2nd Level Teachers a question, "Unions - what exactly are we paying them for"?

Pete2012

I beg the question in relation to the above in relation to the cutbacks in educatin. Who are the unions representing, the government or teachers??

In my opinion they are all politicians on a gravy train attending meetings or pretending to...

What exactly do they do? What are their salaries? Who are they accountable to? How many union officials are there? Who pays their salaries? What cuts have they being subjected to?
Why are school reps remaining unpaid???? (the salaries from the top need to be cut, less officials, more accountability, less cosy meetings, expenses and unaccountability, and school reps on the ground paid)

They signed teachers away with the croake park agreement. Our net pay - for all the extra work expected of us is not worth it. We have been yellow packed.
And what will happen after 2014 ?

Did they represent teachers or guidance counsellors in their pre budget talks last week???? What are they doing to reverse the changes to the ex quota allocation of guidance counsellors which will affect young people adversely and both guidance counsellors and subject teachers positions.

Do they even care about the effects the budget cutbacks will have on students? Are they in the real world or do they know what goes on, on the ground at all??

What exactly are we paying them for????

They have sold us out, yet again

spurious

There is no 'they', 'we' are the union - at least that is the case in TUI, where policy is determined by the branches and Congress. I presume the others are the same, though tbh, I don't know.

Boober Fraggle

Are you a member of a union? Did you vote against the Croke Park agreement? Did you make representations to your union rep about your concerns about the Croke Park agreement?

Pete2012

Yes, I am a member of a union - the ASTI. I voted against the Croke Park Agreement. As a result of the cutbacks in the budget I might lose my job because I am a temporary teacher.

I was interested in becoming a Guidance Counsellor, had prepared for the interview for the course last year but due to personal and financial circumstances I was unable to do the course this year.
My wife is a Guidance Counsellor and will be affected too (not job wise as she is permanent) and is highly concerned about the effects the cuts will have on students.

Juniorhurler

TBH the biggest issue that I have with the teacher unions is the way they have allowed new entrants to be sold out. This started in 2004 with the changes to the pension scheme and was continued last year with all new entrants going to point one and on a 10% reduced pay scale. Now they have allowed the change in the allowances payable to teachers to slip through on this sector.

The suggestion I would make on union leadership salaries is that their pay grades should be a fixed multiple of the lowest point on the pay scale. Their pay would therefore drop or increase in line with that of young or new entrant teachers. This would incentivise them to protect the most vulnerable members of the teaching profession.

Lord TSC

Juniorhurler wrote: »

TBH the biggest issue that I have with the teacher unions is the way they have allowed new entrants to be sold out.

This 1000%
As someone just starting to get some stability work-wise (in that I've had three sub days in the last three weeks; not a great stability, but at least it's work), I cannot say enough how disgusted I am reading all these punishments being levied on me because I happened to be a few years younger than someone who got into the profession a few years ago.

I get the Unions are ultimatly watching their own rather than teachers in general. They have an obligation to the people paying them now rather than the likes of me who is not. But I really hate how they've let new teachers like me take the brunt of the cuts to save the wages of older teachers. I know thats unfair and that's me falling into the "us vs them" attitude but there is a two-tier system coming into place now and I'm going to be in the bottom rung

Not that the unions care. They know I'll have to join one as soon as I get a full job anyway to cover my ass if anything went wrong. They seem to not care about hurting my money-making abilities because they know they'll get me paying them sooner or later...

rainbowtrout

I don't actually have a huge issue with the new cut - new entrants please read to the end of my post before going all fire and brimstone on me - but I think they've done it the wrong way around.


We have allowances for the dip and then academic qualification - degree/masters/PhD. What I don't understand and I've never really understood is why teachers get an allowance for holding the basic qualifications required for having a teaching job. I realise that people did get teaching jobs in the past without these qualifications, I suppose most notably in the VEC system where the dip wasn't a requirement, I have a few teacher friends who don't have the dip. But I've never understood why we get a bonus for being qualified. It's a bit like saying to a doctor, well we'll pay you the going rate for the job and give you an extra 5k a year because you've completed your medical training. Being qualified should be a given.

So realistically there shouldn't be a bonus for having a dip and a degree. Those are the basic requirements. Perhaps there should only be an allowance for having a higher qualification than that for those that wished to become more qualified in their chosen field.

As for the current situation, to remove the allowance from serving teachers would constitute a breach of contract so it can't be done. This cut also affects teachers who are teaching and don't have those extra qualifications but may elect to pursue them in the future. I'm in the first year of my masters. I won't get the allowance for it when I'm finished. Only those that have the allowance get to keep it. I'm not particularly bothered by it. I already posted about this in another thread, it's an extra €500 a year if you already held an honours degree and you get an honours masters. After deductions I will be just under €5 a week better off.

I think there are far bigger fish to fry with the union. Guidance hours are going to be scrapped in a big way in schools across the country I would imagine. While I don't have figures for it, anecdotal evidence would suggest that many of the teachers who are full time guidance or the bulk of their hours are in guidance will end up going back into the classroom to teach their normal subjects. Mainly because they are permanent/CID teachers in the first place and so need to be given hours. This will absorb hours that may have been available to part time teachers, or it will absorb the jobs created by the retirements that are supposed to be happening in February.

Boober Fraggle

If you have a problem with the stance of the union on issues, you need to lobby your co-workers, go to meetings, ring head office, and make your voice heard.

I hate hearing teachers complain about 'the union' as if it is a separate entity to the teachers who are members of it.

raytray

I think there are far bigger fish to fry with the union. Guidance hours are going to be scrapped in a big way in schools across the country I would imagine. While I don't have figures for it, anecdotal evidence would suggest that many of the teachers who are full time guidance or the bulk of their hours are in guidance will end up going back into the classroom to teach their normal subjects. Mainly because they are permanent/CID teachers in the first place and so need to be given hours. This will absorb hours that may have been available to part time teachers, or it will absorb the jobs created by the retirements that are supposed to be happening in February.[/QUOTE]

Yes of course this is the most important thing that needs to be reconciled as it is the students who will suffer. But it is very easy to see this as the biggest fish to fry as you have not faced the cuts the new entrants have. Yes you wont get your masters allowance, but either will the new entrants (and I am NOT an new entrant). I don't see how now taking the dip allowance off new entrants is going to achieve saving now, as very few who qualify in June will actually get jobs. Also I would love to see how much the 10% cut and point 1 salary scale has saved so far also. I know they will bring about savings in the long term but the country needs the savings now and this is not going to achieve it. It is the people at the top of the salary scale that are costing the most money so why not shave a point or 2 from the top of the scale where people are paying the higher rate of tax anyway so the money would not be as much missed. Of course this isn't fair either but at least it would not create a two tiered system and it would probably save enough to keep the guidance teachers, something that the new entrant cuts will not achieve. I think new entrants are entitled to feel a bit down about this if they want to.However, I would imagine a lot of new entrants would be happy to take these cuts if they could get a job, but as I have already said, this cut will not create more teaching posts now.
And I agree Rainbowtrout that it was a stupid allowance in the first place but it is an extremely unequal system now and I don't think it is very fair on new entrants. When all of these new entrants have permanent jobs in a few years down the line I would imagine that it will create problems and people will tackle the unions on it.
And actually a few months back I did see something on the INTO page about wanting new entrants to step forward with their names as they were going to seek legal advice on their behalf.

doc_17

I have some sympathy with the complaints made about the union from younger teachers.

