Calling for a NO to TUI ballot

deiseindublin

Thought TUI needs it's own thread, getting confusing with the Yes Vs No discussion on the ASTI one.

Anyway, TUI have managed another own goal and decided to recommend a yes to this pile of crap.

Please, canvass the highways and byways, get on FB, get on Twitter, get around your staffroom, canvass everybody that has a vote and make sure this doesn't get through.

http://www.tui.ie/_fileupload/Final%20TUI%20DES%20document%20090516.pdf

maude6868

I'm ASTI but hoping all teachers can stand up to the bullies and reject CP hours. The talks with TUI only prove one thing, they have nothing to offer and will promise reviews and more talks etc, confident in their belief that teachers are a soft target and will always do as they are told/advised. We have been sheepish for far too long. Delighted with the ASTI, proud member today when I received the text to vote yes in light of DES unprecedented interference.

deiseindublin

It's totally soul destroying being a TUI member, totally agree with you on standing up to the bullying, hopefully our membership will face this down once and for all.

mirrorwall14

I'm going to my branch meeting this week. Please get yourselves there everyone by hook or by crook. This has to be fought, it is an absolute farce of a document by the TUI

The_Valeyard

Who are the TUI representing ? Teachers or their government friends.

TheDriver

Count me in......disgraceful! Assume Sean o foghlu sat in on those meetings?

deiseindublin

I'm actually baffled that they spent 2 months negotiating this. Also, don't like that they've rolled a few bits of 2nd & 3rd level together in one ballot. Surely they need to be separated?

How do they think they'll sell this to the members?

mirrorwall14

Just received the email as school rep. On rereading I'm still flabbergasted, the whole document is full of bull**** of the highest order

For the ward report 'the parties commit to immediately commencing discussion',

for the posts of responsibility 'robust review' before 'budget 2017',

for croke park hours 'review of the usage of hours' for 2017/2018,

for data management 'commits to examining..'

And for new entrant pay it didn't form part of the negotiation??!

The only thing that has any form of clarity is inspections but sure that was never an issue to do with the LRA at all

Why on earth would second level teachers accept this? It's is complete waffle? There's nothing in it!

And I have a huge problem with the scaremongering wording of

'This special edition will set out the significant consequences both of accepting/not accepting the proposed' agreement

I'll bet my hat that magazine will be just as threatening as the recent department circular

deiseindublin

Martin Marjoram for President might be a start to getting rid of the deadwood, he sounds like he's willing to put his back into it.
http://tui.ie/_fileupload/TUI%20Presidential%20ballot%20candidate%20Martin.pdf

I'm honestly pissing laughing at Joanne Irwin's list of what she thinks she did as VP. Campaigned against LRA? They've basically recommended an LRA2 without naming it as such.
http://tui.ie/_fileupload/TUI%20Presidential%20ballot%20candidate%20Joanne.pdf

mirrorwall14

deiseindublin wrote: »

Martin Marjoram for President might be a start to getting rid of the deadwood, he sounds like he's willing to put his back into it.
http://tui.ie/_fileupload/TUI%20Presidential%20ballot%20candidate%20Martin.pdf

I'm honestly pissing laughing at Joanne Irwin's list of what she thinks she did as VP. Campaigned against LRA? They've basically recommended an LRA2 without naming it as such.
http://tui.ie/_fileupload/TUI%20Presidential%20ballot%20candidate%20Joanne.pdf

I'm very confused by the pair of them. He's campaigning saying he's the only classroom teacher. Her literature says she is the only second level candidate. Is he being disingenuous? Never really heard of a third level lecturer referring to it as being 'in the classroom'

deiseindublin

Is she seconded full time in her VP role? Maybe that's the angle.

mirrorwall14

Maybe. But he's a classroom teacher? What does that mean?

deiseindublin

He's still educating each day, with real life students in front of him? Not qualified as a teacher, but no longer teaching.

deiseindublin

Was there much talk of this in TUI staff rooms today? Anybody I spoke to was appalled by document, after the shell shock wore off.

man_no_plan

deiseindublin wrote: »

Was there much talk of this in TUI staff rooms today? Anybody I spoke to was appalled by document, after the shell shock wore off.

Not a word, they didn't even know who the new minister was

deiseindublin

In fairness, only 1 person in my staffroom had read doc but anybody that I told of the endless list of future tense 'review' verbs were horrified and up for the NO vote.

My mantra is to not even read the fine print, basically we need to call for:
* NO in LRA2 ballot
* Marjorum in Presidential ballot.

Also, I think it's important that we have immediate school based union meetings BEFORE the TUI propoganda/scaremongering literature comes out.

evolving_doors

I think what the TUI Secondary school members should take account of is the oft forgotten Institute of Technologies factor.
Consider all the extra hours that the IT crowd had to actually lecture (not BS meetings), and of course all the workload that comes with those modules.
So you can see why they might be signing up to the proposal below.

