Time for a New Union

newfrontier

Came across this and it got me thinking.If Article 40.1 means anything, “All citizens shall, as human persons, be held equal before the law”, I know that new teachers are getting lower pay and with no payment of allowances surely this is unconstitutional. I am looking for advice on forming a new trade union for those who are a) opposed to this new practice b) fed up of the current fat cats who are only looking after themselves.

I understand this will be no easy task but I would be interested in hearing who would be in favour of such a process. I think it is time to take this government to task on this one. What steps are required to proceed?

born2bwild

Good idea. The unions have abandoned the future of the profession. How they expect to continue to exist in years to come is beyond me. Who in his right mind is going to join an organisation that stood over the government's yellow packaging of teaching?

rainbowtrout

newfrontier wrote: »

Came across this and it got me thinking.If Article 40.1 means anything, “All citizens shall, as human persons, be held equal before the law”, I know that new teachers are getting lower pay and with no payment of allowances surely this is unconstitutional.

Don't mix up being seen as having equal human rights with contracted working conditions.

If what you're saying was unconstitutional then payscales would also be illegal in the interests of fairness and equality.

doc_17

Those affected by recent changes in pay should, instead of forming a new union, actually show up to their cuurent one's meetings.

If they then feel that this union is not representing them then they should form their.

Oh and these current useless fatcat unions are soon to be taking a court case against the government because of this unequal pay stuff.

Powerhouse

newfrontier wrote: »

Came across this and it got me thinking.If Article 40.1 means anything, “All citizens shall, as human persons, be held equal before the law”, I know that new teachers are getting lower pay and with no payment of allowances surely this is unconstitutional. I am looking for advice on forming a new trade union for those who are a) opposed to this new practice b) fed up of the current fat cats who are only looking after themselves.

I understand this will be no easy task but I would be interested in hearing who would be in favour of such a process. I think it is time to take this government to task on this one. What steps are required to proceed?

'No easy task' doesn't really describe it. 'Impossible' would be closer.

The idea that people doing essentially the same job for different salaries is as old as the hills. In fact rewind five or ten years and you would struggle to find any two teachers in the average staff-room getting exactly the
same money because (as has been alluded to by rainbowtrout) of the existence of payscales.

No different from any other job really. You can be fairly sure that in the private sector an (say) Accountant starting out will not be paid the same salary as someone there for five years. If being equal before the law meant that everyone was paid the same this would not be happening. (I realise there is an alternative interpretation but this is one anyway)

As for steps required to proceed, you can contact a solicitor. You are, as a citizen, entitled to challenge the constitutionality of a law. Your difficulty is that the provision you cite has been there since the inception of the constitution and it has never been interpreted (to my knowledge) as having any force in regard to pay.

Even minimum pay legislation was never founded on the premise that people were 'equal before the law'. Indeed a possible legal finding that everyone doing nominally the same job had to be paid the same salary irrespective of experience, expertise, or ability to pay or any other such criteria would have extraordinary implications for potential employment, not just in the Public Service, but in business and industry too. The place would grind to a halt.

Powerhouse

born2bwild wrote: »

Who in his right mind is going to join an organisation that stood over the government's yellow packaging of teaching?

It is interesting to see the unintended (presumably) consequences of the government's cutting of starting salaries. Not only are they now able to pay less but they have also weakened the unions by disaffecting many potential new members - at the very time when new teachers appear to most need solidarity and union support. A good move all round for the government. Drawing the teeth of the unions with reference to the future is a nice unexpected bonus for them.

rainbowtrout

Powerhouse wrote: »

'No easy task' doesn't really describe it. 'Impossible' would be closer.

The idea that people doing essentially the same job for different salaries is as old as the hills. In fact rewind five or ten years and you would struggle to find any two teachers in the average staff-room getting exactly the
same money because (as has been alluded to by rainbowtrout) of the existence of payscales.

No different from any other job really. You can be fairly sure that in the private sector an (say) Accountant starting out will not be paid the same salary as someone there for five years. If being equal before the law meant that everyone was paid the same this would not be happening.

