were well paid, didn't think that it amounted to that though.

By same pay and conditions I meant the same pay and conditions that 'temporary' teachers get, i.e. those who don't have full time pensionable jobs.

rainbowtrout

brightspark wrote: »

Wow €47 per hour at that rate its €1833 for a 39 hour week leading to an annual €95,316!! or do teachers actually work much less hours? (including prep time)

I knew teachers were well paid, didn't think that it amounted to that though.

By same pay and conditions I meant the same pay and conditions that 'temporary' teachers get, i.e. those who don't have full time pensionable jobs.

Teachers get paid based on a 22 hour contract which is 22 hours in the classroom. They don't get paid for any work - preparation, corrections, etc that are done outside class time. You're obviously not a teacher so I'd suggest you read up on your facts before you start debating the issue.

And no we don't get paid €95k a year. And not every is on full hours. And not everyone is permanent. And not everyone is on that rate of pay. Contract teachers are also entitled to pay into a pension so if you wanted everyone to be equal those on dole rates would have to pay in too. In the interests of equality and fairness.

brightspark

rainbowtrout wrote: »

A person in that position would be better off keeping their dole money and doing grinds at home, or working any minimum wage job which would pay better

Earn money from grinds and claim 'dole', is that even legal?

sitstill

brightspark wrote: »

Wow €47 per hour at that rate its €1833 for a 39 hour week leading to an annual €95,316!! or do teachers actually work much less hours? (including prep time)

I knew teachers were well paid, didn't think that it amounted to that though.

By same pay and conditions I meant the same pay and conditions that 'temporary' teachers get, i.e. those who don't have full time pensionable jobs.

A teacher who was being paid at that rate would be working max 22 hours a week and would not be paid during summer, midterm or other school holidays.

rainbowtrout

brightspark wrote: »

Earn money from grinds and claim 'dole', is that even legal?

No it's not. Some teachers declare their grinds earnings and some do not. There are plenty of people working cash in hand in this country as I'm sure you are aware. And that situation is not going to disappear particularly at the moment. That is reality. Some would even be better off just working at grinds full time and not claiming dole or doing the Work Placement Scheme.

brightspark

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Teachers get paid based on a 22 hour contract which is 22 hours in the classroom. They don't get paid for any work - preparation, corrections, etc that are done outside class time. You're obviously not a teacher so I'd suggest you read up on your facts before you start debating the issue.

And no we don't get paid €95k a year. And not every is on full hours. And not everyone is permanent. And not everyone is on that rate of pay. Contract teachers are also entitled to pay into a pension so if you wanted everyone to be equal those on dole rates would have to pay in too. In the interests of equality and fairness.

I am well aware that teachers do not spend 39Hrs in the classroom, obviously the rate of pay for the 22 Hours includes compensation for the other work or why else do they do it?

I am also well aware that teachers do not get €95K a year, but you were the one who said €188 would only pay for 4 hrs!

Even if they only had to work 4hrs to get 'dole' then they should!


Or do you really believe in paying people to stay at home and letting them give grinds with their extra spare time.

Teachers of course know everything so I must be wrong....Rant over

rainbowtrout

brightspark wrote: »

I am well aware that teachers do not spend 39Hrs in the classroom, obviously the rate of pay for the 22 Hours includes compensation for the other work or why else do they do it?

I am also well aware that teachers do not get €95K a year, but you were the one who said €188 would only pay for 4 hrs!

Even if they only had to work 4hrs to get 'dole' then they should!


Or do you really believe in paying people to stay at home and letting them give grinds with their extra spare time.

Teachers of course know everything so I must be wrong....Rant over

You're the one that suggested teachers earn €95k a year, not me. You're also the one that made their calculations based on 39 hours. If you were 'aware' of all of this information then why use it?

Some teachers believe it or not do their jobs because they like teaching. Strange and all as it sounds.

Why should teachers be treated differently to anyone else on the dole? Why not make everyone else on the dole work for their dole? Why is it only teachers that should have to do this? What's so different about them?

brightspark

Sorry if I wasn't clearer earlier but I think we should have 'Workfare' for everyone, not just teachers.

