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/

acequion

donegal11 wrote: »

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.

Sorry if I seem a tad catty donegal11, but your weak spelling, in addition to your provocative tone, would indicate that you are not a teacher.

However, I would like to reply to your post by pointing out the following:

I am an older teacher and I am willing to take this fight to the end, at the risk of considerable pain to myself, for the integrity of the profession and for the future of my younger collegues and their students.

Secondly, you are quite wrong when you say that a majority of teachers don't get involved in extra curricular.Like many things in education it is difficult to quantify, but in my own school, only a minority do nothing extra.Bear in mind also that while some teachers may do no extra curricular per se, many give extra lunch time classes or stay back in the evenings to prepare kids for oral exams. Hard as it may be for you to believe, teachers do that selflessly, for the good of their students.Yes, many young teachers have to do extra activities, indeed to impress the principal in the hope of a job, but they do so in accordance with their personal talents and preferences.In my young days I coached debating teams and drove them in my car all over the place.Exhausting, but highly enjoyable for all concerned [and I was never paid nor sought payment for this]. I no longer do it because I'm older now, the job is more demanding than it used to be then and there are other things in my life besides my work.

And everyone, even the teacher, is entitled to a life outside work.

solerina

acequion wrote: »

Sorry if I seem a tad catty donegal11, but your weak spelling, in addition to your provocative tone, would indicate that you are not a teacher.

However, I would like to reply to your post by pointing out the following:

I am an older teacher and I am willing to take this fight to the end, at the risk of considerable pain to myself, for the integrity of the profession and for the future of my younger collegues and their students.

Secondly, you are quite wrong when you say that a majority of teachers don't get involved in extra curricular.Like many things in education it is difficult to quantify, but in my own school, only a minority do nothing extra.Bear in mind also that while some teachers may do no extra curricular per se, many give extra lunch time classes or stay back in the evenings to prepare kids for oral exams. Hard as it may be for you to believe, teachers do that selflessly, for the good of their students.Yes, many young teachers have to do extra activities, indeed to impress the principal in the hope of a job, but they do so in accordance with their personal talents and preferences.In my young days I coached debating teams and drove them in my car all over the place.Exhausting, but highly enjoyable for all concerned [and I was never paid nor sought payment for this]. I no longer do it because I'm older now, the job is more demanding than it used to be then and there are other things in my life besides my work.

And everyone, even the teacher, is entitled to a life outside work.

I agree, I am a so called senior teacher (in that I am permanent and have been in the school 10+ years) but I have always been involved in extra curricular (as you said this doesnt just mean coaching sports teams, although I do that too)....I am not directly affected by the pay cut which will be imposed as I am below the 65K but I still think we need to fight for our working conditions....Paster Niemoller comes to mind, we need to fight for the teaching profession for the good of all...young, NQTs, Long Standing teachers etc.

derb12

acequion wrote: »

Sorry if I seem a tad catty donegal11, but your weak spelling, in addition to your provocative tone, would indicate that you are not a teacher.

A tad catty? I think it's a bit below the belt to use poor spelling as a criticism for a particular point of view. And whether donegal11 is or isn't a teacher - I know plenty of teachers who have lousy spelling!

I would like a more balanced debate. I think teachers have a good case and intend to vote no but I am sick of reading the self-righteous tone of many teachers in the media. One guy in the irish times claimed that being compelled to do 49 hours of S&S a week (he currently opts out) means that he will now have to take work home and do 2 extra hours per night to make it up? It doesn't make any sense. Other teachers have been using the drop in salary for new entrants as the "teachers have already given so much" argument, even though they are sitting pretty with a permanent job in the middle of the increment scale. And to suggest that the majority of teachers do extra-curricular work - well let me just say that that is definitely not my experience. In the two schools where I have taught it was around the 30% (tops 40%) mark and almost exclusive to the younger more precariously situated teachers.
And one of the pieces of outside-hours work that I have done - back to back paper1 and paper 2 saturday morning sessions for LC Maths before the exam - well I got criticised by some colleagues for undermining the weekend course that some industrious teachers were charging for in a school down the road. You can't win.
We aren't all saints. Teaching isn't some vocation which I joined to "give something back". It's my job which I try to do honestly to the best of my ability. I believe that some of the very people who complain that the changes in conditions are eroding the profession are themselves guilty of eroding it through fallacious argument.

Miss Lockhart

donegal11 wrote: »

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.

You clearly have no understanding of the issues. Younger teachers have the most to lose and they are the ones overwhelmingly voting no. "Pay equalisation" is nothing but a sop. The vast majority of those affected can't even get a job to start with and the proposed changes will only exacerbate that situation as well as removing the subbing hours that those few lucky enough to have a few contract hours need to earn enough to support themselves.

implausible

donegal11 wrote: »

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.

Wow, in one fell swoop, you've managed to completely (and wrongly) state that anyone who is permanent doesn't do any extra and utterly slate the motives of anyone younger who does. Who does that leave?

In my experience, it is nearly impossible to work in a school environment and not be involved in some extra-curricular activity and I would hate to work in a school where this was the case.

On a related note, what gets my goat is a common perception that, if you're not out on the pitch freezing your ass off or if your mug isn't in the local paper every week, you're not doing any extra-curricular work. I had to stifle a snort when a colleague recently asked me to word an article for the paper and instructed me not to forget to thank him in the piece:D

It might be the withdrawal of obvious stuff like football matches that will get the PR, but it's the more day-to-day stuff like choir practice and entering competitions that will affect the running of the school.

acequion

It's such a shame that we find ourselves constantly defending our very existence, by having to point out the hours of unpaid work we do. In what other job or profession do they have to do that?

