ASTI ballot

r93kaey5p2izun

SligoBrewer wrote: »

They can't take CIDs from people who already have them, that's scaremongering.

No it's that CIDs go back to 4 years for anyone due one and the Ward Report and Circular 49/2017 no longer apply.

judeboy101

I'd take a big financial hit for no more croke park. Just remember the inmo and into have now said no. They are two big unions with a look of visability.

wirelessdude01

judeboy101 wrote:

I'd take a big financial hit for no more croke park. Just remember the inmo and into have now said no. They are two big unions with a look of visability.

Our CEC rep told our quarterly meeting that the INMo voted no to something very different.

TheDriver

judeboy101 wrote: »

I'd take a big financial hit for no more croke park. Just remember the inmo and into have now said no. They are two big unions with a look of visability.

The reality of Croke Park is that it's all PT and staff meetings now that 10 hours were taken out of timetable. And there's no point having PT meetings early if parents won't be at them.

Redser87

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

Our CEC rep told our quarterly meeting that the INMo voted no to something very different.

Their motivation may have been different but it was still a 94% rejection of PSSA. Either way it still looks good to have teachers and nurses on the same side.

r93kaey5p2izun

Redser87 wrote: »

Their motivation may have been different but it was still a 94% rejection of PSSA. Either way it still looks good to have teachers and nurses on the same side.

We were told that INMO already accepted the PSSA and what they rejected is a proposal from the Public Service Pay Commission but they are not rejecting the PSSA so quite a different situation.

r93kaey5p2izun

TheDriver wrote: »

The reality of Croke Park is that it's all PT and staff meetings now that 10 hours were taken out of timetable. And there's no point having PT meetings early if parents won't be at them.

My former school has seen PT meeting attendance plummet since the introduction of the circular. They used to be held on a day we had a slightly earlier finish when we would usually have CP meetings but fully outside the timetable running from 3-5.30. There's a big push from parents to be seen between 3-4 due to childminding. Now over half of them just don't come at all because it's all after 4.15. Zero flexibility and no consideration of individual school needs.

solerina

TheDriver wrote: »

The reality of Croke Park is that it's all PT and staff meetings now that 10 hours were taken out of timetable. And there's no point having PT meetings early if parents won't be at them.

Depends on the school our P has directed us to use 7 hours for specific committee meetings...and he has so far gotten away with it.
On the upcoming ASTI ballot, there are no LPTs in my school who have actually joined the union, everyone in the union is teaching in the school in excess of ten years, the appetite against strike is huge so many of the members feel that they won’t go on strike to stand up for LPTs who can’t even be bothered to join the union. Not my position but I know it is for many of my colleagues. It was commented ‘ why should I lose another days pay for them when they can’t be bothered to stand up for them selves...’

SligoBrewer

solerina wrote: »

Depends on the school our P has directed us to use 7 hours for specific committee meetings...and he has so far gotten away with it.
On the upcoming ASTI ballot, there are no LPTs in my school who have actually joined the union, everyone in the union is teaching in the school in excess of ten years, the appetite against strike is huge so many of the members feel that they won’t go on strike to stand up for LPTs who can’t even be bothered to join the union. Not my position but I know it is for many of my colleagues. It was commented ‘ why should I lose another days pay for them when they can’t be bothered to stand up for them selves...’

Have you tried speaking to them?

Icsics

solerina wrote: »

Depends on the school our P has directed us to use 7 hours for specific committee meetings...and he has so far gotten away with it.
On the upcoming ASTI ballot, there are no LPTs in my school who have actually joined the union, everyone in the union is teaching in the school in excess of ten years, the appetite against strike is huge so many of the members feel that they won’t go on strike to stand up for LPTs who can’t even be bothered to join the union. Not my position but I know it is for many of my colleagues. It was commented ‘ why should I lose another days pay for them when they can’t be bothered to stand up for them selves...’

Same here, in fact during the last strike all the LPTS joined TUI

SligoBrewer

Icsics wrote: »

Same here, in fact during the last strike all the LPTS joined TUI

An analysis of members lost by the ASTI showed the majority of those members who left were all permanent members of staff, so don't go slinging mud at those below you on the ladder please.

Icsics

SligoBrewer wrote: »

An analysis of members lost by the ASTI showed the majority of those members who left were all permanent members of staff, so don't go slinging mud at those below you on the ladder please.

