CP2 Discussion Here: ASTI,TUI, INTO etc

Terri26

Mod edit: Rather than have two threads open where one is rather old at this stage can we please keep all discussion of CP2 to here.
Thanks


Hi, I am just wondering on peoples views on CP2. I'm in ASTI so we only got our ballots on Wed. TUI had already rejected it by then. I have voted no and am firmly in the no camp. I don't see how anyone can see it as being a good deal (as I have seen some people write on Facebook).
The increment that has been promised in 20 years time to NQTs is nothing more than a sop. Sure they couldn't even keep the agreement until next year which was meant to be the deadline!
If people don't mind how are ppl voting and what union are you in. I am worried ASTI won't have as strong as a no vote!

km79

Terri26 wrote: »

Hi, I am just wondering on peoples views on CP2. I'm in ASTI so we only got our ballots on Wed. TUI had already rejected it by then. I have voted no and am firmly in the no camp. I don't see how anyone can see it as being a good deal (as I have seen some people write on Facebook).
The increment that has been promised in 20 years time to NQTs is nothing more than a sop. Sure they couldn't even keep the agreement until next year which was meant to be the deadline!
If people don't mind how are ppl voting and what union are you in. I am worried ASTI won't have as strong as a no vote!

http://touch.boards.ie/thread/2056884210/38#post83875849

Terri26

Thanks KM79. Thought it would be easier if it had a separate thread as it would be clearer to follow!

km79

Terri26 wrote: »

Thanks KM79. Thought it would be easier if it had a separate thread as it would be clearer to follow!

Sound. I voted no anyway and most people who are voting in our school are the same

doc_17

Voted No

whiteandlight

It's looking like a rocky road ahead if we do all end up voting no

Inspector Coptoor

Could be a rockier road if we keeping allowing ourselves to be shafted.

whiteandlight

Oh I agree, I did vote no!

Moody_mona

Musicmental85 wrote: »

It's looking like a rocky road ahead if we do all end up voting no

I voted no as well, mainly because of the absences which will not need no substitute cover. I've only been teaching since last September and am a recent asti member so haven't attended meetings. What will happen if we vote no that makes it a rocky road? What determines whether we have to strike?

Inspector Coptoor

If we vote no, the government will just legislate for pay cuts etc

I'd rather take a (reversible) pay cut now than allow conditions to be further eroded, especially when the projected €1 billion of "savings" will really only give a saving of €200 million & further contract the economy.

Miss Lockhart

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

If we vote no, the government will just legislate for pay cuts etc

I'd rather take a (reversible) pay cut now than allow conditions to be further eroded, especially when the projected €1 billion of "savings" will really only give a saving of €200 million & further contract the economy.

Same here. But I don't think it will be as simple as accepting a pay cut. I think we will have a long battle against an attempt to force through changes in conditions also.

Trotter

Are the results of the poll on the previous thread available?

TheDriver

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

If we vote no, the government will just legislate for pay cuts etc

I'd rather take a (reversible) pay cut now than allow conditions to be further eroded, especially when the projected €1 billion of "savings" will really only give a saving of €200 million & further contract the economy.

Please please please tell me you don't actually believe its reversible? My issue is that its a pay cut either way but the Labour/FG govt aren't talking fair or negotiating but using economy as an excuse to wield an axe.
Yes means no more work for subs, no one wanting P or DP, a pay cut anyways and "last ask" being a vague notion of time....

Inspector Coptoor

Perhaps there's a bit of naievity on my part there but I stand by my point.

Pay cut & a no vote vs pay cut & worse conditions.

Only One option, and it's the one we both agree upon.

Trotter

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

Perhaps there's a bit of naievity on my part there but I stand by my point.

Pay cut & a no vote vs pay cut & worse conditions.

Only One option, and it's the one we both agree upon.

Even if voting yes and no result in the same thing, a no vote makes it harder for them to come back next time for more.

Conversely, a yes vote means they can go again afterwards until they see a no vote which is what I believe happened after CP1.

Let them come back to me when the CEO of the bank is on less than half a million.

Darwin

Miss Lockhart wrote: »

Same here. But I don't think it will be as simple as accepting a pay cut. I think we will have a long battle against an attempt to force through changes in conditions also.