Anyway here's some personal feedback from the ASTI convention in Wexford.

1. Almost 500 delegates in attendance with an overwhelming opposition to CP2. Some wonderfully eloquent speakers who spoke with great passion. I found it uplifting to be there.
   
2. It was made clear to the union leadership that a NO vote, which we are confident of achieving, must be accepted as a democratic statement and that there must be no second vote on the matter.
   
3. One delegate suggested that a strategy committee be put in place in the union, with the sole purpose of deciding on courses of action to be taken during times of industrial strife. [However this was only a suggestion, not a request].
   
4. While strategies were not discussed as the voting has not yet been completed [many felt that like the TUI, voting should have been completed prior to congress], however as discussed here, most delegates appeared to favour the work to rule strategy of withdrawing from extra curriculars, CP1 etc, as an alternative to striking.
   
5. An entire day was put aside to debate the framework for Junior cycle reform, with all speakers opposed to the current format.
   
6. The minister arrived at 4.30pm yesterday. Outgoing ASTI president Gerry Breslin gave a very good speech with an excellent summation of teachers' concerns re CP2 and the new JC. During his own speech [which was hardly inspiring] the minister was heckled and about 10 delegates walked out.
   
7. In a case of "damned if you do, damned if you don't", teachers have been criticised in the media for their discourteous behaviour. However,call me militant, but I don't think this minister is entitled to much courtesy.And the Irish, in general are way too courteous,way too low key and that's one of the reasons why we're easy fodder for wily politicians and corrupt groups protecting the rich. In fact one of Ruari Quinn's comments to the media which I copy and paste below from the journal.ie, shows him stirring up the now yawn inducingly boring public/private sector debate.Shame on him!
   
   Drawing comparisons with the country’s private sector, Quinn said that the current proposals before unions represented a “relatively modest reduction in the overall public pay bill. A reduction that many people sadly in the private sector have had imposed on them and they were never consulted about whether they would have it or not.”

BuilderPlumber

Again, we see more dictatorial practice by a government SO out of touch with the people and reality. Quinn and co are acting like they are Imelda Marcos and Nicolai Ceaucescu in trying to sell the people a bad deal by threatening them with a worse deal if they don't accept. They are using this contrived "financial crisis" by overplaying how "bad" it is so they can rob the people of their money, jobs and hope. It is disgusting. Just like the previous government overplayed the so called "boom" to get people into debt for the developers.

Did the people vote for this? No. In 2011, the people voted out another bad government for the same reasons ... only to get a far nastier regime in this one. We are in many ways no better off than North Korea.

If the government wants to seek cuts in education and save ordinary lecturers and teachers jobs it should:

1. Reduce the obscene salariers and pensions of college heads of departments, registrars, directors, etc.
2. Tighten up the laws on research projects and their finance - they often amount to money for fancy exotic trips abroad.
3. Reign in the waste in student unions. Yes, these are not a joke and cost students and colleges a lot of money to pay idiots a salary to do f all.
4. Retire off - on reduced pensions - heads of departments that are surplus.

Then, more ordinary teachers, lecturers, SNAs and researchers can be employed.

Why can't the regime see this??!?!?!!!!

MacGyver007

IFUT have rejected the deal

http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/0415/381444-croke-park-pay/

acequion

Am starting to feel nervous. Results from all the unions should be in in the next few days and god knows where we'll be if Impact, Siptu and INTO vote in favour. This is a stressful enough time of year in our job without the added worry of what's going to happen.

How is everyone else feeling? How do people think the vote will go in the big unions?

Darwin

I'm fearful if there is an overall rejection of CPII, then some crappy compromise will be cobbled together to get buy in from everyone. It looks like all the teaching unions are going to reject it which is good news at least, the best outcome I think is for it to pass overall and let them legislate for the unions outside the agreement. A law lecturer from DIT (who came across as pro CPII) was interviewed on drivetime today about it and he was saying they may have to legislate for pay cuts and changes to conditions of service. This second point is absolutely wrong, but of course Mary Wilson was happy to let him scaremonger...

joebloggs32

Poor old Ingred on the Rte news seemed very worried that a no vote may succeed. She is not looking forward to the prospect of hanging around the LRC late a night to give us updates.

whiteandlight

Rumours in the economy forum and on other sites/friends/family is that siptu is possibly going for a no and impact are likely to be no (still counting)

Moody_mona

Go on the NO votes! Big results from SIPTU and INTO.

Susie120704

Hopefully more No votes to follow. Enda is posturing that he will save the 300 million with or without our agreement. I wish him luck. We cannot allow our conditions to be eroded further.

whiteandlight

Looks to be dead in the water at this stage

Darwin

On the one hand I'm pleased it has been shot down, on the other hand Labour backbenchers are talking about a re-negotiation instead of legislating for paycuts. We could end back up at square one voting again on some piece of crap - I really hope not!

MacGyver007

The big question is: what happens CP1 now? My understanding was that it would be gone with immediate effect in the event of a rejection of CP2. Are those horrible and generally pointless 33 hours now a thing of the past?

Even though the deal is off, there is still no word of the ASTI vote, even though voting closed on Friday. The INTO deadline was yesterday and they had their results in a couple of hours ago!

acequion

Delighted with the news and let's hope the ASTI deliver a sizeable No!

However do ye hear them on Six One already mooting a renegotiation. Jesus, what part of NO don't they understand!!

Benicetomonty

ASTI reject the deal, 85% opposed. Not a great turnout imo, 62%.

Juniorhurler

Just watching primetime there. God I ****ing hate Eddie Hobbs and was delighted to see Liam Doran put him in his place.