"it is agreed that an interim measure will be introduced from January 2017 to re designate half of the additional flex hours required of each lecturer to wide duties other than teaching, in consultation with the lecturers and in accordance with Institute priorities and needs. "

Now go and look at what is on offer for the Secondary teachers.... Review of Croke Park hours and, wait for it..... a "robust review" on management structures.

Does anyone know what the make-up of the membership is in the TUI (Between FE, Secondary, IT's etc)? If the numbers in secondary aren't sufficient then 'rallying the troops' in a Secondary TUI staffroom might be fruitless.

That's my reading of it anyway, I'm open to correction if I've misunderstood the IT's offer.

deiseindublin

That's why I didn't think it was fair to roll it all into one ballot, we all have different conditions and improvements we're fighting for.

The_Valeyard

deiseindublin wrote: »

Was there much talk of this in TUI staff rooms today? Anybody I spoke to was appalled by document, after the shell shock wore off.

Lot of laughing and bemusement at it. Its nothing. Just kick the can down the road.

deiseindublin

Talking to another few today and lots of them not even aware of it.

Darwin

Gebgbegb wrote: »

I think what the TUI Secondary school members should take account of is the oft forgotten Institute of Technologies factor.
Consider all the extra hours that the IT crowd had to actually lecture (not BS meetings), and of course all the workload that comes with those modules.
So you can see why they might be signing up to the proposal below.


Now go and look at what is on offer for the Secondary teachers.... Review of Croke Park hours and, wait for it..... a "robust review" on management structures.

Does anyone know what the make-up of the membership is in the TUI (Between FE, Secondary, IT's etc)? If the numbers in secondary aren't sufficient then 'rallying the troops' in a Secondary TUI staffroom might be fruitless.

That's my reading of it anyway, I'm open to correction if I've misunderstood the IT's offer.

I'm an IoT lecturer and there is no way me or any people I know would vote for continuation of these insidious and absolutely hated flex hours beyond the end of the current agreement. Having said that I am long in the job and it is likely that they will divide and conquer again by offering something (conversion to CIDs, restoration of pay?) to staff at the beginning of their career to get a new agreement over the line. I believe there are also vastly greater numbers of TUI members at second level than third level. Yes there should definitely be separate ballots on second and third level issues.

mirrorwall14

Darwin wrote: »

I'm an IoT lecturer and there is no way me or any people I know would vote for continuation of these insidious and absolutely hated flex hours beyond the end of the current agreement. Having said that I am long in the job and it is likely that they will divide and conquer again by offering something (conversion to CIDs, restoration of pay?) to staff at the beginning of their career to get a new agreement over the line. I believe there are also vastly greater numbers of TUI members at second level than third level. Yes there should definitely be separate ballots on second and third level issues.

Great to hear that Third level feel the same was as us!

deiseindublin

The problem isn't those posting on Boards though, be they 2nd or 3rd level, the problem is the other 95% that don't even bother their arses reading the literature and then might or might not vote on the day. If they do, they'll likely vote with the union recommendation and vote in the VP while they're at it.

gaiscioch

Regarding the date of the TUI ballot, I quote from the TUI website, Monday 9 May 2016:

A ballot of members on this proposed agreement will take place before the end of May with ballot papers issuing next week.

deiseindublin

I'm getting more annoyed every time I reread the TUI agreement. Why do they fudge it so much that we're re-voting on LRA, even though we rejected it emphatically, over 90% from memory.

Effectively, acceptance of the proposed agreement would mean that TUI members would continue to co-operate with and not to repudiate the relevant collective agreements. The Haddington Road Agreement (HRA) expires on 30th June 2016. Therefore, from 1st July 2016, the only relevant collective agreement that will apply will be the LRA.

In summary, if the proposal is accepted, TUI members will be covered by the LRA from 1st July 2016.

acequion

In summary, if the proposal is accepted, TUI members will be covered by the LRA from 1st July 2016.

Trying to force ye in through the back door,it would seem. Disgraceful carry on by a union especially when that agreement has already been resoundingly rejected by the members.

Ye absolutely have to fling that back in their faces!

deiseindublin

I know, it's unbelievable that there was a 92% rejection and they're trying to re-brand it as 'an agreement' without mentioning the fact that we're actually reballoting LRA.

man_no_plan

Report on fixed term employment in Third Level - may have an impact on opinions.

Darwin

We (@third level) have a branch meeting next week, will be interesting to see what the wider membership make of it. Speaking to colleagues at coffee, people could not believe we were being re-balloted on something that has already been emphatically rejected so some hope I guess.

evolving_doors

Darwin wrote: »

We (@third level) have a branch meeting next week, will be interesting to see what the wider membership make of it. Speaking to colleagues at coffee, people could not believe we were being re-balloted on something that has already been emphatically rejected so some hope I guess.