No one should get money handed to them when they are capable of working.

spurious

brightspark wrote: »

Wow €47 per hour at that rate its €1833 for a 39 hour week leading to an annual €95,316!! or do teachers actually work much less hours? (including prep time)

I knew teachers were well paid, didn't think that it amounted to that though.

It doesn't.
Most teachers working part-time hours have below 11 hours a week - any more than that and they have a pro rata contract. Personally, I lost a substantial amount of my income when I was made permanent from part-time.

And no, I'm not on 95k either. I'm paid now what I was paid in 2005, before I was promoted, though still expected to do all the extra work the promotion entailed.

brightspark

As I said I didn't think that teachers were on 95K a year.

Of course contracting teachers are paid a higher hourly rate than permanent staff, but that applies to many other jobs too. It goes someway to making up for no sick pay, no holiday pay etc and also the uncertainty of not having a regular income.

How many hours/days work would be fair to get €188, I know its definately not 40, but it shouldn't be 0 either (for anyone, not just teachers).

Or is it now so ingrained in people that the 'dole' is money for doing nothing and even having to do a day's work for it would be too much?

gaeilgegrinds1

Full time teachers are on about 500 a week after tax, for 22 hrs class time and varying times outside depending on how long they're in the job and how much they put in. I find about 10 hours in general but more different times of the year, I usually give up a Saturday every three weeks or so and do notes then. So it's about a 32-35 hour week in my opinion. We're all different though.
But...most teachers now start on eight or eleven hours in our place, so divide that out and you'll see the reality of teaching in Ireland in 2010.

rainbowtrout

brightspark wrote: »

As I said I didn't think that teachers were on 95K a year.

Of course contracting teachers are paid a higher hourly rate than permanent staff, but that applies to many other jobs too. It goes someway to making up for no sick pay, no holiday pay etc and also the uncertainty of not having a regular income.

How many hours/days work would be fair to get €188, I know its definately not 40, but it shouldn't be 0 either (for anyone, not just teachers).

Or is it now so ingrained in people that the 'dole' is money for doing nothing and even having to do a day's work for it would be too much?

This is getting off topic, but do remember that most people have been making PRSI contributions while they are working and that is what funds their dole payments. It's not like they are purposely sponging off the state for free. Most people don't want to be on the dole and are looking for work.

Bigloan

Ok, so let me get this straight, there are people out there who think this scheme is a good idea?? for experience etc???YOU HAVE TO BE KIDDING!!!!!I have spent the last few years doing my BA, MA and PDGE, I now have a 12,000 euro loan while trying to pay back which was used to pay my way through college, I NEVER got help from the goverment, nothing, and now I am paying it back as best as I can. So after spending years and money get what I needed to teach I am now going to be asked to work for the dole, while others get it because well they dont have work at all!!!are they for real, are they thinking, may I ask how thick are these people! I am so mad, I mean I want to punch someone! this is killing me, like people saying 'it has to be done'... NO, NO, it doesnt, I have no problem working at a lower wage rate that is fine, but to work basically for nothing, to spend the last few years studying for what? and this 'good experience' thing, you want experience, go to england, at least they will pay might not be as good, but you will get experience and some sort of decent wage packet!!!how can you expect people to work along side those who get double if not more than what you will get if you take the scheme, its an insult to any trained teacher, if ur a student in college and you want experience you do it....I am so mad, i am going to end up abroad, and thats what the goverment want, doh?!.. I have got sub work here and there but good luck to those who take it because you are going to need it, up to 40 hours a week, dont forget correcting, after school activities, oh travel expenses, and rent, you cant survive on it unless your school is down the road and you have no rent to pay, its a insult I would take any teaching job, but I refuse to take the dole for it, what about those on the dole getting it and not working 40hrs, those with the rose tinted glasses about the scheme, u are either a)not living in the real world, b) have no loans or any bills to pay, c) your just.......???!!!!!!!!!!! and frankly I could kill someone at this point!!!!

evolving_doors

Bigloan wrote: »

Ok, so let me get this straight, there are people out there who think this scheme is a good idea?? for experience etc???YOU HAVE TO BE KIDDING

+1 Bigloan


This system has 2 basic POLITICAL functions..