As for steps required to proceed, you can contact a solicitor. You are, as a citizen, entitled to challenge the constitutionality of a law. Your difficulty is that the provision you cite has been there since the inception of the constitution and it has never been interpreted (to my knowledge) as having any force in regard to pay.

Even minimum pay legislation was never founded on the premise that people were 'equal before the law'. Indeed a possible legal finding that everyone doing nominally the same job had to be paid the same salary irrespective of experience, expertise, or ability to pay or any other such criteria would have extraordinary implications for potential employment, not just in the Public Service, but in business and industry too. The place would grind to a halt.

Agree. If everyone got equal pay regardless of the type of job or experience the person had we would be living in a comunist society and I don't seem to remember it working too well in the not so distant past.

Just like doc-17 said start by going to branch meetings. I hear people in my staff room complaining about things regularly yet if they are asked to attend a branch meeting they recoil in horror as if they been asked to kill their granny. Yet they still expect their problems to be solved, and hope that someone else will go to the meeting and do the work on their behalf.

We have had a system for the last few years in my school where the rep position is rotated on an annual basis so no one gets stuck with it longterm and only permanent / CID staff take it so part timers aren't vulnerable to losing jobs/ hours if they brought an issue to management that may effect them. It worked well for a couple of years. But then people who had originally agreed to be part of the rota are now refusing to take their turn. They've had people represent them on numerous occasions but now won't return the favour for one year. Yet they still expect to be represented. As of today we still have no rep for this year.

chippers

doc_17 wrote: »

Those affected by recent changes in pay should, instead of forming a new union, actually show up to their cuurent one's meetings.

This is all well and good for the few teachers who have actually gotten employment in Ireland. The reality is that we have seen / are seeing huge amounts of Irish teachers emigrating to find work.

There are also those teachers who have recently gotten jobs in Ireland that don't want to join these unions as they feel the weren't represented by the unions when they needed to be.

rainbowtrout

chippers wrote: »

This is all well and good for the few teachers who have actually gotten employment in Ireland. The reality is that we have seen / are seeing huge amounts of Irish teachers emigrating to find work.

There are also those teachers who have recently gotten jobs in Ireland that don't want to join these unions as they feel the weren't represented by the unions when they needed to be.

That's kind of a self fulfilling prophecy. If they don't join they won't be represented, and many teachers that are members won't attend meetings and then complain that decisions are taken that are not in their best interests.

Not defending the unions here, but if there are so many members which feel they are not being represented then they have to start making noise about it and the easiest way to do that is to start attending meetings and putting forward motions.

chippers

rainbowtrout wrote: »

That's kind of a self fulfilling prophecy. If they don't join they won't be represented, and many teachers that are members won't attend meetings and then complain that decisions are taken that are not in their best interests.

Not defending the unions here, but if there are so many members which feel they are not being represented then they have to start making noise about it and the easiest way to do that is to start attending meetings and putting forward motions.

But your missing the point. The original poster is interested in setting up a new union to represent those who have been hit so comparatively hard in recent times. They are not proposing to tackle the issue with the help of the established unions.

drvantramp

doc_17 wrote: »

Those affected by recent changes in pay should, instead of forming a new union, actually show up to their cuurent one's meetings.

If they then feel that this union is not representing them then they should form their.

Oh and these current useless fatcat unions are soon to be taking a court case against the government because of this unequal pay stuff.

Doc17 what happened in the last few weeks? (apart from Donegal winning:)) you were only recently saying NQTs should probably form a union?

Bottomline: it is not about feeling that the union does not represent them, it is a clear fact they do not.
Attending meetings and paying subs for what exactly, to agree to a two-tier system?

And yes, teacher union heads salaries of €130k plus and expenses are indeed fat-cat and they cannot relate to the yellow-pack teacher anymore. Unions, Teaching Council, NCCA and DoE all too cosy, that is the reality.