Tell em hold firm and Croke Park will fall. Cave in and it'll be like trying to get the milk back out of your tea.

TheDriver

But they have promised things.....and this Govt have always kept their promises......

evolving_doors

TheDriver wrote: »

But they have promised things.....and this Govt have always kept their promises......

this time they're promising a review, but better than the last review it's going to be a "robust review".

History Queen

At our union meeting members were shocked and disappointed at the recommendation for a Yes vote.... to echo the op i too call for a no vote on this nonsensical "agreement"

mirrorwall14

Attended my branch meeting tonight. It was an eye opener in many ways. To lay out some of the feedback from the top brass

1. Legal advice taken by the TUI is that there is no way that a legal challenge to FEMPI will succeed. They are adamant that the ASTI will fail and that this is simply not an option that is available.
2. The government will ABSOLUTELY apply all of the available tools in their arsenal to force us to accept this agreement by hook or by crook. There is no good end game here. If we chose to go out, then we are out and the following AT LEAST will apply
-S and S payment will not be made (this affects you for every year for the rest of your career)
-The Ward Report will be immediately revoked and no one will get their CIDs in September either for the first time, or for the increase they may be due. It will revert to the 5th contract being a CID
- New recruits will be placed on the original new salary scales not on the revised scales from HRA
-Increments will be immediately suspended for a 2 year period and it will be like they never happen from your career perspective.
3. NQT's and the separate salary scales are being addressed separately to this agreement (provided we are in an agreement) with SIPTU and ICTU and a committee will be in place within 6 months to start this review. TUI will also be campaigning for allowances to be reinstated. For the first time they are reasonably confident that this review is going to be reality rather than a just a "wish" because the door has been opened with the firefighters getting allowances back by being built into their scale.


I am now torn.

They were fairly blunt. The end game when you go out on strike is that you eventually have to talk. They said the reality of talks is never going to get more than this now that an "orderly" unwinding of FEMPI is built into the government. The government simply cannot back down because the fiscal space will not allow them to, there has to be an orderly unwinding so they can't afford to let us have our own moment. They didn't try to sell us any "carrots", it was pretty much-if we don't accept this the alternative is horrific and will cost us way more than what this has on the table

deiseindublin

Sorry but I'm still a big RESOUNDING NO.

I call it horse****, there is nothing in the agreement except talk about talks. They will have to talk if (hopefully when) we vote No, they won't want the schools closed.

deiseindublin

Also, if we don't get paid for S&S, surely we can stop doing it? Does that not expire end of June also?

I think no CP hours and no S&S is worth going for a NO vote.

mirrorwall14

If we stop S&S the schools remain closed indefinitely (and we do not get paid) at all.

They said it essentially comes down to how long can we afford to stay out on strike because it would be a bloody long time before the government would back down even an inch

History Queen

deiseindublin wrote: »

Sorry but I'm still a big RESOUNDING NO.

I call it horse****, there is nothing in the agreement except talk about talks. They will have to talk if (hopefully when) we vote No, they won't want the schools closed.

I agree fully with you. How long will it take us to learn that agreeement cannot always be one sided with the other side changing the rules all the time?

I'm here reading an anti bullying policy for our school...i should forward same to the department for them to reflect on

mirrorwall14

I do agree with you guys. I'm just not sure that realistically everyone is going to stand up to this bullying

deiseindublin

As HQ said, where do we draw the line though, are we always going to just nod in agreement for an easy life in the hope they'll come good? It's time to stand up and be counted and if that means the schools are closed for a while, so be it.

I can't see the DES letting the schools close for any length. At the moment all the negative press that circulates is towards the teachers (overpaid with too many hols etc) but if the school were closed and there was no agreement the negative press would be against government and teachers.

I can't see an unstable to start with government letting it happen.

mirrorwall14

deiseindublin wrote: »

As HQ said, where do we draw the line though, are we always going to just nod in agreement for an easy life in the hope they'll come good? It's time to stand up and be counted and if that means the schools are closed for a while, so be it.

I can't see the DES letting the schools close for any length. At the moment all the negative press that circulates is towards the teachers (overpaid with too many hols etc) but if the school were closed and there was no agreement the negative press would be against government and teachers.

I can't see an unstable to start with government letting it happen.

I agree with you except for the second paragraph. I cannot see decades of poor press coverage overturned because we closed the schools. Parents and the media would absolutely blame us not the Department. We lost the media battle long ago

LaLa2004

mirrorwall14 wrote: »

the government simply cannot back down because the fiscal space will not allow them to, there has to be an orderly unwinding so they can't afford to let us have our own moment. They didn't try to sell us any "carrots", it was pretty much-if we don't accept this the alternative is horrific and will cost us way more than what this has on the table

They found the 'fiscal space' to get rid of water charges when people shouted loud enough.

deiseindublin

Guards have stopped doing CP hours and no downside so far for them.

