Building Monentum: what are your thoughts?

ThePiedPiper

I’m surprised there isn’t any discussion on the proposal as yet.

My wife and I are both on the post 2011 pay scales, so this issue is very relevant to us both. On the plus side, the skipping of a third point and the various adjustments to the scales over the past few years have brought the basic salary more or less in line with the pre 2010 scales. The Union is doing the hard sell on this, telling us that equality has now been achieved. Of course they are. This has rumbled on for a decade, the public finances are in a horrible state, it’s as good as it’s going to get. That’s the one side of it, the part of me that just wants to accept that there’s equality from 2021 onwards until I retire.

However, what about the blatant discrimination thousands of younger teachers suffered for the past 10 years? I don’t want to sicken myself by calculating exactly how much we, as a couple, have lost over this time, but it would be close to six figures, I imagine. Sure, teacher bashing is a very popular pastime, and we’re constantly reminded that we work less hours and have better pension entitlements than most. The old pension scheme indeed was excellent, perhaps overly generous. The new scheme? Not so much.

Teachers have not been united over the last decade. Older teachers said to my face that they deserved to be on a better pay scale as they were more experienced, and wasn’t the salary just fine? So, it’s little surprise that the ‘more experienced’ teachers, the union and the media would point to this pay deal as a great deal for ‘young teachers’. Is it though?

The problem with voting yes to it is that it implies acceptance of the losses of the last 10 years, that issues not addressed don’t ever need to be. The problem with voting no is that’s it’s probably pointless. The union won’t demand redress for loss of earnings, the government would probably never agree to it in any case. As we have done for 10 years, should we just accept it, and move on?

What are your thoughts?

r93kaey5p2izun

I think you need to clarify which union and which sector. Only INTO is selling this a good deal. My experience of "older" teachers has been the opposite, I have to say. My thoughts are that no deal should be accepted unless it delivers pay equality from this point forward, at the very least, as a starting point.

Treppen

Iker Miniature Vacancy wrote: »

I think you need to clarify which union and which sector. Only INTO is selling this a good deal. My experience of "older" teachers has been the opposite, I have to say. My thoughts are that no deal should be accepted unless it delivers pay equality from this point forward, at the very least, as a starting point.

Totally agree, INTO are the only ones taking the soup. BTW voting yes precludes unions from striking. Which is how junior teachers got shafted in the first place (not because of any Union vote). INTO have been approached numerous times by the ASTI (and probably TUI ) asking for solidarity across all unions on teacher pay, but I guess they're happy with their lot. I do wonder is it because a larger % of INTO are principals and it's relatively easier to get a full time position! I just don't get their willingness to bow down every time.

Wages might be back in line after a few Pascale jumps but your pension is indeed shocking. Focus on that more so the pay. You'll get literally feicall extra by paying into a new teacher pension scheme with career average. You would be better off taking your pension contributions and putting it in solidarity bonds.

I have my doubts op is a genuine teacher if they are describing the pre 2011 pension as overly generous.

In other news...
How about an 81k payrise!

https://www.thejournal.ie/department-health-role-salary-hike-michael-mcgrath-5343229-Feb2021/

rainbowtrout

ThePiedPiper wrote: »

Teachers have not been united over the last decade. Older teachers said to my face that they deserved to be on a better pay scale as they were more experienced, and wasn’t the salary just fine? So, it’s little surprise that the ‘more experienced’ teachers, the union and the media would point to this pay deal as a great deal for ‘young teachers’. Is it though?

I think whatever the outcome of this ballot that there isn't a hope in hell of any government now or in the future back-paying teachers for the last 10 years. It's never going to happen.

The comment above: I have never met any teacher who has said anything remotely like that. Are you sure it wasn't in the context of being on a higher point on the pay scale?

What I do see is younger teachers in my staffroom saying that they have no representation and when I suggest that they join the union (we have both TUI and ASTI in my school), they say 'no, that's too expensive, not spending money on that'. And then they wonder why they have no representation.

ThePiedPiper

Yes, I’m primary teacher. I don’t understand why someone suspects I’m not a genuine teacher just because I think the old pension scheme was too generous. I worked in the private sector for 10 years before becoming a teacher, and as both of my parents are retired teachers, I know how generous the old scheme was. In any case, that’s my position.

I’m no fan of the INTO brass whatsoever, and for many years didn’t join the union as I felt it wasn’t really bringing the fight in the same way the ASTI was on the pay issue. There was some talk though about adding a vote on the industrial action issue to the pay agreement vote, but this obviously didn’t get done.