Stating a fact, LPTs in my school left ASTI & joined TUI

SligoBrewer

Icsics wrote: »

Stating a fact, LPTs in my school left ASTI & joined TUI

Anecdotal evidence isn't evidence. In my school every single LPT joined up and went on strike with our colleagues.

I've no idea why people are targeting the weakest people in the staffroom who mightn't even (Clearly don't to be honest) understand how unions work, let alone found their voice to speak out.

Yeah, LPTs should be speaking out. But did you invite them too?

Sir123

One of the problems is the lack on information regarding branch meetings and also the fact that many LPTs have an extra job after school in order to make ends meet and may not be able to make said meetings.

It's true that many don't realise that in order for change to happen, it needs to occur within the union, hence the importance of being a union member and actually attending branch meetings.

Listening to Pat Kenny this morning on the radio and the utter sh**te comments coming in from viewers was shocking. We're only seeing as money grabbers. Comments like that don't shock me anymore, but the standard of the profession is slowly dying before our eyes. You cannot have a good education system if you do not pay teachers sufficiently and/or fairly for that matter.

Anyway, yesterday was a good day for INTO. Let's hope CEC initiaties a mandate for strike action and members get onboard. It's a pity TUI let us down. Let's hope ASTI see some hope and join in to eliminate this discrimiation once and for all.

wirelessdude01

Sir123 wrote:

Listening to Pat Kenny this morning on the radio and the utter sh**te comments coming in from viewers was shocking. We're only seeing as money grabbers. Comments like that don't shock me anymore, but the standard of the profession is slowly dying before our eyes. You cannot have a good education system if you do not pay teachers sufficiently and/or fairly for that matter.

Don't look at the comments on the journal.ie then

salonfire

Sir123 wrote: »

. You cannot have a good education system if you do not pay teachers sufficiently and/or fairly for that matter.

Full time teachers start on €36,000. The SNAs in the same building max out on €39000. Go mention to any SNA how unfair you think teachers are being paid.

happywithlife

salonfire wrote: »

Full time teachers start on €36,000. The SNAs in the same building max out on €39000. Go mention to any SNA how unfair you think teachers are being paid.

apples and pears! completly different skillset qualification responsibility etc etc

salonfire

happywithlife wrote: »

apples and pears! completly different skillset qualification responsibility etc etc

Exactly.
The contrast is pretty clear, as it should be.

But puts the hyperbolic nonsense of teachers working two jobs to survive into perspective.

happywithlife

salonfire wrote: »

Exactly.
The contrast is pretty clear, as it should be.

But puts the hyperbolic nonsense of teachers working two jobs to survive into perspective.

no it doesn't
because an SNA is generally employed on a full time basis
LPT's are on a lower scale AND must be factored on a pro rata basis depending on hours employed for -- as little as 5/6 often 11-15. A fact usually IGNORED by media.
there's no point quoting a salary scake based on full hours when such contracts are few and far between

salonfire

happywithlife wrote: »

no it doesn't
because an SNA is generally employed on a full time basis
LPT's are on a lower scale AND must be factored on a pro rata basis depending on hours employed for -- as little as 5/6 often 11-15. A fact usually IGNORED by media.
there's no point quoting a salary scake based on full hours when such contracts are few and far between

And is full restoration of pay going to help those on 5 or 6 hours? I guess not.

But that's not what the ballots were about.

evolving_doors

salonfire wrote: »

Full time teachers start on €36,000. The SNAs in the same building max out on €39000. Go mention to any SNA how unfair you think teachers are being paid.

last chance Salonfire.
Poster infracted for trolling.
I'd advise posters not to get sucked into the apples and oranges rabbit hole.
MOD

alroley

salonfire wrote: »

Full time teachers start on €36,000. The SNAs in the same building max out on €39000. Go mention to any SNA how unfair you think teachers are being paid.

Newly qualified teacher here. I applied for every job I could and luckily got one. I will earn no where near €36,000.

evolving_doors

alroley wrote: »

Newly qualified teacher here. I applied for every job I could and luckily got one. I will earn no where near €36,000.

Just ignore it. You'll eventually get used to people explaining your job to you.

SligoBrewer

salonfire wrote: »

And is full restoration of pay going to help those on 5 or 6 hours?

Yes, equal pay for equal work hits lower earners disproportionally.