I started teaching in 2005, 1 year after the change in regulations that said I can't retire after 35 years like those that were already in the profession. The union were happy that their existing members were being protected and didn't care about their future ones at that point.

The 10% cut in salary for new teachers is in place and I know that there are possible legal challenges being prepared by the union (TUI - which I'm a member of). However this should be the single biggest item on each of the teaching unions agenda from now until it is reversed. But I was in the union at that time and didn't care as I was being was protected.

This business of not paying for additional allowances for newly qualified Masters holders is also an unfair attack.

The pension levy also disproportionately affects the younger teachers, although there is nothing that can be done about that.

My fear is that in a few more years there will be more attacks on younger teachers and they might be forced to branch off and form a new union.

If I was one of the new teachers on the lower pay/point I would probably not join the union - I can understand how they might feel.

Lord TSC

Rainbow, personally it's not about the money itself. It's about the fact we're being punished simply because we're newer to the game. I actually agree the allocation is dodgy, but it's the fact it's only a certain group of teachers being punished which annoys me.

Yeah, the guidance counciller thing is bad as well but at least the damage to younger teachers is a byproduct and is subtle. The MA cut is a blatent slap to the face and isn't subtle at all in the way it punishes new teachers not because they are worse but just because they are new. It's a symbol of the overall problem. Had the cut been across the board, I don't think it would have hurt half as much, but then that "Only €5 a week" line wouldn't play such a big part in discussions...

rainbowtrout

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

Rainbow, personally it's not about the money itself. It's about the fact we're being punished simply because we're newer to the game. I actually agree the allocation is dodgy, but it's the fact it's only a certain group of teachers being punished which annoys me.

Yeah, the guidance counciller thing is bad as well but at least the damage to younger teachers is a byproduct and is subtle. The MA cut is a blatent slap to the face and isn't subtle at all in the way it punishes new teachers not because they are worse but just because they are new. It's a symbol of the overall problem. Had the cut been across the board, I don't think it would have hurt half as much, but then that "Only €5 a week" line wouldn't play such a big part in discussions...

I don't quite agree. I would say there are more teachers without a masters than there are with one. Many don't go on to do masters until they have established themselves with jobs and can afford it. Remember free third level education only came in in 1996. Prior to that it was a lot more expensive to go to college so many would not have had the option to spend even more time in college and get an even higher qualification. It's taken me 11 years to get around to starting mine. All of those people will also not get this allowance. I take what you are saying about new teachers taking the brunt of all the cuts but from a legal standpoint it would be difficult to remove an allowance from a person who already has one. I would also suggest that getting a masters for many is a product of the PAC system which awards points for masters, which seems to be particularly more important now that teaching experience does not count for points. There are threads on here every year with people saying 'I'm going doing a masters, that six points for the PGDE application, then I'll apply'.

I am in a relatively good position in comparison to a person just starting teaching, but I could easily compare myself to a person who started in teaching prior to 1995, just like people here are comparing themselves pre and post 2004. While I didn't know all the ins and outs of paying tax and pensions etc when I started working in teaching in 2001, I do now. I didn't understand why when I filled in forms for exam correction etc why it asked my class of PRSI. It turns out that those of us that started teaching post 95 (and anyone else in CS/PS) pay the A class PRSI and those who started prior to that pay D class. Now I'm not an expert on it, but from what I understand D is a lot lower PRSI rate than A, it also means their pensions are smaller because they aren't entitled to a state pension where as A class are. They don't have social welfare entitlements because their jobs are permanent so it's not considered necessary. It also makes it that bit harder to leave a PS/CS job as you would want to be going to something fairly secure to work up some entitlements in the private sector should you ever need it. There are a few other things but I won't go into them.

Anyway my point is, that because of legal and contractual obligations to existing employees it is hard to bring in any change so it's brought in with new employees instead. I could spend my time comparing myself to pre 1995 teachers, but I don't.


Me personally, if I was a new teacher, I would prefer to lose an allowance of €500 I never had than to see the pupil teacher ratio go even higher and remove the scant few jobs there are out there from the reach of new teachers. All those guidance teachers will have to be absorbed back into the teacher allocation of their schools. I would imagine most are permanent/CID. That means current part time teachers losing hours and less hours being available for new teachers next year. Hours made available in some schools from retirements will be absorbed by some of this too. Far more damage has been done to the prospects of new teachers by getting rid of the guidance allocation than the masters allowance ever will. There are the equivalent of 700-800 positions in guidance across the second level system in terms of hours. That is a huge number of teachers to absorb. That's on average 1 per school. Our guidance teacher has about 18 hours. We are likely to lose two teacher through retirement this year. If the guidance teacher is to be retained in a teaching role with minimal guidance that is one of those jobs gone. The other will most likely be absorbed by our part time teachers. So that's two teaching positions lost, no new staff gained and try and continue as normal offering the same level of service, range of subjects but with a smaller staff. I think it's a far bigger issue than the allowances to be honest.

flatbackfour

rainbowtrout wrote: »

I I think it's a far bigger issue than the allowances to be honest.

Agreed, and what are the unions doing about it? Sitting on thier hands. The union is useless. The leadership is more interested in protecting itself from change than helping its members especially its part time members.

It sees its only role as protecting the pay of permanent staff. All the while the conditions of all staff is being constantly undermined. We are also loosing the PR battle.

Now we have further weaked the union by seperating the new staff from the old staff, playing one against another. The staff who could kick up a fuss are too busy protecting thier own ass.

flatbackfour

spurious wrote: »

There is no 'they', 'we' are the union - at least that is the case in TUI, where policy is determined by the branches and Congress. I presume the others are the same, though tbh, I don't know.