Looking forward to the court case, wonder will it pay out like paddy power?

rainbowtrout

chippers wrote: »

But your missing the point. The original poster is interested in setting up a new union to represent those who have been hit so comparatively hard in recent times. They are not proposing to tackle the issue with the help of the established unions.

No I'm not. I've watched it play out many times in our staff room. I'm in a vec school and we're the biggest school in the county so realistically we should have the power at branch level to get motions carried etc yet when we had a few issues last year and staff brought them up at a union meeting in school the rep told us there was a branch meeting coming up the following week. When he asked for a show of support at it, he was met with averted eyes and mumbles of maybe or I have something to do that night. Result: NONE of those people who were in danger of losing their jobs last may were arsed enough to go to the meeting to see what could be done to save their jobs but all wanted to know the day after the meeting what the outcome was and how safe were their jobs.

On the other hand the smallest school in the county mobilises their staff extremely well because they know it's their only option to protect their jobs. As a result they control all teacher positions on branch committee, vec committee etc. technically my school could have the run of them all if anyone ever bothered to show up.

So assuming that the problem in my school is not an isolated issue what do people who propose a new union hope to achieve when they don't attend meetings of their current union?

Consider the scenario. Government in negotiation with ASTI, TUI and new union. New union not happy about cuts in pay etc. government propose to cut pay further for new entrants in next budget. This leaves two established unions and their members unaffected. What are new union members going to do in that scenario because it doesn't sound a whole lot different than what's happening now, except now if people mobilised themselves through existing channels they might have their voices heard.

I don't think the current unions are perfect. Far from it. Have seen plenty of people get shafted despite union intervention. But I get really annoyed watching people sit back and expect things to happen when they have practically zero input in the form of attendance.

I have great sympathy for the part timers I work with who have crap hours, no hope of securing 22 hours anytime in the next 10 years but if they weren't worried enough about their jobs last may to try and do something to protect their conditions, I'm not sure I'll be thanked for losing any sleep over it.

spurious

It is surprisingly easy to influence Branch (and ultimately national Union) policy if you get people to go en masse, on one night to a Union meeting.

I've seen it done many times from various interest groups.
Speaking for TUI only.

No real limit to what NQTs could achieve if they would make sure at least ten or so of them were at every Branch's November meeting (as October is usually the AGM). Just make sure your motions are submitted properly and on time.

bdoo

The strength of a union is in its members and their.willingness to take action. If the asti or tui send out a ballot for strike action for example the members need to vote for it.

If you want something done you need to get involved and make your case, with the best will in the world nothing will be done for you.

There isn't a member of either union who doesn't disagree with the cuts to new entrants. Get yourselves to your next branch meeting and make noise.

I agree totally with spurious and rainbowtrout in what they have said.

I was at tui congress this year, they were looking for a young teacher who was on the lower payscale etc to speak on the radio and they couldn't find one. There were motions from branches calling for all sorts to be done to reverse cuts, but not one member who was affected spoke to the motions.

To say unions are doing nothing is wrong, get involved and set the agenda.

Their is a view, and it is probably correct imo, that this is just another stage in the lowering of wages for all public sector workers including current employees.

drvantramp

I have great sympathy for the part timers I work with who have crap hours, no hope of securing 22 hours anytime in the next 10 years but if they weren't worried enough about their jobs last may to try and do something to protect their conditions, I'm not sure I'll be thanked for losing any sleep over it.[/QUOTE]


And you expect these people in above precarious positions to rock the boat?? No union meetings where I am btw, no steward in place...

As far I can see, the apathy is from the middle down, not the other way round. (Sure I'm alright Jack)



First they came for the basic payscale and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a NQT.
Then they came for the allowances and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a NQT.
Then they came for the rest of teachers and trade unionists and there was no one left in the union to speak for me.

bdoo

drvantramp wrote: »

I have great sympathy for the part timers I work with who have crap hours, no hope of securing 22 hours anytime in the next 10 years but if they weren't worried enough about their jobs last may to try and do something to protect their conditions, I'm not sure I'll be thanked for losing any sleep over it.