My understanding (from TUI officials) is they can only change your conditions of service through agreement (i.e. getting a yes to CPII) and if they have to legislate as a result of a no vote, they can only cut pay.

linguist

I simply hope, very sincerely, that if the Government come after us and we decide to take action, that we will have the courage to take the fight to them and not just to the kids.

I've already heard suggestions of a ban on extra-curricular activities. To me, that's just attacking the kids and indeed the very vocation that many of us have. Standing up for yourself at work requires courage and maybe even short-term pain. So let it be non-cooperation with the changes to S&S, refusing to do Croke Park hours if the Government walks out on Croke Park 1 early, and indeed the threat of real industrial action. But as adults, we should fight like adults and with the adults who are doing this to us, as opposed to taking it out on the kids that we all care so much about and in whose interests we profess to act.

Miss Lockhart

linguist wrote: »

I simply hope, very sincerely, that if the Government come after us and we decide to take action, that we will have the courage to take the fight to them and not just to the kids.

I've already heard suggestions of a ban on extra-curricular activities. To me, that's just attacking the kids and indeed the very vocation that many of us have. Standing up for yourself at work requires courage and maybe even short-term pain. So let it be non-cooperation with the changes to S&S, refusing to do Croke Park hours if the Government walks out on Croke Park 1 early, and indeed the threat of real industrial action. But as adults, we should fight like adults and with the adults who are doing this to us, as opposed to taking it out on the kids that we all care so much about and in whose interests we profess to act.

I see where you're coming from but non cooperation with S&S will impact on extra curricular and on trips and therefore on children.

linguist

To clarify, by extra-curricular, I mean what happens after school hours. Yes, there would be an impact should matches be scheduled inside school time but that doesn't always have to be the case. I'd rather not open up a separate issue, but the reason we have a Wednesday half day in Dublin is because sports were originally done in that time!

My point is this: if we take action, it should create problems in the way any normal industrial action would. It should clearly relate to the conflict at hand. Boycotting activities that are already voluntary is pretty cynical imho.

TheDriver

but affecting extra curricular activities will affect everyoe because the IRFU/GAA etc will be onto the Govt wholesale.
I assume if our pay is cut by legislation then all bets are off i.e. no more CP1 hours, no more agreeing to anything other that paid for S&S etc etc

By the way, did anyone hear the civil servant on Joe today (think it was Joe) giving out about teachers getting paid more than she is, all I thought is that does she realise Govt will after something else from her in the next round.....

Miss Lockhart

linguist wrote: »

To clarify, by extra-curricular, I mean what happens after school hours. Yes, there would be an impact should matches be scheduled inside school time but that doesn't always have to be the case. I'd rather not open up a separate issue, but the reason we have a Wednesday half day in Dublin is because sports were originally done in that time!

My point is this: if we take action, it should create problems in the way any normal industrial action would. It should clearly relate to the conflict at hand. Boycotting activities that are already voluntary is pretty cynical imho.

I agree with you in part. I think the choice to coach teams etc should be left up to the individual. At tbe same time, many school duties are voluntary but I think a work to rule directive should include them.

And just to note that we don't all half days in Dublin.

linguist

Sadly I am not at all convinced that the sporting organisations will help us out. They could have stood up for teachers a long time ago and have failed to do so.

I love rugby personally and have huge time for all concerned, but I'd be no more inclined to broadcast what I do for a living at the Aviva stadium than I would at an IBEC meeting. I'm under no illusions about where public opinion is and how it's been manipulated but we must continue to share our idealism and our vocation with the pupils and never take things out directly and only on them. They have done us no harm.

joebloggs32

Darwin wrote: »

My understanding (from TUI officials) is they can only change your conditions of service through agreement (i.e. getting a yes to CPII) and if they have to legislate as a result of a no vote, they can only cut pay.

That is exactly the case

joebloggs32

Miss Lockhart wrote: »

I agree with you in part. I think the choice to coach teams etc should be left up to the individual. At tbe same time, many school duties are voluntary but I think a work to rule directive should include them.

And just to note that we don't all half days in Dublin.

But it is not just the sports organisations that would lose out. Private transport operators would lose revenue as would fast food outlets as every time we go to a game these get a major spin off. Same too for all the firms involved with school musicals. The government would begin to feel some heat from them too. We already are not liked, so it is not as if we would lose popularity, and in fact what we have been doing voluntarily may be better appreciated in future.