We were promised X, Y and Z when HR expires at end of June. Our finances have improved. We should now we given what we have worked for and agreed to. We've upheld our side, end of. I don't get why they think that it's ok to just shelf the promises and have a few robust reviews instead.

Btw - this is the exact reason why I suggested in school that we need to have a TUI meeting BEFORE the propaganda spills out from head office. They've basically negotiated a crap deal and have to sell it to us now so I'd expect the literature to be OTT scaremongering, with none of the historical facts behind Government agreements.

deiseindublin

Also, probably a stupid question but can there not be some kind of legal challenge to them changing the goal posts for back pay etc? Surely at some point if one side does all they're supposed to do, and the other party doesn't, it has to be challenged?

I have to admit that I really don't care about the back money side of S&S, for me I just don't want to do CP hours, end of. I was so happy all year thinking "at least they're going to be gone". I felt like the dog ate my homework when I ready the new agreement the other night. It's awful that they could have made so little headway in the talks.

I'm actually wondering were there any talks at all? I mean, it looks like a document that was posted to them without negotiation. Exactly what gains were there?

r93kaey5p2izun

I'm sorry but I just don't buy this stuff about the government holding out with no concessions in the face of strike or school closures, or even them allowing it to get that far. They are not in a strong position as regards their own stability. Look at the water charges. They are simply seeing our unions as a weak target that will roll over with a few threats. And we're walking right into their hands.

And as for the fiscal space and not giving any carrots because they can't afford it - I think that's a load of cobblers. Casualisation is one of the core issues here. It will not cost the government more to give CIDs quicker or to do something meaningful to stop the widespread abuse of part time contracts going on in many schools. This could be easily solved with minimal financial outlay. But they fail to commit to anything more than a review and show that they're really just looking for power over a weak teaching profession rather than any real financiaI concerns.

My resolve to reject this worthless document is strengthened by this nonsense scaremongering.

deiseindublin

I hope to god that everybody has the same reaction Arlessienne. It's only ever taken a bit of scaremongering for teacher unions to fold.

TheDriver

I would like to go back to the people behind the agreement - our elected representatives. We should all be writing to our TDs with our concerns of constant agreements being broken and mistrust. And as our elected representative, we expect fair play. Hell-there's circulars that are now being thrown away because the Govt isn't liking things. Can we now just change which circulars we go by? Can we get the inspectors to go back to DESk and get them to abide by all their circulars? I would believe all the promises except I have believed them last time and as the saying goes- fool me once....fool me twice

No TD wants to answer a question that why aren't we getting the pay restoration we were PROMISED in HRA?????? Why are we being threatened??? No TD wants to jeopardise their vote which is NOT long away again....

man_no_plan

A long strike will break the unions.

With strategy there can be effective protracted strikes. They will cost unions money and cost members money.

I was taken aback at the reports of the next phase of Luas strikes affecting the State Exams. Today SIPTU altered the timing og thosr strikrs so as not to impact on the students.

Tell me who is winning there?

If there is to be action it needs to be carefully planned and executed and there needd to be discipline among members.

The JC campaign was a success from a TUI perspective yet, even during it people were moaning and groaning about it and not wanting to participate in the lunchtime protests.

The other concerns, re new entrants etc., are also going to cause an implosion very soon in my view. I know that plenty of my colleagues who were on strike resent the fact that non members, not all of whom are on the old payscale, were paid while we were on strike.

A union needs unity, and we haven't got it in either union. This needs to be sorted rapidly.

gaiscioch

mirrorwall14 wrote: »

The government simply cannot back down because the fiscal space will not allow them to

I'm still waiting for evidence that my sitting reading a book/colouring pictures/twiddling my thumbs/falling asleep in egregiously boring meetings during Croke Park hours contributes financially to anything in this state. The emperor has no clothes!

gaiscioch

deiseindublin wrote: »

I have to admit that I really don't care about the back money side of S&S, for me I just don't want to do CP hours, end of.

100% agree, and I write this as somebody whose childcare fees are over €2000 a month (that's supposedly the "discounted" rate) so money is obviously tight for the next few years. Time is far more valuable, however: with routine child sickness I'm already stretching the kindness of family members and my fellow staff. In this context, that I'm forced to stay on school premises giving *zero* - and I do mean zero - added value to the state during these sham "reform" hours has nothing but my abject, wholehearted contempt.

picturehangup

It was great to send ballots out to the schools, ASTI getting this bit right, as everyone in my school has now handed ballot back to school steward. A large 'YES' from our staff. Everyone is fed up to the teeth doing these unnecessary hours.
If we get this wrong now, our conditions are down the drain for good, and will never be restored.
i forecast 85%Yes; 15% No, and 90% turnout. Hope I am not too optimistic.