And you expect these people in above precarious positions to rock the boat?? No union meetings where I am btw, no steward in place...

As far I can see, the apathy is from the middle down, not the other way round. (Sure I'm alright Jack)



First they came for the basic payscale and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a NQT.
Then they came for the allowances and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a NQT.
Then they came for the rest of teachers and trade unionists and there was no one left in the union to speak for me.[/Quote]

The notion that speaking out against a pay cut would affect your employment prospects is not one that I would agree with.

I am not so naive to believe that people aren't pug under pressure to do extra work in schools and feel that they cant say no.

The two things are totally different. How a principal could hold a grudge for having a view on a pay cut is beyond me

Hootanany

Benchmarking should go south as well for existing staff. Do the right thing and reduce your exorbinant salaries and perks.

Home Scooled

bdoo

Hootanany wrote: »

Benchmarking should go south as well for existing staff. Do the right thing and reduce your exorbinant salaries and perks.

Home Scooled

Inform yourself please. Benchmarking is a thing of the past. Teachers received no increase in salary in the last round due to their so called great pension.

This was subsequently used as an excuse to introduce the pension levy.

If you are going to troll, please make the effort.

rainbowtrout

drvantramp wrote: »

I have great sympathy for the part timers I work with who have crap hours, no hope of securing 22 hours anytime in the next 10 years but if they weren't worried enough about their jobs last may to try and do something to protect their conditions, I'm not sure I'll be thanked for losing any sleep over it.

And you expect these people in above precarious positions to rock the boat?? No union meetings where I am btw, no steward in place...

As far I can see, the apathy is from the middle down, not the other way round. (Sure I'm alright Jack)



First they came for the basic payscale and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a NQT.
Then they came for the allowances and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a NQT.
Then they came for the rest of teachers and trade unionists and there was no one left in the union to speak for me.[/QUOTE]

Before you go making wild assumptions, I have acted as union rep in my school and attended the meetings. We have a union in the school and there is no problem holding meetings. Also as county branch meetings are held in a different location in the county every time, there is no issue with someone attending a meeting which is not being held in our school building, not that there's ever been an issue when we have hosted them. I have represented those people, I have taken issues to the union for them and fought for CIDs and hours for people and got them too, although unfortunately not on every occasion.

All I'm saying is that there are people on staff that had absolutely no interest in hearing what their union could do for them in the event that the lose hours/job last year. No one was asking them to take a stand against management and they couldn't be bothered to turn up to listen. But expected other people to turn up and listen on their behalf.

While we have no rep in my school at the moment, we have never expected a part timer to take it, it's always been a permanent member of staff who could go and fight the corner of the part timers without fear of repercussions for hours/contract.

Part timers aren't being asked to do very much. A union rep like myself in the past is well able to put forward a motion at a branch meeting but if I have no one there to vote for it - not a very onerous task, there's not much I can do about it. From my experience many of them would prefer to sit at home and watch Eastenders.

So it's not a case of 'I'm alright Jack' but I or the one or two interested people on staff can do very little by ourselves. We need the staff behind us to vote for motions, that are in their interests.

Lord TSC

I think we've had this discussion before. A year ago, I brought up my concerns about teaching unions. Some time later, those worries haven't changed.

I still don't believe that the group who have been hit and have been "left out in the cold" would have sufficient sway in the union to make a real difference.
I still think that even if a group mobilised at the local meetings, nothing would come in the long term, since I don't think it would ever get to the stage where sufficient action would take place.
I don't think the unions would allow it to get to the stage where unemployed and newly qualified teachers would get all teachers to go out on strike.
I don't think NQTs would want to take a risk of making bad names for themselves and get themselves blacklisted through trying to push through such actions.
I don't think the older teachers would offer the support that would be needed, even if the unions could be manipulated into action.
I don't think a union should be able to be subject to manipulation like is being encouraged.