* Reduce Numbers on live register

* Reduce pupil teacher ratio

The claim of "giving teaching experience" is moot . If that was the justification, then this system would have been in operation for years.
Oh hold on... you get the required teaching experience during your HDip anyway, maybe the teaching council might pass this information on to the politicians.

Why don't they do it for all people on the dole to give them 'experience'. Where I'm from (high unemployment area etc.) the bookies and the pubs are still jammers any time of the day,(same as it ever was) "what's a recession" I hear them say...

What do you do after 1 years "experience' anyway ?
A. ... get shown the door to be replaced by the nxt stooge
B. ....get taken on if the school 'likes the look of ya'.....those days are well over boss.
C. ... Stay on for 4 years and get a CID ( Contract of Indefinite Dole)
D. ... Emigrate

this whole rant about teachers wages/hours is off-topic, save it for Joe Duffy,, notice he never rants about 3rd level lecturer wages/holidays.... "Joe joe what about the days they missed because of the snow Joe" ,"Would someone please think of the children Joe",...

rabble rabble

kiwikid

are newly graduated but unqualified teachers get paid full wages in the the required "dip year" before they have been rubber stamped as competent to teach?
if this was unpaid ut students could claim social welfare / grant during the time then it would save a fair bit surely?
I mean this right across the board in nursing / allied health / librarian etc; students gain their qualification before being paid as a fully qualified person.

evolving_doors

kiwikid wrote: »

are newly graduated but unqualified teachers get paid full wages in the the required "dip year" before they have been rubber stamped as competent to teach?
if this was unpaid ut students could claim social welfare / grant during the time then it would save a fair bit surely?
I mean this right across the board in nursing / allied health / librarian etc; students gain their qualification before being paid as a fully qualified person.

?

kiwikid

yes my terminology was wrong- question rephrased - would it not be better to require the teacher do their probationary or "dip year" at dole wages instead of creating an instance where a teacher with years of experience earns the dole while working while someone gets a permanent role and wages whole on their probation year?

TheDriver

you cannot get a CID because you are not employed at the school or I suppose you might but under the same conditions as the initial 4 years i.e. dole only?

Bigloan

Armelodie wrote: »

+1 Bigloan


This system has 2 basic POLITICAL functions..

* Reduce Numbers on live register

* Reduce pupil teacher ratio

The claim of "giving teaching experience" is moot . If that was the justification, then this system would have been in operation for years.
Oh hold on... you get the required teaching experience during your HDip anyway, maybe the teaching council might pass this information on to the politicians.

Why don't they do it for all people on the dole to give them 'experience'. Where I'm from (high unemployment area etc.) the bookies and the pubs are still jammers any time of the day,(same as it ever was) "what's a recession" I hear them say...

What do you do after 1 years "experience' anyway ?
A. ... get shown the door to be replaced by the nxt stooge
B. ....get taken on if the school 'likes the look of ya'.....those days are well over boss.
C. ... Stay on for 4 years and get a CID ( Contract of Indefinite Dole)
D. ... Emigrate

this whole rant about teachers wages/hours is off-topic, save it for Joe Duffy,, notice he never rants about 3rd level lecturer wages/holidays.... "Joe joe what about the days they missed because of the snow Joe" ,"Would someone please think of the children Joe",...

rabble rabble

Just a note all the stuff you have mentioned I am well aware of, I have looked up the scheme etc, I have asked other people what they think, I have exactly the same views as you (that is pretty clear don't you think?) but I am annoyed by the whole thing, it should not be a different rule for us a different rule for others...but the experience thing was what someone posted earlier and I was annoyed by it...you get experience while training, like I am beyond against this scheme!!!!! and my 'rant' about wages/hours, sorry its how I feel about it, because how can the scheme truly be justified? It's either work for nothing or get out of the country!!! and frankly i wouldnt go to joe...you must be kidding...at least give me some credit, the teachers who are in the system for the last 20-40+ are grand, its the new teachers coming out who will be screwed, a lower wage fine, but the dole, then make everyone do it for the dole I want to work but this scheme is an abuse of all the hdips do to get it, and I have applied for all jobs going not just teaching?!...and how about you go to joe considering you think my opinion is a rant? when I am basically struggling and begging for a job! so rabble rabble yourself....because seems we are on the same page but my opinion is invaild.good luck to u!