Juniorhurler

linguist wrote: »

To clarify, by extra-curricular, I mean what happens after school hours. Yes, there would be an impact should matches be scheduled inside school time but that doesn't always have to be the case. I'd rather not open up a separate issue, but the reason we have a Wednesday half day in Dublin is because sports were originally done in that time!

My point is this: if we take action, it should create problems in the way any normal industrial action would. It should clearly relate to the conflict at hand. Boycotting activities that are already voluntary is pretty cynical imho.

You mention that it would be cynical. Industrial action is dirty business. I remember my dad on strike in the 80s with 5 children under 12 at home. They stuckl to their guns for 5 weeks and won. If you are not willing to follow through you should vote yes.

linguist

Juniorhurler, I'm not sure if you're agreeing or disagreeing with me to be honest, but I've a feeling you've misread me. Basically, I agree with you 100%. The type of industrial action you describe is honest, upfront stuff. It creates problems for the Government, school management and indeed parents who are voters and have a role in shaping political reaction.

My problem, and I'm sorry to have to repeat it again, is with action that solely targets pupils and activities that are not the subject of the dispute. I basically agree that you have to be willing to take some pain yourself if you believe that something is worth fighting for.

Juniorhurler

Ah no tbh I wasn't having a go at you. Unfortunately there is no way to do it without hurting the students though. I would justify it by saying that it is short term for them in the general scheme of things and preventing the complete erosion of pay and conditions may mean that motivated and capable teachers will enter, and more pertinently, remain in the profession.

teacherhead

linguist wrote: »

Juniorhurler, I'm not sure if you're agreeing or disagreeing with me to be honest, but I've a feeling you've misread me. Basically, I agree with you 100%. The type of industrial action you describe is honest, upfront stuff. It creates problems for the Government, school management and indeed parents who are voters and have a role in shaping political reaction.

My problem, and I'm sorry to have to repeat it again, is with action that solely targets pupils and activities that are not the subject of the dispute. I basically agree that you have to be willing to take some pain yourself if you believe that something is worth fighting for.

It's not about solely targeting students. It is for teachers and schools to educate. It is for the GAA to promote football and the Irfu to promote rugby.

Parents are voters, they will not take notice until there is a knock on effect on their children. Then maybe they will see the impact of incessant cuts.

Schools are running on good will at present. Pull the plug

solerina

I voted no....
I am heavily involved in extra curricular in school but some of the comments above I must say I totally agree with.
I think we are constantly under attack from parents and the media and we seem to be constantloy under attack from every corner, I really dont think a lot of people realise exactly how much is done for free in every school across the country, If teachers en masse backed out of every minute of extra curricular etc we do then at least it would be realised how muich we do and some of our attackers (parents especially) might realise their children benefit hugely from thousands of free hours done in schools. I am really getting feb up that people think we earn a fortune, I know I dont. So pay is destroyed, by voting No and stopping extra curriclular (for a period of time)could help protect our working conditions.

donegal11

solerina wrote: »

I voted no....
I am heavily involved in extra curricular in school but some of the comments above I must say I totally agree with.
I think we are constantly under attack from parents and the media and we seem to be constantloy under attack from every corner, I really dont think a lot of people realise exactly how much is done for free in every school across the country, If teachers en masse backed out of every minute of extra curricular etc we do then at least it would be realised how muich we do and some of our attackers (parents especially) might realise their children benefit hugely from thousands of free hours done in schools. I am really getting feb up that people think we earn a fortune, I know I dont. So pay is destroyed, by voting No and stopping extra curriclular (for a period of time)could help protect our working conditions.

What about the majority of teachers that haven't or never do extra curricular stuff (unless there getting paid)? It has to be said most this stuff is done by young teachers on part time contracts for there own reasons(office politics/impress the principle/ there own enjoyment) rather then for the childrens.

As far as CP2 It is these young teachers who have the most to benefit and least to lose with equalisation of pay and earning under 65k have no direct paycuts. It seems that senior teachers are using the lower salaries/work of younger teachers to justify there own conditions but willing to give nothing in return.

km79

TUI votes to ballot for industrial action http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/0403/379532-asti-exams/