Bobtheman

Benicetomonty wrote: »

No point in blaming the ASTI here. It was made abundantly clear to members in my school by the president herself that unless there was cross union cooperation, there would be nobody taking industrial action. After the TUI and (especially) the INTO chose to ballot without a recommendation, the writing was on the wall, as, historically, no recommendation is the same as recommending a Yes vote.

Whilst there is a strong lpt cohort that is active on social media, here and elsewhere, the ASTI's failed campaign last time around showed everyone that those members are in a minority, and probably a significant minority. Im aware that a number of senior members defied all sorts of basic tenets of trade unionism in 2016 but in my own place and from what Ive heard anecdotally, the majority of post 2011 recruits chose to take the crumbs on offer from the Lansdowne rd agreement and desert the ASTI for the TUI. Their ex colleagues spent a couple of days on the picket line and several months repudiating the agreement for nothing. Frozen increments have become, retrospectively, a particularly bitter pill to swallow, and, truth be told, even if there was a no recommendation, there would be zero guarantee that it would be carried.

Il be voting no obviously. Would never occur to me to vote otherwise. But I can certainly understand why many like me will vote to accept. Until the vast, vast majority of LPTs are ready to bombard politicians, the media and union leadership into addressing the issue, pay equality wont happen. And, as the last 2 years have proven, we're nowhere near that right now. As such, appealing to or criticising pre 2011 folk and the leadership is pointless.

I agree with everything you wrote. I wrote to SC asking them to survey the NQT so at least us older members could be sure what newer members wanted. I would speculate majority-vast of NQTS wanted to take the crumbs. SC told me to please fxxx off.
I have no faith in my fellow members to continue action once started. I have no faith in SC to map a strategy. Once I gave up hope-I felt a lot better. Im voting YES

Sir123

Bobtheman wrote: »

I agree with everything you wrote. I wrote to SC asking them to survey the NQT so at least us older members could be sure what newer members wanted. I would speculate majority-vast of NQTS wanted to take the crumbs. SC told me to please fxxx off.
I have no faith in my fellow members to continue action once started. I have no faith in SC to map a strategy. Once I gave up hope-I felt a lot better. Im voting YES

I will be voting NO as will many of the LPTs and non LPTs in my school. However, I do see your point to a degree. Just because the INTO has rejected doesn't mean they will fight with us if we choose to go down that path.

Based on union official talk, CEC and SC members, I kinda got the impression that they tried to fight in 2016, got no support, had a failed strike and a yes vote now seems to brush some of that resentment under the carpet.
However, I disagree and I am an optimist and I believe that we mustn't give up. Let the INTO carry some weight on their shoulders and let us ASTI give them a helping hand.

This is my opinion, but if we vote to accept this "deal", we as teachers, both LPTs and non- LPTs, vote to fully implement a two tier pay system in this country for forever more.

I think the TUI did the wrong thing, shame on them, however we mustn't let Fempi get to us. I think the lack of support from TUI will make some members worried however, I am willing to forgo and increment as long as I am treated equally to the teacher next door to me, hence the restoration of one common payscale.

I urge all voters this week and next to really think about the future of the profession, for yourself, your colleagues and possibly your future children, nieces, nephews etc. We should not make history for doing the wrong thing. It will forever be remembered if we do. Vote NO.

Bobtheman

What is TUI position?

km79

Bobtheman wrote: »

What is TUI position?

Accepted

SligoBrewer

Bobtheman wrote: »

I agree with everything you wrote. I wrote to SC asking them to survey the NQT so at least us older members could be sure what newer members wanted. I would speculate majority-vast of NQTS wanted to take the crumbs. SC told me to please fxxx off.
I have no faith in my fellow members to continue action once started. I have no faith in SC to map a strategy. Once I gave up hope-I felt a lot better. Im voting YES

The vast majority of NQTs don't want to take the crumbs, thanks.

evolving_doors

Bobtheman wrote: »

I agree with everything you wrote. I wrote to SC asking them to survey the NQT so at least us older members could be sure what newer members wanted. I would speculate majority-vast of NQTS wanted to take the crumbs. SC told me to please fxxx off.
I have no faith in my fellow members to continue action once started. I have no faith in SC to map a strategy. Once I gave up hope-I felt a lot better. Im voting YES

You can abandon hope but it shouldn't mean that the principle you still believe in should be abandoned.