Lala85

Bigloan wrote: »

Ok, so let me get this straight, there are people out there who think this scheme is a good idea?? for experience etc???YOU HAVE TO BE KIDDING!!!!!I have spent the last few years doing my BA, MA and PDGE, I now have a 12,000 euro loan while trying to pay back which was used to pay my way through college, I NEVER got help from the goverment, nothing, and now I am paying it back as best as I can. So after spending years and money get what I needed to teach I am now going to be asked to work for the dole, while others get it because well they dont have work at all!!!are they for real, are they thinking, may I ask how thick are these people! I am so mad, I mean I want to punch someone! this is killing me, like people saying 'it has to be done'... NO, NO, it doesnt, I have no problem working at a lower wage rate that is fine, but to work basically for nothing, to spend the last few years studying for what? and this 'good experience' thing, you want experience, go to england, at least they will pay might not be as good, but you will get experience and some sort of decent wage packet!!!how can you expect people to work along side those who get double if not more than what you will get if you take the scheme, its an insult to any trained teacher, if ur a student in college and you want experience you do it....I am so mad, i am going to end up abroad, and thats what the goverment want, doh?!.. I have got sub work here and there but good luck to those who take it because you are going to need it, up to 40 hours a week, dont forget correcting, after school activities, oh travel expenses, and rent, you cant survive on it unless your school is down the road and you have no rent to pay, its a insult I would take any teaching job, but I refuse to take the dole for it, what about those on the dole getting it and not working 40hrs, those with the rose tinted glasses about the scheme, u are either a)not living in the real world, b) have no loans or any bills to pay, c) your just.......???!!!!!!!!!!! and frankly I could kill someone at this point!!!!

yes indeed, it is beyond a joke, I'm in the same boat and so are so many others why are we getting this, its not fair. I have been out getting sub work for the last few years, thank god its all I had to keep me going. If this scheme happens I won't have any work at all, the only other option is to move to England and i don't want to up root my daughter. I know they are trying to drive us out now thats what they want. I am so sick of this government and country! Everyone thinks all teachers get big wage packets and paid holidays but its not everyone....I really don't want to leave but I'm feeling like there is no other option....

Lala85

this whole rant about teachers wages/hours is off-topic, save it for Joe Duffy,, notice he never rants about 3rd level lecturer wages/holidays.... "Joe joe what about the days they missed because of the snow Joe" ,"Would someone please think of the children Joe",...

rabble rabble[/QUOTE]



I just read your comment 'save it for joe'.. it's clear you know the facts you aren't the only on this site that does. The minute I read this I was annoyed, 'save it for joe' please grow up a bit?! People are annoyed and upset by this scheme, god knows I am, I know I will end up moving and I don't want to do that to my daughter but I have no choice. What good is ringing Joe Duffy? Are you trying to be condescending?Are you a teacher I assume yes? You know the facts well done, pat on the back for you! So does everyone on this trend at this point! People are annoyed, as am I, to be honest I'm more depressed about it, you on the other hand seem to be too smart about the whole thing, if you are teaching god help your students.

rainbowtrout

kiwikid wrote: »

yes my terminology was wrong- question rephrased - would it not be better to require the teacher do their probationary or "dip year" at dole wages instead of creating an instance where a teacher with years of experience earns the dole while working while someone gets a permanent role and wages whole on their probation year?

Dip students do not get paid while on placement. If a school offers them subbing hours which are not part of their placement hours they can get paid for them. However some schools take advantage of the dip student in this instance and do not pay them knowing the student can't really say no.

Toto Wolfcastle

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Dip students do not get paid while on placement. If a school offers them subbing hours which are not part of their placement hours they can get paid for them. However some schools take advantage of the dip student in this instance and do not pay them knowing the student can't really say no.

It's possible that he meant the primary teaching dip year though. The first year out. I presume that's a paid year as you need an actual teaching job to do it.