I do think unions should be fighting for the equal rights of all teachers, regardless of how loud they shout or how active they are; that it shouldn't take a group of manipulating teachers to point out the injustices in the way new teachers are being treated. I think if the unions were any good, as soon as it was announced that new teachers were going to be hit hard, they would have mobilised in a big way, trying to ensure that the protection they had via the Croke Park agreement also covered new teachers.

But then that's the problem I guess; my definition of a union and what the reality of the Irish teaching unions actually do are separate to each other.

As far as "Sure are they not helping you now", yeah, but it's a little too late for me. I can't help but feel that the reason they've suddenly started trying to help the unemployed and NQT who has had their pay cut is because they've suddenly realised the older teacher is about to be hit to, and after leaving us out in the cold, they now want our support. At this stage, I'm quite happy to sit back and see the CP agreement destroyed and the playing field move towards a more equal level again.

And yes, I know some people will want to write up big long rebuttals. We had them last time round, and I don't fancy a big circular debate. This post dictates how I feel, and nothing said is going to change my disillusionment with unions or the entire profession right now. So, with the greatest of respect, I advise people not to bother with using any of the arguements already outlined above...

Hootanany

bdoo wrote: »

Inform yourself please. Benchmarking is a thing of the past. Teachers received no increase in salary in the last round due to their so called great pension.

This was subsequently used as an excuse to introduce the pension levy.

If you are going to troll, please make the effort.

I am not Trolling Teachers should be deployed in different positions and not taking all them genorous Holiday entitled to this protected elite profession

chippers

rainbowtrout wrote: »

No I'm not. I've watched it play out many times in our staff room. I'm in a vec school and we're the biggest school in the county so realistically we should have the power at branch level to get motions carried etc yet when we had a few issues last year and staff brought them up at a union meeting in school the rep told us there was a branch meeting coming up the following week. When he asked for a show of support at it, he was met with averted eyes and mumbles of maybe or I have something to do that night. Result: NONE of those people who were in danger of losing their jobs last may were arsed enough to go to the meeting to see what could be done to save their jobs but all wanted to know the day after the meeting what the outcome was and how safe were their jobs.

On the other hand the smallest school in the county mobilises their staff extremely well because they know it's their only option to protect their jobs. As a result they control all teacher positions on branch committee, vec committee etc. technically my school could have the run of them all if anyone ever bothered to show up.

So assuming that the problem in my school is not an isolated issue what do people who propose a new union hope to achieve when they don't attend meetings of their current union?

Consider the scenario. Government in negotiation with ASTI, TUI and new union. New union not happy about cuts in pay etc. government propose to cut pay further for new entrants in next budget. This leaves two established unions and their members unaffected. What are new union members going to do in that scenario because it doesn't sound a whole lot different than what's happening now, except now if people mobilised themselves through existing channels they might have their voices heard.

I don't think the current unions are perfect. Far from it. Have seen plenty of people get shafted despite union intervention. But I get really annoyed watching people sit back and expect things to happen when they have practically zero input in the form of attendance.

I have great sympathy for the part timers I work with who have crap hours, no hope of securing 22 hours anytime in the next 10 years but if they weren't worried enough about their jobs last may to try and do something to protect their conditions, I'm not sure I'll be thanked for losing any sleep over it.

Realistically the government have already torn apart the NQT's as much as they can (with little to no opposition)and as soon as the Croke Park deal finishes they will go after the teachers higher up the food chain. The Unions are starting to realise this, hence, their recent concern about NQT's (post cuts). As soon as they go after the senior teachers the unions will be letting the world know how the 'profession' has already been torn apart with the cuts to NQT's. The hits to the NQT's and the 'profession' will be used as an argument to protect the higher paid teachers.

Anyway, I agree a third union at this stage would have no political power. In this situation critical mass is most important and NQT's form only a minority cohort. However, the numbers of teachers on the lower salary scale will continuously grow and the issue will rear it's head properly in a few years time. With the negative association a lot of the current NQT's have towards the current Unions a third union in a few years time, with a much larger membership, is conceivable.

byhookorbycrook

I qualified in the 80s and there was no question that I or any of my peers would not join the unions, to fight our corners. For the many good years, the only people I saw at our branch meetings were teachers older than my friends and I.