Please, there is a union executive, we elect them to represent us. Young teachers have been very badly represented by these people. I thought the core ideal of a union is solidarity. Not protecting the interests of the strongest members.

When we distinguished between new and current teachers without putting up some much as a token fight on thier behalf, that was the nail in the coffin for teacher union representation. Role on 2014 when we have are going to really have to look for solidarity.

We really have a deficite of leadership and ideas at senior level. That is our problem.

We need a bold move, a volentery pay cut to fund guidance services or retention of special needs teachers. Something to get the public back on our side.

What have we got? Complete lack of fight as was shown last week with the guidance cuts. One of the most short sighted cuts in education in the history of the state and our union leaders are silent on it.

Teaching unions are a dead duck and the government know it.

rainbowtrout

flatbackfour wrote: »

Agreed, and what are the unions doing about it? Sitting on thier hands. The union is useless. The leadership is more interested in protecting itself from change than helping its members especially its part time members.

Perhaps, perhaps not. I've had my fair share of dealings with the union over the last few years, some things they were great on, some they were woeful on.

However, something that has been said here time and time again. Decisions are made at union meetings. Teachers have the opportunity to make their views heard at these meetings or get involved in the branch and in my own experience they spend their time bitching in the staff room and when asked if they are going to the branch meeting you hear all sorts of excuses 'oh no, it's too far too drive, I can't be bothered going out again this evening, it'll take too long, there's no point going nothing will ever change'... how does anyone expect things to change if they don't attend and make themselves heard. The branch meeting for my county was on this week, and it was time to elect new officers. No one from my school went to it (I wasn't there either) and I know they had difficulty getting people to take on the positions (chairperson, secretary, treasurer). The union will be the same people representing the same people if those that are members don't actually take an interest.

flatbackfour

rainbowtrout wrote: »

However, something that has been said here time and time again. Decisions are made at union meetings. Teachers have the opportunity to make their views heard at these meetings or get involved in the branch and in my own experience they spend their time bitching in the staff room and when asked if they are going to the branch meeting you hear all sorts of excuses 'oh no, it's too far too drive, I can't be bothered going out again this evening, it'll take too long, there's no point going nothing will ever change'... how does anyone expect things to change if they don't attend and make themselves heard. .

The leadership thrives on that apathy, they feed into it, it keeps them in jobs. Dont rock the boat with the government, dont rock the boat with the membership. Maintain the status quo. Maintain the fat pay cheque.

When was the last time you had a union official at seniopr level in your school rallying the troops so to speak. Trying to get a sense of purpose in the young members.

This is a time of transition and the old leadership are riding the time out until they retire, selling the new members down the drain while they do so.

rainbowtrout wrote: »

The branch meeting for my county was on this week, and it was time to elect new officers. No one from my school went to it (I wasn't there either) and I know they had difficulty getting people to take on the positions (chairperson, secretary, treasurer). The union will be the same people representing the same people if those that are members don't actually take an interest.

The TUI is a joke. This is the same situation in practically every county. This suituation has been allowed to fester for 10 years or more (by leadership at national level). Yea I blame younger members too they came into teaching on the back of benchmarking. They have no stomach for the hard fight ahead.

Mark my word unless we get stratagic, play a PR masterclass, get the old guard out and get some solidarity between ASTI and the TUI; our terms pay and conditions are heading south after 2014.

rainbowtrout

flatbackfour wrote: »

The leadership thrives on that apathy, they feed into it, it keeps them in jobs. Dont rock the boat with the government, dont rock the boat with the membership. Maintain the status quo. Maintain the fat pay cheque.

When was the last time you had a union official at seniopr level in your school rallying the troops so to speak. Trying to get a sense of purpose in the young members.

This is a time of transition and the old leadership are riding the time out until they retire, selling the new members down the drain while they do so.




The TUI is a joke. This is the same situation in practically every county. This suituation has been allowed to fester for 10 years or more (by leadership at national level). Yea I blame younger members too they came into teaching on the back of benchmarking. They have no stomach for the hard fight ahead.

Mark my word unless we get stratagic, play a PR masterclass, get the old guard out and get some solidarity between ASTI and the TUI; our terms pay and conditions are heading south after 2014.

We've had them down plenty of times to our branch meetings over the last 3-4 years and we had them down to sort stuff out in our school as well. In terms of rallying the troops I'm sure that would have to be done at union meetings which in our place take place during lunch, a very small window. I'm assuming it's the case in all schools, as it is in mine but the staff room is neutral territory, union business does not take place in the staff room as not all members of staff are part of the union, staff who have issues they want to take to the union would not want them broadcasted to the whole staff, and also we have two unions so we need to use separate rooms.

Apathy isn't just a problem within the leadership of the union, it's a problem within the members too. This attitude isn't just confined to union membership, it's a problem in all walks of life 'sure someone else will deal with it'.

spurious

This is Ireland all over really - people moaning about 'something should be done' but who won't bother their backside doing it themselves and sneer at those who try to do something.

There is not a branch in the country of any union that would not welcome new faces.

I was around for the start of EPT contracts, the fight for jobs in PLC courses, the start of the fight for Youthreach jobs. I could have stayed at home and laughed at the bearded cardiganned union members, but I didn't. I got off my bum one evening a month and attended the branch meetings.

If all these outraged new teachers don't get down to their branches and make union policy head in the direction they want, they deserve all they get.

Apologies but this slagging Irish attitude really annoys me.

Lord TSC

Out of interest, what chance do you really think an unemployed teacher who isn't actually part of the union has of changing the direction and policy of the overall union? It's all well and good going "Get out and do something" but let's be realistic; if the unions were so inclined to worry about what the likes of me thinks, they wouldn't have allowed the cuts in the first place.

It's easy to hide behind "Our contracts wouldn't allow us to take cuts" and it is possible to get annoyed at not just one but the multiple roadblocks being placed in the way of entrance teachers. Again i say, it's not about the money with the cuts. The GC thing, the talk of retired teachers coming back, the difficulty of actually getting even the most basic of sub jobs...it all adds up and all annoys me. But then this is a country where, as a whole, the message is "you did things right, now **** off out of the country!"

Chilli Con Kearney

The unions were involved in talks on cuts in education for the budget. The idea of deputy principal posts being cut was discussed and thrown out. Guidance counselling was offered on a plate instead.

You won't hear much from your union re this as they see it as more palletable than a point increase in the ptr. Even though they are the same thing anyway. Just terminology and sleight of hand. But the public and many teachers don't realise this.

