Why do TUI teachers not pay tax?

silver2020

The TUI are having teachers strike on Feb 4th.

The reason is that they claim a two tier pay system means that over 40 years of a teaching career one teacher is paid €100,000 more than another.

(don't you just love these "over 40 years in the future" arguments)

I had a look at the figures and it seems that if the figures is to be correct, then those earning that extra €100,000 must be paying no tax on it as it the gross amount they are quoting. And even then you would have to follow a very very specific path and have a crystal ball.



But sure why let facts get in the way of a big giant headline reading €100,000 and the annual "We're teachers - we strike" mantra

EmmetSpiceland

It’s a real shame that the teaching “unions” hold their members to ransom, forcing newly qualified teachers to join an organisation that only looks after the “old guard”.

Obviously, no one has to join up but if you don’t you are, effectively, left without an HR system and if anything changes for the better you’ll be left out in the cold.

The fact there’s more than one union in the first place just means more snouts in the “trough” for the career shop stewards. Unions were a great necessity back in the days when exploitation was rife and there was no “employment law” but now they are a lumbering dinosaur hellbent on slowing progress and making money.

silver2020

BTW - this is not a anti-teacher post. Its an anti-union post as I know plenty of teachers who despise their Unions and unfortunately have to follow what they say. And there's a lot of disquiet about how the voting is done - basically what the union says will ALWAYS be voted in.

The Rape of Lucretia

silver2020 wrote: »

BTW - this is not a anti-teacher post. Its an anti-union post as I know plenty of teachers who despise their Unions and unfortunately have to follow what they say. And there's a lot of disquiet about how the voting is done - basically what the union says will ALWAYS be voted in.

Yes. But its a 'union'. A union of teachers. They arent some outside egency imposed on them - the unions are a reflection of the teachers, and arent following what the unions say - teachers are following what the teachers say. What the teachers say will ALWAYS be voted in as it will be teachers voting.
Far too many union members of all persuasions hide behind the 'I dont agree with it but its the union' excuse. You are the union !

silver2020

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Yes. But its a 'union'. A union of teachers. They arent some outside egency imposed on them - the unions are a reflection of the teachers, and arent following what the unions say - teachers are following what the teachers say. What the teachers say will ALWAYS be voted in as it will be teachers voting.
Far too many union members of all persuasions hide behind the 'I dont agree with it but its the union' excuse. You are the union !

How many of those with votes are retired teachers?

Badly Drunk Boy

silver2020 wrote: »

How many of those with votes are retired teachers?

Why would retired teachers have a vote? I'm in a union in work, and when I stop working here, I'll stop paying my union dues because the union will no longer be representing me.

Is it different with teaching unions?

the beer revolu

It's perfectly normal to quote salaries in gross figures.
People pay different amounts of tax depending on their circumstances.

Winning_Stroke

silver2020 wrote: »

But sure why let facts get in the way of a big giant headline reading €100,000 and the annual "We're teachers - we strike" mantra

Pretty much and they'd be stupid not to. Look, I'd love to bash the teachers and their unions as much as the next boardsie, I'm no fan, but this is standard practice for any agitating group and they'd be morons not to use the big headline numbers and let their detractors argue the specifics.

Rhyme

Is this about the union screwing incoming members during the recession so the older members wouldn't have to take a pay cut? The union created the two tier system and are now annoyed by it? Go and shite. Should have taken the pay cut like most of the rest of the civil service and kept things equal.

Only solution I can see is to temporarily cut the pay of the older members who refused to take one then to make up the difference. I've two family members currently teaching and another training to be a teacher and looking at the starting pay before and after the recession is humiliating for the younger generation.

Jasper79

Well it was the existing teachers and their unions that screwed over the new entrants in a deal to not touch their salaries. Then after deal is done, oh this isn't fair on the new entrants they should be on the same pay.

Would the long serving teachers be willing to take the pay cut to boost up their new colleagues... my eye they would.

abbir

It was some crap by the union before. They agreed to the two-tier pay scale as it protected the older teachers i.e. the ones that were members of the union at the time. Now that a few years have passed and there are many new teachers that are now members and are affected by the union's previous decision, they will fight against this discrimination.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

silver2020 wrote: »

How many of those with votes are retired teachers?

Little or none.

seamus

the beer revolu wrote: »

It's perfectly normal to quote salaries in gross figures.
People pay different amounts of tax depending on their circumstances.

This. I'm not sure why the OP is making such a big fuss over it. If I earn 100k and you earn 100k, we don't necessarily pay the same tax on that 100k; You could have a stay-at-home spouse, I could make higher pension contributions, you might buy more expensive health insurance. And so on.

The only honest way to compare our salaries is using the gross figure, not the net.

Badly Drunk Boy

Badly Drunk Boy wrote: »

Why would retired teachers have a vote? I'm in a union in work, and when I stop working here, I'll stop paying my union dues because the union will no longer be representing me.

Is it different with teaching unions?

Well an increase in pay for a current teacher means an increase in pension for a retired teacher so while I don't think continue they pay union dues, the union certainly benefits them by negotiating pay increases etc.

Same across other public sector jobs too.

Btw I'm not saying this is a bad thing, I'm very much behind the public sector unlike many here.

rainbowtrout

silver2020 wrote: »

BTW - this is not a anti-teacher post. Its an anti-union post as I know plenty of teachers who despise their Unions and unfortunately have to follow what they say. And there's a lot of disquiet about how the voting is done - basically what the union says will ALWAYS be voted in.