Then, cue economic downturn and people who didn't know a bad day ,were,in droves,coming to meetings. A new union would be toothless, NQTs and NPTs can and do influence meetings,when they turn up.

bdoo

How many people come on boards looking for advice about CIDs etc rather than go to their union? I see it so often that it's ridiculous.

This is the same. While it is worth talking about here to an extent, people must go to union meetings.

Like byhookorbycrook I have been at lots of union meetings where I was the youngest person there. I qualified in 2004. Joined TUI and attended all branch meetings.

Teachers are probably the most ignorant bunch when it comes to matters affecting their employment. They used to ask me why did they need to be teaching council registered when they were already in a Union!

There are a core of teachers who are active in the unions and who are concerned for the conditions for all colleagues, find them and get involved. Coming on here and US going back and fOrth will do nothing.

I think that the strength of the unions from now on needs to be with the nqts, there are many teachers in their thirties who are spoiled and selfish as far as I can see. Many of the strong union teacherd are retiring or retired. There are enough new teachers to set the agenda. Do it.

seavill

I will be the first to say I have my own personal issues with unions, but I do agree with the point being made that at this stage it is numbers that count.

I would make the point that people seem to be missing, maybe a lot of the NQTs commenting here about unions were not around last May to fight their corner they were either unemployed or not qualified yet. They cannot be blamed for not being in the position to fight.

I really do think that fighting amongst ourselves gets us no where. People are entitled to their opinions even when it doesn't agree with others however comments like "they are all sitting at home watching Eastenders" and "Spoilt and selfish thirty year olds" what terrible comments to be making about our own.
Yes they may need to stand up for themselves at this stage but making sweeping comments like that is as bad as the troll above as far as I am concerned. I would almost expect to see comments like that in AH from non teachers not here from within the ranks.

If people are disillusioned with things you cant blame them considering what has happened, but turning on each other and making comments like that will do nothing but alienate them even further and give them the impression that maybe going to union meetings may not be such a good idea if this is the attitude that they will meet.

We can all sit here and say that no young people are at meetings etc. however I can guarantee the percentage of over 50's at those meetings I have attended is broadly similar to the number of young teachers.

Yes in the past people have got together to fight as 1 or 2 unions for the same cause in large numbers but people of a certain age will not understand that younger people did not grow up in an age of strikes and union issues like was experienced across the board outside of teaching in the 80s etc. This is almost like a whole new culture shock to them.
I know in my current school no one give a sh1t about the union, it is never mentioned never talked about, no meetings etc. It has been all plain sailing there for years.
I was in another school in the past where there was huge issues with management and the staff all came together, but it only happened when it effected everyone, however the reality of the situation was that my issue was my issue and very few people were interested outside of a select few. I am not surprised by this but this is society today (young and old).

I would feel the starting point here (from experiences in many different schools) is for schools to have internal union meetings even once a month for even 20 mins at lunch time. This will begin to get all staff engaged. Once people start to feel part of the fold then they may become more involved. In my present and previous school the same person has been rep for probably 10 years each so no one else has any experience or involvement in anything to do with the union apart from getting the magazine once a month.

If some people feel that the only way forward is a separate union, that is their opinion but don't belittle them or slag everyone under a certain age off. This is not what is needed. Unionism can always be a touchy issue but everyone here needs to keep a level head to get everyone together rather than splinter apart even more.

byhookorbycrook

Seavill, not quite over 50, but most attending in our branch were!

seavill

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

Seavill, not quite over 50, but most attending in our branch were!

Just speaking of my experience, everyone will have a slightly different experience depending on area etc. thats what I am saying sweeping generalisations are no good to anyone.