I can’t make any excuses for the relative ambivalence of post 2011 primary teachers, as I, like the majority, have not taken enough action over the last eight years. My younger self believed that the benchmarking back in the mid 2000s was a contributing factor to the economic meltdown in the 2010s, but somehow always thought that the austerity focused on new entrants would eventually be reversed.

It’s interesting getting the perspective of secondary teachers on this issue, as it really is being presented to the primary union as a major victory. Maybe I need to put my cynical hat back on again.

ThePiedPiper

rainbowtrout wrote: »

The comment above: I have never met any teacher who has said anything remotely like that. Are you sure it wasn't in the context of being on a higher point on the pay scale?
.

Genuinely, it’s exactly as I described it, only worse. After about 5 or 6 years of never once bringing up the issue in my staff room of the unequal pay scale, I brought it up. I was accused of being jealous, of whinging by one staff member, then another jumped in to tell me what I said above. Brutal attitude, but it taught me a lot. This wasn’t the type of union and collective strength that existed 30-40 years ago. But if the ASTI threaten strikes, they’re labeled as militants.

am_zarathustra

I've certainly never experienced that at secondary level, most of the older staff are 100% on the side of the younger staff in getting better/equal pay. Increments aren't the same as unequal scales, maybe their was confusion around this?

I'm lucky enough to be on the middle pension, not the post 2012 over though I'm on the new pay scale, thanks to a very sound principal during my dip year, the difference is shocking. Pre 2005 was probably too generous, but mostly because it was from a bygone era where people didn't live as long. The middle pension is about right I feel, you nee to put the years in but you can buy a few back and the rates are solid, the new pension is garbage.....as the poster said above, you'd be better off putting it in solidarity bonds

ThePiedPiper

Am_zarathrusa, you were lucky with the dip year issue. The opposite happened my wife. She had been teaching since 2004 in a private special school, which the department only took under their umbrella about 2 months after the March 2010 cutoff. The principal at the time was moving heaven and earth trying to get it done before the new scales came in but it didn’t happen. A couple of days subbing in another school would have done the job for all teachers in that school, which really just adds to the immense frustration.

I’ve started on AVCs a couple of years ago, accepting that the pension won’t be adequate. It’s just hard to know if voting No will have any impact on pensions. In an era now of covid induced public finance deficits, I can’t envisage anything better.

Treppen

ThePiedPiper wrote: »

Yes, I’m primary teacher. I don’t understand why someone suspects I’m not a genuine teacher just because I think the old pension scheme was too generous. I worked in the private sector for 10 years before becoming a teacher, and as both of my parents are retired teachers, I know how generous the old scheme was. In any case, that’s my position.

I’m no fan of the INTO brass whatsoever, and for many years didn’t join the union as I felt it wasn’t really bringing the fight in the same way the ASTI was on the pay issue. There was some talk though about adding a vote on the industrial action issue to the pay agreement vote, but this obviously didn’t get done.

I can’t make any excuses for the relative ambivalence of post 2011 primary teachers, as I, like the majority, have not taken enough action over the last eight years. My younger self believed that the benchmarking back in the mid 2000s was a contributing factor to the economic meltdown in the 2010s, but somehow always thought that the austerity focused on new entrants would eventually be reversed..

It’s interesting getting the perspective of secondary teachers on this issue, as it really is being presented to the primary union as a major victory. Maybe I need to put my cynical hat back on again.

Seriously! You do realise there was the minor matter of banks overlending tens of billions.. And from what I saw it wasn't public sector workers who went insane buying properties and overborrowing.

But yet I pay 400pm additional tax for ASC and USC to sort out the bailout bill for private sector failings. And took the paycuts on top. Benchmarking has well and truly been unwound.

Not to mention the extra hours teachers have to work Croke Park and S&S (which also deprives new teachers like yourself of sub work).

As I said, forget about your pay, if you came to teaching late your pension is the real timebomb for post 2014 teachers.

ThePiedPiper

Treppen, in my old job, I had a few clients who were teachers, with multiple investment properties. This was commonplace. Anyone in Ireland who took on three, four or five additional mortgages contributed to the meltdown. The banks contributed, weak governance by financial regulators contributed, and overstretching on benchmarking had an impact.

I agree entirely with your other point. The salary issue is pretty much sorted out. The couple of sentences about pensions that the INTO put in their email displays how little emphasis is put on it.

Treppen

ThePiedPiper wrote: »

Genuinely, it’s exactly as I described it, only worse. After about 5 or 6 years of never once bringing up the issue in my staff room of the unequal pay scale, I brought it up. I was accused of being jealous, of whinging by one staff member, then another jumped in to tell me what I said above. Brutal attitude, but it taught me a lot. This wasn’t the type of union and collective strength that existed 30-40 years ago. But if the ASTI threaten strikes, they’re labeled as militants.