Anyhow, its an easier wave for the unions to ride than the 'alternative'.

implausible

The union is made up of its members. Members rise up through the ranks to the executive committee. How does anyone expect change if the situation Rainbowtrout described is happening in every county? Declining attendance + apathy and bitching in the staffroom = no change. I was at a branch meeting the other night and the next day was greeted with "the union is useless, what are they doing for us?" from members who never attend meetings. That kind of grief makes me wonder why I bother...

Another poster mentioned PR. This is why the unions have no teeth - the ordinary member at the chalkface does not want the PR nightmare that is standing outside on a picket while the general public bitches about lazy ungrateful teachers. There is NO appetite for industrial action, even if we could take it.

Join the union, go to meetings and air your views. It's very easy to sit and complain about 'the union' as if it consists solely of a far-distant elite.

At the moment, the TUI is looking for submissions from teachers on JC reform. The same teachers who can't be bothered reading the material, forming an opinion and sharing it, will be the first to complain when change comes.

flatbackfour

I agree an active membership is vital. But the national executive don't communicate what's really going on. We don't get told the bigger picture we not trusted.

2014: government can say it stuck rigidly to croke park. That will be used as a stick against teachers. When look at what we gave up to protect pay. And for what? 3 years of no pay cuts.

flatbackfour

implausible wrote: »

The union is made up of its members. Members rise up through the ranks to the executive committee. How does anyone expect change if the situation Rainbowtrout described is happening in every county? Declining attendance + apathy and bitching in the staffroom = no change. I was at a branch meeting the other night and the next day was greeted with "the union is useless, what are they doing for us?" from members who never attend meetings. That kind of grief makes me wonder why I bother...

Another poster mentioned PR. This is why the unions have no teeth - the ordinary member at the chalkface does not want the PR nightmare that is standing outside on a picket while the general public bitches about lazy ungrateful teachers. There is NO appetite for industrial action, even if we could take it.

Join the union, go to meetings and air your views. It's very easy to sit and complain about 'the union' as if it consists solely of a far-distant elite.

At the moment, the TUI is looking for submissions from teachers on JC reform. The same teachers who can't be bothered reading the material, forming an opinion and sharing it, will be the first to complain when change comes.

When I talk about pr a am talking about the union doing something pro active. Advising permanent members to defer increments to keep guidance service etc. Something that tells the public we are on their side.

flatbackfour

Young members are usually part time. They are scared **** less to get involved in union as they want to keep heads down to get a contract.

This is what happens when you don't have complete solidariy.

rainbowtrout

flatbackfour wrote: »

Young members are usually part time. They are scared **** less to get involved in union as they want to keep heads down to get a contract.

This is what happens when you don't have complete solidariy.

We rotate the union rep position in my school every year. We have a loose arrangement that part time staff are not in a position where they have to be rep until they have a CID and some security precisely for the reason you outline. We don't want them to have to go into the principal fighting for hours that may include their own contracts or could affect their own contracts. However that doesn't stop them attending branch meetings and airing their views there.

The annual congress takes place at Easter every year. Each branch is entitled to send a couple of members, I think their places are paid for. I know my branch had trouble getting two people to go because I got a text during the Easter holidays from my school rep asking if I would like to go because there was a place available and she wasn't going. This is two places for the whole county which covers a number of secondary schools, a number of adult education/PLC/back to education centres and a prison education unit and they were still having trouble getting two people to attend. If that's not apathy I don't know what is. Motions are proposed for this meeting, debated and voted on. So those that attend branch meetings have a chance to go and make their vote count if they want. It doesn't mean it affects what goes on in their school.

Pete2012

I agree flatback four, young members can be afraid to be active in the union in case it might rock the boat in terms of future contracts, i don't necessarily agree with this attitude.

Pete2012

chilly con careny, yes that was reported on last fridays times that they were had left deputy principals posts and were going cutting guidance instead. Very sneaky way of reducing the pupil teacher ratio. How do you know that the unions offered that alternative?

whiteandlight

Pete2012 wrote: »

I agree flatback four, young members can be afraid to be active in the union in case it might rock the boat in terms of future contracts, i don't necessarily agree with this attitude.

I'm one of those. I'm sorry but the jobs market is so precarious out there that I cannot afford to be active in the union/outspoken in case I get let go. To be honest I'm also too busy doing a ton of extracurricular work in the vain hope of becoming indispensable.

rainbowtrout

Musicmental85 wrote: »

I'm one of those. I'm sorry but the jobs market is so precarious out there that I cannot afford to be active in the union/outspoken in case I get let go. To be honest I'm also too busy doing a ton of extracurricular work in the vain hope of becoming indispensable.

Not a personal attack on you Musicmental but this is the attitude all around the country. Attending a union meeting and giving your view on something on the agenda, or putting something on the agenda does not equate to putting your job at risk. In my experience the branch officers have done a lot of work for regular teachers, but can't help them if they don't know what the problems are. Also in my experience, principals and deputy principals tend not to attend meetings, so it's not like you have to raise an issue with them in the room and then labelling you as a trouble maker.

Being too busy is not an excuse. We're all busy. I spent a year as a union rep, and we had a lot of issues in my school that year, I spent countless hours in the office with management in a union capacity, I attended branch meetings, I was on the phone to branch officers and those higher up, I attended JCB meetings, I was still teaching my full hours, I'm the PLC co-ordinator for my school, I'm involved in extra curricular like many, many teachers and I was studying for a degree by night at the time. So really being busy is not an excuse, just like I outlined above, everyone is busy, everyone makes excuses, and then everyone complains because decisions are made that affect them and they complain that they don't have a say. Their own fault really. You'll make time if you're interested enough. Meetings only happen maybe once every two months or so. Not an awful lot of time to give up.

When I was the rep, I had people constantly on my back asking me if their contracts had been sorted out, but if you ask them to attend the branch meeting where we are trying to get something done about it, it was 'no, too busy for that'. Can't have it both ways, if you want your working conditions preserved don't sit back and expect everyone else to do the work.

Lord TSC

Personally, it's not that I'd be afraid to go. It's that I know it would be pointless. Again I ask, relatisically, what chance has an unemployed, non-union member have of going to a meeting like this and actually changing the direction of the union's plans?

Also, we're not talking about an individual or local issue which if someone doesn't go along and raise them, it won't be discussed. Is the arguement that if I don't go along, the unions are unaware of these constant attacks on younger teachers? That they are unaware of how all these steps they allow also make it harder for new teachers to find jobs and that when they do, they are a tier down from most of their colleuges? If I don't go along and do something, are we saying the unions don't bother talking about how unfair some of these cuts and redeployments are on younger teachers?