Most recent meeting I was at 2 early 20's 6/7 about 30, 6 or 7 about 40, 6 or 7 about 50. fairly even spread at that one but a point that could be made is where are all the other 30 year olds or 40 year olds just as the point is made where are all the other NQTs

rainbowtrout

seavill wrote: »

I really do think that fighting amongst ourselves gets us no where. People are entitled to their opinions even when it doesn't agree with others however comments like "they are all sitting at home watching Eastenders" and "Spoilt and selfish thirty year olds" what terrible comments to be making about our own.
Yes they may need to stand up for themselves at this stage but making sweeping comments like that is as bad as the troll above as far as I am concerned. I would almost expect to see comments like that in AH from non teachers not here from within the ranks.

Well one of those comments was mine seavill, and it wasn't about slagging off 'our own' or making sweeping generalisations about all part time teachers across the country. It is my personal experience over a number of years in my school. It was a comment on the apathy of teachers who are not concerned enough about their own situation, I am not union rep now, and I never commented on any individual in my staffroom for not attending a meeting, but I know from speaking to people that if the meeting came up in conversation that the general response is 'well i got home last night, and got comfortable on the couch in front of the tv - you know yourself - and just couldn't make the effort to go out again. So did anything happen at the meeting??' I've heard that said numerous times over the years, and I'm not a teacher in my 50s, I'm early 30s.

seavill

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Well one of those comments was mine seavill, and it wasn't about slagging off 'our own' or making sweeping generalisations about all part time teachers across the country. It is my personal experience over a number of years in my school. It was a comment on the apathy of teachers who are not concerned enough about their own situation, I am not union rep now, and I never commented on any individual in my staffroom for not attending a meeting, but I know from speaking to people that if the meeting came up in conversation that the general response is 'well i got home last night, and got comfortable on the couch in front of the tv - you know yourself - and just couldn't make the effort to go out again. So did anything happen at the meeting??' I've heard that said numerous times over the years, and I'm not a teacher in my 50s, I'm early 30s.

To be honest I can see it from both sides, and I am sitting right in the middle on it. However that was the way I took your comment to be completely honest and as I said someone young and unsure about getting involved it may make them feel slightly unwelcome to a point.

I stand over my last point though that (and I'm not having a go at you here but) by the way some people talk you would swear that every person that is in the job over 5 years goes to all the meetings.

From my experience yes there are far more of a certain age group than others but taking each age ground there is only a tiny minority of each that actually goes whether that be NQTs or 30 somethings. Yes there may be more 30 somethings but in all reality compared to how many are actually out there it is still only a tiny fraction. similar to the NQT situation.

rainbowtrout

seavill wrote: »

I stand over my last point though that (and I'm not having a go at you here but) by the way some people talk you would swear that every person that is in the job over 5 years goes to all the meetings.

From my experience yes there are far more of a certain age group than others but taking each age ground there is only a tiny minority of each that actually goes whether that be NQTs or 30 somethings. Yes there may be more 30 somethings but in all reality compared to how many are actually out there it is still only a tiny fraction. similar to the NQT situation.

No I'm well aware that meetings are not well attended by and large. But that, at least in theory should give part timers room to manoeuvre. I've watched the smallest school in the county rally the troops and get their 10-12 staff members to all attend on one night and vote through their motion etc, and sat on my own, or with only one other person from my school and wondered why our staff won't do the same when we could have double those numbers there. With low attendances at meetings it would be quite possible for an organised group of part timers/NQTs to make up the majority on any given night.

desmurphy

THe TUI is composed of 2 factions who are constantly fighting to get control of the union. this takes up all their time and energy. if the members knew

seavill

rainbowtrout wrote: »

No I'm well aware that meetings are not well attended by and large. But that, at least in theory should give part timers room to manoeuvre. I've watched the smallest school in the county rally the troops and get their 10-12 staff members to all attend on one night and vote through their motion etc, and sat on my own, or with only one other person from my school and wondered why our staff won't do the same when we could have double those numbers there. With low attendances at meetings it would be quite possible for an organised group of part timers/NQTs to make up the majority on any given night.