I'm kind of shocked that your colleagues would put you down like that. Considering they work in education they sound very ignorant of what's going on. Only way the INTO will get any progress is from the bottom up, from what I see of the ASTI there is an ethos of questioning everything and not selling the profession short .
Have a look at the INTO grassroots group glór , they're not so quiet. https://glorteachers.wordpress.com/

byhookorbycrook

INTO branch AGM via Zoom last week. Very poor turnout / the same when face to face . People need to get involved with their union and make their voices heard .

ThePiedPiper

The last INTO branch meeting we had a couple of weeks ago had over 300 at it, so much so that it nearly broke Zoom. Building Momentum was only given about 5 minutes I’d say. Issues I had asked to be addressed at the previous meeting regarding the agreement were mentioned very quickly, more or less to say that they wouldn’t be dealt with at this time within sectoral bargaining.

Before the extraordinary attendance at the recent branch meeting, its a fact that attendance at meetings was extremely low. A big part of me regrets not joining years ago, as I’ve no problem in challenging accepted consensus.

mtoutlemonde

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

INTO branch AGM via Zoom last week. Very poor turnout / the same when face to face . People need to get involved with their union and make their voices heard .

I've saying that with years - the union is only as strong as the people who attend meetings regularly. As people retire, who takes over?? I go to my branch meetings to inform myself and shock people when I tell them something they should know re pay, circulars etc. It's only one evening every 6-8 weeks - even the social aspect was good. I have seen the same faces at meetings for years.

In general, not in response to byhookorbycrooks post.

Backing up my union, when we decided to strike for equal pay - a lot of young teachers took off to the TUI to secure a CID - the I'm alright Jack approach was and is sickening so don't go telling me the older teachers sold out the younger ones.

I feel sorry for you OP to have to work with such ignorance. I always got my advice from the older teachers and I hope I inform and support new teachers. Like rainbowtrout, I encourage young teachers to join the union, some do but once the free year is up, they're gone and who do they turn to when things happen?? And they happen ...

rainbowtrout

ThePiedPiper wrote: »

Yes, I’m primary teacher. I don’t understand why someone suspects I’m not a genuine teacher just because I think the old pension scheme was too generous. I worked in the private sector for 10 years before becoming a teacher, and as both of my parents are retired teachers, I know how generous the old scheme was. In any case, that’s my position.

I’m no fan of the INTO brass whatsoever, and for many years didn’t join the union as I felt it wasn’t really bringing the fight in the same way the ASTI was on the pay issue. There was some talk though about adding a vote on the industrial action issue to the pay agreement vote, but this obviously didn’t get done.

I can’t make any excuses for the relevant ambivalence of post 2011 primary teachers, as I, like the majority, have not taken enough action over the last eight years. My younger self believed that the benchmarking back in the mid 2000s was a contributing factor to the economic meltdown in the 2010s, but somehow always thought that the austerity focused on new entrants would eventually be reversed.

It’s interesting getting the perspective of secondary teachers on this issue, as it really is being presented to the primary union as a major victory. Maybe I need to put my cynical hat back on again.

Something that never seems to be considered when looking at teacher pensions is that teachers are typically (certainly back in the day) paying into a pension from the day they start working. No choice in the matter as you obviously know. Most people in the private sector do not pay into their pensions for 40 years. People in the private sector can choose not to pay into a pension at all, or freeze payments if they need to. Public sector can't do that. I've been paying into mine since the age of 22. I'd say the number of 22 year olds in private sector paying into a pension are practically non existent.

Also if you do out a spreadsheet to calculate what the pension is worth based on number of years v. final salary (i.e. for those who leave teaching without the full complement of hours), it takes about 16 years to break even. That's getting a pension equivalent to the state pension of €12-13k per year. I'm already paying PRSI to cover that.

I don't think benchmarking contributed to the collapse of the economy. Giving people mortgages 10 times their salary, and all sorts of dodgy banking practices had a far bigger effect.

Watching teacher friends earning a similar salary to me, being offered 100k more in 2006 on their mortgage offers, than I was offered in 2003 had a far bigger effect than any pay rise.

There may have been teachers buying extra properties but I wouldn't say that was as a result of massive salaries. Banks were lending to anyone who walked in off the street who gave them a payslip.


This particular case (not a teacher) has always stuck with me. Who lends €32 million to someone who has no experience in property development, let alone building a shopping centre in a rural county?

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/shopkeeper-pursued-over-32m-loan-1.870578

Benchmarking probably contributed an overall payrise of about 15% to teachers during the boom. That's not a huge amount of money. Even if you take somewhere in the middle of the payscale, it amounts to about €5-7k. An extra 5k does not buy 2-3 extra houses. Reckless lending does.