Or is it more likely that they are sacrificing the minority, who also aren't union members, to protect the rights of the majority who are? Don't get me wrong, if roles were reversed, I'd probably be more intent on protecting my own wage than worrying about someone just starting off in the profession, and I'd want the unions to look out for me. But the implication that the unions aren't watching out for me, and are allowing the allowance cuts, GCs to be fired, retired teachers to keep working etc , is because I'm not going to a meeting and pointing out that these things are happening is bizarre.

The unions know the damage these do to new teachers. New teachers are sacrificed in order to maintain the status quo for and maintain the wages of current teachers. And me going along to a meeting and asking them to remember me when brokering these deals won't change that at all.

spurious

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

Personally, it's not that I'd be afraid to go. It's that I know it would be pointless. Again I ask, relatisically, what chance has an unemployed, non-union member have of going to a meeting like this and actually changing the direction of the union's plans?

(speaking for TUI)
It takes one person to propose a motion, one to second it.
Then it can be discussed and a vote taken.
Votes passed by a Branch become Branch policy.

If you don't know anyone else at the meeting ask a committee member to second your motion. They may even speak to it, if you are not comfortable speaking in a big group.
Once your motion is passed, it is Branch policy.

If you're worried about older members not supporting you, bring a gang of fellow young teachers with you. It's how the game is played. We would not see teachers from a particular sector for years then they would arrive en masse one night, vote through a load of motions relevant to them and not be seen again for years.

implausible

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

Again I ask, relatisically, what chance has an unemployed, non-union member have of going to a meeting like this and actually changing the direction of the union's plans?

The unions know the damage these do to new teachers. New teachers are sacrificed in order to maintain the status quo for and maintain the wages of current teachers. And me going along to a meeting and asking them to remember me when brokering these deals won't change that at all.

You're right - ONE teacher going along to a meeting won't change anything. Change will occur if ALL of the teachers, who sit in the staffroom complaining how useless the union is, start attending meetings, raising issues and looking for change.

Maintain the status quo? Maintain the wages? Where have you been?! My take-home is back to 2007 levels, there are more students in my classes, my paperwork has quadrupled and I have to do (mostly) pointless Croke
Park hours. ALL of this was done before new teachers' pay was affected.

It has been pointed out time and time again here that cutting new entrants' conditions is the easiest thing legally for the Govt to do and teachers are not alone in being subject to this. It is far from the first time it has happened either. Across the public sector, it's the new entrants who are being hit, because it's do-able.

Is it fair? No. Is is the fault of 'older' teachers? No. So can posters please stop blaming the unions for selling out new teachers to protect the 'old' ones. We did not vote to cut new entrant pay.

The country is in sh*t and the Govt is tightening the purse strings by shoving older teachers out the door, cutting the pay of new entrants, increasing the PTR etc. Anyone who thinks that us volunteering a paycut would result in a lowering of the PTR, reinstatement of SNAs and the return of old salary scale has far more trust in this govt than I do and is, in my opinion, hopelessly naive.

byhookorbycrook

In our local INTO branch during Celtic Tiger years,none of the NQTs ever came to any meeting.All of us there had at least 20 yrs done. When it came to voting about salary, suddenly there were dozens of people who had never bothered previously to attend at the meeting.

When times were good, people felt the union was pointless, but now I hear cries of "what ais the union doing?" from all sides. If you want to be heard,go to your union meetings, otherwise,you really can't complain about "them."

whiteandlight

I haven't made any complaints about the union. I'm aware that I chose not to go to meetings because yes I consider myself too busy. Whether or not someone else is just as busy and manages to go is pretty irrelevant to my own time. I go to the meetings in the school even though it means eating my lunch at them. I make no complaints about this. Does this mean that I don't get to have an opinion on the union simply because I don't go to branch meetings? Thats a little harsh in my opinion.
My reference to rocking the boat was more to do with out school looking for someone to be a union rep. I wouldn't do that until I am permanent.

kob29

I quit the tui last year largely because I felt the tui heavy gang in the school were living on another planet....they barely want to work at all

Lord TSC

spurious wrote: »

(speaking for TUI)
It takes one person to propose a motion, one to second it.
Then it can be discussed and a vote taken.
Votes passed by a Branch become Branch policy.

If you don't know anyone else at the meeting ask a committee member to second your motion. They may even speak to it, if you are not comfortable speaking in a big group.
Once your motion is passed, it is Branch policy.

If you're worried about older members not supporting you, bring a gang of fellow young teachers with you. It's how the game is played. We would not see teachers from a particular sector for years then they would arrive en masse one night, vote through a load of motions relevant to them and not be seen again for years.

So you are saying all I've got to do is band a group of young teachers together, march to a meeting and we can start working on getting the unions striking on behalf of the young teacher? That, again, the reason these cuts are going through is because no one has bothered to bring them up with the union? That these national problems are only there because new and unemployed teachers aren't attending the meetings, and if we did, these cuts to newer teachers wouldn't exist?

Again I say, the unions KNOW what problems I and other new teachers have. The unions know damn well what I would say but they are already choosing to let these cuts go through. Likewise, older members know about these cuts as well. Why aren't they bringing up their protests against these cuts? If it is so easy to overturn them, why have the teachers not asked their unions to strike over GC cuts?

Don't get me wrong. I am aware that these cuts are nessecary due to the economic situation in Ireland. I'm also well aware of why young and unemployed teachers are being targeted. Honestly, while I resent the cuts, I can understand them.

It has been pointed out time and time again here that cutting new entrants' conditions is the easiest thing legally for the Govt to do and teachers are not alone in being subject to this. It is far from the first time it has happened either. Across the public sector, it's the new entrants who are being hit, because it's do-able.

Is it fair? No. Is is the fault of 'older' teachers? No. So can posters please stop blaming the unions for selling out new teachers to protect the 'old' ones. We did not vote to cut new entrant pay.

I'm not blaming the old teachers at all. I'm wondering why some aren't a bit more honest about the situation and why some continue to hide behind "legalities" and other convient excuses when they know that younger and newer teachers have every right to be annoyed. If "older" teachers cared, they'd be bringing these problems up at the unions as well. Instead, it's easier for the people in a position to actually have a voice to fall back on this "Go out and do something yourselves". These cuts aren't happening because young teachers aren't going to union meetings. They are happening cause the unions have to allow cuts somewhere so sacrifice, mainly, new and unemployed teachers. We can hide behind legalities and contracts, and I don't blame anyone. I'm just wondering why these excuses keep getting trotted out...