Yes as I said earlier I agree with your point. But arguing amongst ourselves gets us no where.
Meetings are not well attended across the board my point was constantly putting across the point (which is correct) that not enough nqts go skews the overall impression. The fact is very few of any age go.

I still make the point that union activity needs to become a regular part of local school life, as I said not just getting the mag once a month. Regular meetings within schools will bring people into the fold and that is where it starts.

You have stated twice about the small school bringing loads of people. I would imagine this us not every meeting only when the need arises. In one way that isn't what it is really about. But it goes back to my point that obviously within that school there is a strong bond amongst the staff obviously have regular meetings and people feel part of it regardless of age rather than just saying to new staff go to this meeting in x place and it means nothing to them. I guarantee if thee was a guaranteed group of 10 going the nqt would go.

Not everyone will but that is a fact if life if we take any issue. Local clubs very small amount of people do a large amount of work similar idea.

We need to become one no matter how frustrating it may be letting those frustrations come out can be counter productive to the overall aim

doc_17

drvantramp wrote: »

doc_17 wrote: »

Those affected by recent changes in pay should, instead of forming a new union, actually show up to their cuurent one's meetings.

If they then feel that this union is not representing them then they should form their.

Oh and these current useless fatcat unions are soon to be taking a court case against the government because of this unequal pay stuff.

Doc17 what happened in the last few weeks? (apart from Donegal winning:)) you were only recently saying NQTs should probably form a union?

Bottomline: it is not about feeling that the union does not represent them, it is a clear fact they do not.
Attending meetings and paying subs for what exactly, to agree to a two-tier system?

And yes, teacher union heads salaries of €130k plus and expenses are indeed fat-cat and they cannot relate to the yellow-pack teacher anymore. Unions, Teaching Council, NCCA and DoE all too cosy, that is the reality.


Looking forward to the court case, wonder will it pay out like paddy power?

Just to clarify....if, after going To meetings and making the effort, some teachers are actually not being represented then maybe they should represent themselves. But to never join or go To meetings or get involved and still give out is something that i was referring to.

Take a motion to your branch. "i believe we should do this" if it is carried great, if not then maybe there is a time to explore other options.

bdoo

In my experience mots teachers who started from 2000 or so on had it handy with regard to union issues as there was a well established cohort of people in schools who protected their interests.

Those people are now gone and it falls to the rest of us to.take the initiative to make the unions strong again.

I'm not slagging my own, im stating facts. All the wanted to know before from TUI news was when our next pay rise was.

spurious

desmurphy wrote: »

THe TUI is composed of 2 factions who are constantly fighting to get control of the union. this takes up all their time and energy. if the members knew

Again, strange half-referred to allegations.
Whatever your beef with the TUI is, please take it somewhere where it can be addressed. That isn't here.

seavill

bdoo wrote: »

In my experience mots teachers who started from 2000 or so on had it handy with regard to union issues as there was a well established cohort of people in schools who protected their interests.

Those people are now gone and it falls to the rest of us to.take the initiative to make the unions strong again.

I'm not slagging my own, im stating facts. All the wanted to know before from TUI news was when our next pay rise was.

Yes because as you said yourself they have not had many issues since 2000 or so, so they have had no real interaction or have not had any need to have any real integration outside of a pay or CID question.

Now things are different but only in recent times it is a whole change of view, minds, beliefs. That doesn't happen overnight. Give people a chance. Get grass roots I.e. within the school on board first them we will see a change

Nodnedlog

Just a quick message in relation to the INTO.
It seems that quite a high proportion of the senior members of this union are Principals or vice principals and there seems to be a conflict of interest as they are management yet representing teachers should they not form their own union as is done in the private sector once workers become management????

The agenda of these unions is definitely self preservation and looking after the more long standing influential members. As people get older they get more involved in trade union issues. This is human nature I'm afraid.

mrboswell

doc_17 wrote: »

Those affected by recent changes in pay should, instead of forming a new union, actually show up to their cuurent one's meetings.

I've been to a couple where the same 2 or 3 people take over the whole show and its like having teeth pulled!