Of course it's an anti teacher post. Your thread title states 'Why do TUI teachers not pay tax?' That's false. All teachers pay tax, and gross pay is always used to compare salaries. When you go for a job you're not told what you'll earn after tax, why would teachers be different.

No point you hiding behind a comment saying it's 'anti-union'. Your post is anti-teacher like so many other posts about teachers in AH.

Teachers do not have to follow their unions, we get balloted. If they choose not to vote, that's their choice. What the union recommends is not always passed by ballot.

I'm not sure any other profession in the country gets bashed as much as teachers on this forum.

silver2020

Badly Drunk Boy wrote: »

Why would retired teachers have a vote? I'm in a union in work, and when I stop working here, I'll stop paying my union dues because the union will no longer be representing me.

Is it different with teaching unions?

Teaching unions are different. You can be a retired member with many benefits

Vivian Wailing Verdict wrote: »

Little or none.

I can't say for definite on TUI, but in the ASTI the retired vote is very significant

Allow pay and conditions for new entrants to be battered then complain about the profession not being held up or treated properly. They want it both ways.

Geuze

I often wonder why the focus is always on the 10% less new entrants scales in teaching?

Surely across the entire PS, all new entrants are on a 10% lower scale?

thesimpsons

Geuze wrote: »

I often wonder why the focus is always on the 10% less new entrants scales in teaching?

Surely across the entire PS, all new entrants are on a 10% lower scale?

True. I work along side people in PS who are on a different rate due to when they commenced. In private industry its the exact same. I just don't get the way teachers harp on about it all the time - I don't think any other body of people do it.

Title is very misleading - everyone pays tax depending on their rate of pay and credits/allowances. Gross pay is always used when talking about salaries

rainbowtrout

thesimpsons wrote: »

True. I work along side people in PS who are on a different rate due to when they commenced. In private industry its the exact same. I just don't get the way teachers harp on about it all the time - I don't think any other body of people do it.

Because of course the person who has worked 20 years get paid more than the person who has worked one. There is a payscale for that, which reflects that level of experience. However the person who started in 2010 on the first point of the old scale got a different rate of pay to the person who started in 2011 on the first point of the scale as there are two different scales. It's not comparing levels of experience, it's comparing two different pay scales and being paid a different salary for the same experience.

thesimpsons

Clearly we aren't talking about equal pay for a 20 year experienced person vs one year experience. No one expects their pay to be equal.

Its two different pay scales set up in two different ecomonic environments which was agreed upon by the unions at the time. There are just 4 months difference in my experience and my colleagues, but we are on different pay rates. At this stage after 10 years we both have the same work experience and of course we'd both like to be on the same rate (higher rate obviously) but that was the agreed rate and scale we signed up for.

Salary Negotiator

the beer revolu wrote: »

It's perfectly normal to quote salaries in gross figures.
People pay different amounts of tax depending on their circumstances.

They’ve been known to quote the net figure though when it suits them.

Edgware

silver2020 wrote: »

BTW - this is not a anti-teacher post. Its an anti-union post as I know plenty of teachers who despise their Unions and unfortunately have to follow what they say. And there's a lot of disquiet about how the voting is done - basically what the union says will ALWAYS be voted in.

Oldest rule in trade unonism. Never have a vote unless you know the result beforehand

enricoh

Teachers starting salary is 38k on day one iirc, and they're not happy about it!
They want Bertie back to throw money at the unions for every whim! Jog on.

enricoh

enricoh wrote: »

Teachers starting salary is 38k on day one iirc, and they're not happy about it!
They want Bertie back to throw money at the unions for every whim! Jog on.

That's why I'll be voting Fine Gael who'll try rein in the greed at least a bit.

With the amount of holidays they have their already high salaries go even further. They have 3 months where they don't incur childcare or commuting costs.

beggars_bush

enricoh wrote: »

Teachers starting salary is 38k on day one iirc, and they're not happy about it!
They want Bertie back to throw money at the unions for every whim! Jog on.

Is that too high or low for you?

A third level qualification and then another year or two to get probated on the job
And then maybe get a full time contract

beggars_bush

salonfire wrote: »

That's why I'll be voting Fine Gael who'll try rein in the greed at least a bit.

With the amount of holidays they have their already high salaries go even further. They have 3 months where they don't incur childcare or commuting costs.

You know you can go back and train to be a teacher

Rhyme

beggars_bush wrote: »

You know you can go back and train to be a teacher

That's the issue. People want to gripe but nobody wants to have to deal with 30-something kids. As well, these people are laying the educational foundation for the next generations adults, they have huge responsibility and should be compensated. I will admit that teachers should face a certain amount of scrutiny regarding the quality of their teaching but I do think the time of people becoming teachers because 'its an easy pay-cheque' and the power-trip and thus being useless educators is on the way out.

Snow Garden

Teachers are the most spoilt of all the public servants. Massive salaries. Excessive holidays. Way too many allowances. Loads of nixers (e.g. election counts). The bad teachers (and there are so so many) cannot get fired.

The new teachers on lower entrance salaries are correct to feel aggrieved. However the solution is to reduce the salaries of the older teachers. Those salaries were benchmarked up incorrectly by Bertie during a false boom. They didn't reflect reality then and with a massive natonal debt, they don't reflect reality now.