Actually, what strikes me here is that people seemed annoyed that I'd have a problem with something and would voice that problem online, but also that I'm realistic enough to know the unions either can't or won't do anything about it. It's typically Irish to complain but it's also typically Irish to give out when people complain about things they are entitled to complain about and point out realities which they would rather ignore. The unions work for their members and they work for the largest majority in their membership. The likes of me, the unemployed and non-union member, as was said, are easier to hit because we're a minority and we're not going to kick up a fuss.

rainbowtrout

Musicmental85 wrote: »

I haven't made any complaints about the union. I'm aware that I chose not to go to meetings because yes I consider myself too busy. Whether or not someone else is just as busy and manages to go is pretty irrelevant to my own time. I go to the meetings in the school even though it means eating my lunch at them. I make no complaints about this. Does this mean that I don't get to have an opinion on the union simply because I don't go to branch meetings? Thats a little harsh in my opinion.
My reference to rocking the boat was more to do with out school looking for someone to be a union rep. I wouldn't do that until I am permanent.

No one is saying you can't have an opinion. Every has their union meetings at lunch or outside of teaching hours to the best of my knowledge so you're not alone in having your lunch at the meeting. It's not exactly a huge sacrifice. But union meetings within schools tend to stick to local issues within schools, how much wider issues get discussed probably varies from school to school, some schools have a good rep who is active and some don't, so if you want to get your voice heard maybe attend a meeting once every couple of months. When I wasn't satisfied with what was happening at local level I went higher until I got what I wanted (CIDs for part time staff).

As was already said, motions get proposed and passed at branch level, not in a school.

rainbowtrout

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

I'm not blaming the old teachers at all. I'm wondering why some aren't a bit more honest about the situation and why some continue to hide behind "legalities" and other convient excuses when they know that younger and newer teachers have every right to be annoyed. If "older" teachers cared, they'd be bringing these problems up at the unions as well. Instead, it's easier for the people in a position to actually have a voice to fall back on this "Go out and do something yourselves". These cuts aren't happening because young teachers aren't going to union meetings. They are happening cause the unions have to allow cuts somewhere so sacrifice, mainly, new and unemployed teachers. We can hide behind legalities and contracts, and I don't blame anyone. I'm just wondering why these excuses keep getting trotted out...

Actually, what strikes me here is that people seemed annoyed that I'd have a problem with something and would voice that problem online, but also that I'm realistic enough to know the unions either can't or won't do anything about it. It's typically Irish to complain but it's also typically Irish to give out when people complain about things they are entitled to complain about and point out realities which they would rather ignore. The unions work for their members and they work for the largest majority in their membership. The likes of me, the unemployed and non-union member, as was said, are easier to hit because we're a minority and we're not going to kick up a fuss.

The obvious counter argument to that is if younger teachers cared they'd bring these problems up at union meetings. It's not really relevant if older teachers bring them up or not. If you are part of the union you can bring up a motion just as much as the next member, why are you waiting for someone else to do it for you?

I'd be very interested to see how small a minority part time staff are in the union these days, because the 'we're in a minority' argument gets thrown about a fair bit, yet when I look at my staff room more than half the staff are under 35 (not that that is old or young, but the majority of non-CID staff fall into this category), and all of them are in the union in my school and have been since they started there. How many are interested enough to go to meetings though? The demographic at my branch meetings generally is probably 45+

You've actually hit the nail on the head about the Irish attitude there in your last line. It's typically Irish to complain and not do anything about it, and that's what I'm seeing on this thread. What you think my of my opinion on the matter is at this stage is largely irrelevant. You are aggrieved by the situation and rightly so, but you are hiding behind the excuse that you are in a minority and therefore are not going to kick up a fuss about it. If you're not fussed about it, you can hardly expect anyone else to be.

To be honest, I've asked a few people in the staff room this week what they thought about the cut in guidance counsellors. Some weren't even aware of it. Naturally enough the GC is concerned, she's in her fourth year with the VEC. Some of the new teachers that started with us this year weren't even aware of it, and didn't connect what the knock on effects of that move were for them.

Flashgordon197

Good comment rainbowtrout. Unions are generally the most democratic body about but if younger members or other categories dont bother their arse to go to meetings then what do they expect? Secondly, Our Branch (ASTI) is currently organising a petition to do something about drive by shootings (incidental inspections) . A special conference will come out of this hopefully . Its doable because of the rules. Teachers are a conservative group you must accept that but given huge non attendance by the avg teacher-it aint that difficult to change the agenda.

rainbowtrout

Flashgordon197 wrote: »

Good comment rainbowtrout. Unions are generally the most democratic body about but if younger members or other categories dont bother their arse to go to meetings then what do they expect? Secondly, Our Branch (ASTI) is currently organising a petition to do something about drive by shootings (incidental inspections) . A special conference will come out of this hopefully . Its doable because of the rules. Teachers are a conservative group you must accept that but given huge non attendance by the avg teacher-it aint that difficult to change the agenda.

That's pretty much what I was trying to say, and your mention of democracy and conservatism just made me realise what I did want to say.

People whinge constantly about how crap the government are in this country, yet when it comes to election time, they don't vote and complain about how useless the new government are, or when you suggest vote for one of the other guys, the reply is usually 'sure they won't get in anyway, what's the point?' it's exactly the same as what I'm hearing here. It was drilled into me as a child to use my vote and if I didn't like who was in power to vote for someone else, even if I didn't think the other guy (from one of the minority parties) would get in, it was a vote against what was there. If enough people voted against the status quo, it would change. We did that in the general election in February. I'm not saying FG/LAB are perfect by any means - if they were we probably wouldn't be having this argument at all as there would be no cuts, but the people sent out a resounding message of FF out (I have the pleasure of being in Luke Ming Flanagan's constituency - we wanted change ). If the teachers that are so bothered about the cuts got organised then maybe there would be change.

flatbackfour

rainbowtrout wrote: »

That's pretty much what I was trying to say, and your mention of democracy and conservatism just made me realise what I did want to say.

People whinge constantly about how crap the government are in this country, yet when it comes to election time, they don't vote and complain about how useless the new government are, or when you suggest vote for one of the other guys, the reply is usually 'sure they won't get in anyway, what's the point?' it's exactly the same as what I'm hearing here. It was drilled into me as a child to use my vote and if I didn't like who was in power to vote for someone else, even if I didn't think the other guy (from one of the minority parties) would get in, it was a vote against what was there. If enough people voted against the status quo, it would change. We did that in the general election in February. I'm not saying FG/LAB are perfect by any means - if they were we probably wouldn't be having this argument at all as there would be no cuts, but the people sent out a resounding message of FF out (I have the pleasure of being in Luke Ming Flanagan's constituency - we wanted change ). If the teachers that are so bothered about the cuts got organised then maybe there would be change.

I agree with you in princial about the problem of apathy. However your not taking this historical context into account. Ordinary membership since social partnership have been sidelined. That suited all sides, employer union heads and ordinary members, (as long as times were good). Now union leadership is so ingrained and part of the power structure they dont have the undertstanding or stratagy to operate outside of it.

In the process they have devided teachers, and ultimatly all of us will suffer.

whiteandlight

There's a big difference between attending union meetings in your school but not the monthly meetings and not voting in a general election at all?? There are a lot of sweeping generalisations going on here by both sides of the argument.

Perhaps a more productive topic of conversation would be is there some way that issues could be raised and petitioned without attendance at branch meetings since it seems to be down? Perhaps some kind of raising and seconding via the internet maybe? Just an idea anyways

rainbowtrout

Musicmental85 wrote: »

Perhaps a more productive topic of conversation would be is there some way that issues could be raised and petitioned without attendance at branch meetings since it seems to be down? Perhaps some kind of raising and seconding via the internet maybe? Just an idea anyways

Seriously????? Maybe I could teach via webcam and I wouldn't have to get out of bed in the mornings either. Attendance is down because people can't be arsed going to meetings, and assume someone else will attend and do what they want done and then when no one attends they wonder why nothing gets done.

Countless times, particularly when I was rep, I heard part time teachers bitch about contracts in the staff room (and rightly so at the time), yet the morning after a branch meeting took place I would be asked 'Was there many there?' looking at me expectantly that something would have been achieved the previous night and I would say 'I was the only one from our school' and there would be this look of 'the union is useless, why didn't anyone go?' when I would be thinking, 'why didn't you go?'

Another time when we were voting members onto the VEC committee, I think TUI were allowed 2 representatives. I work in the biggest school/centre in the county so by default we should be able to walk away with the two places every time the election rolls around simply because we could out vote everyone else. Did we? Did we hell, the smallest school in the county got all their staff to the meeting and voted their rep onto the committe, only 1 other staff member attended with me, so of course we got no representation. What did I hear the next day in the staff room 'This is a load of shite, so we have no representation on the committe for the next few years and they have 2, it's not fair' and they wonder whose fault it is. :rolleyes:

whiteandlight

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Musicmental85 wrote: »

Perhaps a more productive topic of conversation would be is there some way that issues could be raised and petitioned without attendance at branch meetings since it seems to be down? Perhaps some kind of raising and seconding via the internet maybe? Just an idea anyways

Seriously????? Maybe I could teach via webcam and I wouldn't have to get out of bed in the mornings either. Attendance is down because people can't be arsed going to meetings, and assume someone else will attend and do what they want done and then when no one attends they wonder why nothing gets done.

Countless times, particularly when I was rep, I heard part time teachers bitch about contracts in the staff room (and rightly so at the time), yet the morning after a branch meeting took place I would be asked 'Was there many there?' looking at me expectantly that something would have been achieved the previous night and I would say 'I was the only one from our school' and there would be this look of 'the union is useless, why didn't anyone go?' when I would be thinking, 'why didn't you go?'

Another time when we were voting members onto the VEC committee, I think TUI were allowed 2 representatives. I work in the biggest school/centre in the county so by default we should be able to walk away with the two places every time the election rolls around simply because we could out vote everyone else. Did we? Did we hell, the smallest school in the county got all their staff to the meeting and voted their rep onto the committe, only 1 other staff member attended with me, so of course we got no representation. What did I hear the next day in the staff room 'This is a load of shite, so we have no representation on the committe for the next few years and they have 2, it's not fair' and they wonder whose fault it is. :rolleyes:

That is an extremely harsh response to something which was simply a suggestion. I'll leave it there.

spurious

Motions for Congress get submitted about this time of year, so if you want something to become Union policy, now is the time to go to a Branch meeting and get your motion put forward.

Lord TSC

You'll find I was the very one who argued "If you don't vote, you can't complain about the result" over on the political boards back during the election. But a young teacher trying to bring up the issues affecting young teachers at a union meeting is not like voting or not voting for FG or Labour or even SF. It's more like trying to get Dana elected; a small group may want it but it's obvious the main core of voters aren't going to want to be involved.

I'm glad you have faith in the unions, but I don't. They lost my faith when they allowed the cuts to new teachers to go through. If it was an issue the unions felt was worth dealing with, again I say, they wouldn't need me there pointing them out.

But I'll play along for now. Out of interest, what is the motion you'd propose to the unions if you were in my position? If you were quite annoyed at the perception the unions did not care about the next generation of teachers and were allowing them to lose money and even more opportunities, what would you ask the union to do? What could I ever say at a union meeting that would encourage the changes I feel are needed to keep me on a fair footing with a collleuge who started two years ago?

EDIT: It's also a tad harsh to attack someone for suggesting there be some form of internet discussion forums for unions when we are, may I point out, using an internet discussion forum to discuss topics. It was a suggestion to try and encourage more people to get into debates, and I know it would make it easier to see who the majorities and minorities were if there was a more well rounded board available. Even as another example, I've been told I should gather another group of young, unemployed teachers to force the motions through, but there's no network available to me to get in contact with other unemployed teachers. An internet discussion board would allow such a network to be established and for a more well-rounded opinion to be offered. If a lack of attendance is really a primary concern, then looking for alternatives is exactly what is needed, and using the internet to encourage more particiaption would be a good step forward. Tell me, would such a suggestion have been met with such dismissal at a union meeting had he brought it up there?

rainbowtrout

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

You'll find I was the very one who argued "If you don't vote, you can't complain about the result" over on the political boards back during the election. But a young teacher trying to bring up the issues affecting young teachers at a union meeting is not like voting or not voting for FG or Labour or even SF. It's more like trying to get Dana elected; a small group may want it but it's obvious the main core of voters aren't going to want to be involved.

I'm glad you have faith in the unions, but I don't. They lost my faith when they allowed the cuts to new teachers to go through. If it was an issue the unions felt was worth dealing with, again I say, they wouldn't need me there pointing them out.

But I'll play along for now. Out of interest, what is the motion you'd propose to the unions if you were in my position? If you were quite annoyed at the perception the unions did not care about the next generation of teachers and were allowing them to lose money and even more opportunities, what would you ask the union to do? What could I ever say at a union meeting that would encourage the changes I feel are needed to keep me on a fair footing with a collleuge who started two years ago?

EDIT: It's also a tad harsh to attack someone for suggesting there be some form of internet discussion forums for unions when we are, may I point out, using an internet discussion forum to discuss topics. It was a suggestion to try and encourage more people to get into debates, and I know it would make it easier to see who the majorities and minorities were if there was a more well rounded board available. Even as another example, I've been told I should gather another group of young, unemployed teachers to force the motions through, but there's no network available to me to get in contact with other unemployed teachers. An internet discussion board would allow such a network to be established and for a more well-rounded opinion to be offered. If a lack of attendance is really a primary concern, then looking for alternatives is exactly what is needed, and using the internet to encourage more particiaption would be a good step forward. Tell me, would such a suggestion have been met with such dismissal at a union meeting had he brought it up there?

Right, I'm not sure how many more times I can explain this. It doesn't matter how many permanent and part-time teachers are in your branch. If the majority of teachers attending branch meetings are part-timers then you can get your motions passed. I have been to meetings where there were only 6 or 7 in attendance for the whole county. You get 7 or 8 people to go to the meeting with you, then you are the majority. It doesn't matter if 90% of the county are permanent, if they aren't attending meetings they are not proposing motions or voting on them.


You may think I'm being harsh, but I've been in the union for 11 years and like a lot of things in this country, things are a tad antiquated. So yes, you could set up an online forum, but how could it be monitored. A login for every member in the country? Perhaps, but that would mean time and effort spent in setting up a website. It's been two years since I was the rep in school and all the union stuff still arrives to the school in my name, we've had two reps since then. So I'm not saying it couldn't be done, but it would take a while, in the meantime cuts are going to keep coming, so use the channels available to you currently.

To vote on motions you need to have bodies present. So use what is currently available to you and attend a branch meeting. If you feel so strongly about an online facitility, then propose it. In one respect I suspect it would not be a runner, as the demographic would suggest that most teachers would not use it. Look how many regulars there are on this forum who are teachers and look at the general demographic of the forum. However it would probably be a good way of young teachers discussing issues and getting themselves organized for meetings. Start posting on the forum over on education posts or if your subject association has anything similar. Get to know teachers in your area. If you are finding it hard to meet other teachers due to your lack of work, get in contact with the teachers from the school you have worked. Start attending a few meetings on your own and meet some more teachers., Go into your local teachers centre and see what is going on there, get to know some more teachers in the area.

I never once said I had faith in the unions. I've had my ups and downs with them,but if you want them to work for you, you'll have to make your voice heard.

Lord TSC

So I gather a few friends. I go along to a meeting and I stand up. And I say "You know what? I'm annoyed at these attacks on new teachers. I propose that the unions either negotiate that all teachers take the cuts in a sign of solidarity, or we strike until they reinstate these cuts in a sign of solidarity. Eitherway, I demand a show of solidarity from my fellow teachers on the matter and wish the unions to orgnaise a drastic show of support to new teachers." And because me and a few friends forced this somehow through a meeting, a couple of thousand teachers now either take the pay cut or go on strike? Is that really how it works? Cause if that is how it works (and thats what you seem to be saying), I'm amazed how open to coruption that system could be.

As for...

So yes, you could set up an online forum, but how could it be monitored. A login for every member in the country? Perhaps, but that would mean time and effort spent in setting up a website. It's been two years since I was the rep in school and all the union stuff still arrives to the school in my name, we've had two reps since then. So I'm not saying it couldn't be done, but it would take a while, in the meantime cuts are going to keep coming, so use the channels available to you currently.

It really wouldn't take long to set up such a system whatsoever. As a teenager, I was able to set up a few free forum boards, and could do so in seconds with minimal knowledge of computers. Obviously TUI or ASTI ones would have to be more secure and complicated, but requesting some out of work computer teachers, for example, to help design one would take no time at all. As for logins, it would be no different than signing up for Boards.ie. The only added step would be setting up a possible user validation system whereby users would sign up, give their TUI or ASTI numer, have a mod check it out on a database (I'm sure that could even be automated; there's plenty of websites which offer similar services on similar registration systems) and away you go.

I'd not say motions could be passed or voted online (in fact, if they weren't voted on, a really registration system wouldn't be at all nessecary; a team of voluntary mods ala boards.ie could just make sure posts were obviously not by non-teachers). More than it could be discussed in a larger and more offical way; that union members could discuss and poll topics they wanted to see if there was support for before bringing them up at meetings, discuss whether issues are local or national, etc.

What I'm saying is that difficulty is not an obstacle in setting up a forum board. It would be quite easy, actually.

Pete2012

Rainbowtrout the cut in the guidance counsellors allocation will not affect guidance counsellors or teachers in their 4th year jobwise, it will affect teachers in year 1, 2 or 3 of their contracts (like me!!!) 4th year teachers will be entitled to be given hours first for their cid's. Once these are filled the remaining hours will go to the temporary teachers and some will lose out. As far as I can make out, It's a sneaky political way of increasing the pupil teacher ratio.

doc_17

Decisons are made by those who show up.......

implausible

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

So I gather a few friends. I go along to a meeting and I stand up. And I say "You know what? I'm annoyed at these attacks on new teachers. I propose that the unions either negotiate that all teachers take the cuts in a sign of solidarity, or we strike until they reinstate these cuts in a sign of solidarity. Eitherway, I demand a show of solidarity from my fellow teachers on the matter and wish the unions to orgnaise a drastic show of support to new teachers."

This would be the motion you would submit in writing to your branch and it would get voted upon at the branch meeting. If agreed, it gets submitted to congress. If it is popular amongst other branches in the country, it gets a high priority, meaning that you would get to speak about it at Congress and take a vote. If a motion is agreed, it has to be acted upon (however slowly). At the very least, it would get some media attention. Most of these actions, however, involve attendance at meetings.

I can only speak for my own branch, but I cannot see a motion agreeing to either take a paycut or strike being popular.

Obviously TUI or ASTI ones would have to be more secure and complicated, but requesting some out of work computer teachers, for example, to help design one would take no time at all.

What I'm saying is that difficulty is not an obstacle in setting up a forum board. It would be quite easy, actually.

It may be easy, but your faith in ICT teachers' volunteerism and the ordinary member's comfort with technology is, I think, sadly misplaced. TUI and ASTI both employ people to do the websites etc and it's only this year that we got a TUI email system and even at that, many teachers in my workplace are complaining about the absence of paper in their pigeonholes this year.

Turning up at a meeting remains the only effective way to communicate your views and effect change.