I got my mortgage just before everything went mental, and the bank stress tested and it was basically, can you afford to pay back the loan if it goes from 600 to 650 a month. Two years later my friends on 40k a year are being offered 100% mortgages 6 times their salary with a minimum of 1200 a month in repayments. They were also offered the option of rolling car loans and furniture purchases into the mortgage. Teachers who did buy properties to rent didn't buy them because they were teachers, they bought them because anyone who approached a bank was getting a mortgage.

ThePiedPiper wrote: »

Genuinely, it’s exactly as I described it, only worse. After about 5 or 6 years of never once bringing up the issue in my staff room of the unequal pay scale, I brought it up. I was accused of being jealous, of whinging by one staff member, then another jumped in to tell me what I said above. Brutal attitude, but it taught me a lot. This wasn’t the type of union and collective strength that existed 30-40 years ago. But if the ASTI threaten strikes, they’re labeled as militants.

I haven't taught in a primary school, but that's never been my experience in secondary. I'd wonder is that the general vibe in your school or is it more common in primary.


Regarding INTO generally. I can't honestly remember the last time INTO went on strike and I've been teaching 20 years. I don't know if it's just that they don't have the stomach for it, or because of the slightly different nature of the job that they accept the conditions because they have full time jobs. It's not the same as secondary where you hope there are jobs in your subject and then you hope you get close to full hours. You don't get that in the primary sector.

History Queen

Building momentum only applies to serving members so the door is wide open to post 2021 teachers being on another pay scale. To me a vote yes is selling out future colleagues. Also it does not address pay inequality.

I am qualified since 2013, on pre 2011 payscale
as I was moved back on it 2 years ago due to work I did in a primary school years ago, but im on the new pension.

Vote No.

rainbowtrout

mtoutlemonde wrote: »

I've saying that with years - the union is only as strong as the people who attend meetings regularly. As people retire, who takes over?? I go to my branch meetings to inform myself and shock people when I tell them something they should know re pay, circulars etc. It's only one evening every 6-8 weeks - even the social aspect was good. I have seen the same faces at meetings for years.

In general, not in response to byhookorbycrooks post.

Backing up my union, when we decided to strike for equal pay - a lot of young teachers took off to the TUI to secure a CID - the I'm alright Jack approach was and is sickening so don't go telling me the older teachers sold out the younger ones.

I feel sorry for you OP to have to work with such ignorance. I always got my advice from the older teachers and I hope I inform and support new teachers. Like rainbowtrout, I encourage young teachers to join the union, some do but once the free year is up, they're gone and who do they turn to when things happen?? And they happen ...

All of this. I read circulars and regularly I get new staff knocking on my door saying 'I was told you're the person who knows about pay/conditions/rights... around here'.

We've had ballots over previous pay agreements, croke park hours etc, and people have sat opposite me in the staffroom going 'Oh I don't understand any of this, I'm just not going to bother voting'. I don't understand why people play dumb. My response usually is 'this affects your pay and conditions for the rest of your career, do you not have an interest in that?'

Admittedly I don't attend branch meetings as often as I should, but I am in contact with local reps who are very familiar with the goings on in my school. I was at the last branch meeting before Christmas and aside from the committee members etc, there was me and one other person at it. People have a very cushy life so much so they are willing to allow their conditions to be eroded, but then wonder why things are getting worse.

My principal is not the easiest to deal with, and new staff are not happy with conditions. I have warned them that a tipping point will be reached in the next 5-10 years where more of the staff are not in the union than are, and that will be when things get really bad, because there will be no one to fight their case because they are not willing to pay the subscription, but they want everything for free, and if it is something that doesn't affect them directly they are not willing to fight for the common good.

I won't be around to see that day and I can't say that I'll be too worried.

ThePiedPiper

My point about benchmarking in the mid 2000s was that it was done using a property bubble economy as the yardstick. The property bubble wasn’t sustainable, and as it transpired, the salary scales of the public service weren’t either. If we accept that the public finances are again in a very bad place, maybe Building Momentum is as good as it’s going to get at this stage. Having entered the workforce in 2003 and working in a financial sector that many would assume was well paid, it took me 10 years to reach a salary that a 2021 graduate teacher commences at. There’s no justification for complaining about salary really in that respect.

If, as I suspect, a lot of us have an issue with pensions as opposed to salary, is it likely that anything will change with a No vote? That ship probably sailed years ago.

Regarding a couple of my colleagues, I would say they are not typical of the attitude of all teachers in my school, nor of primary teachers in general. But, if two colleagues can have that attitude, it’s despairing. It has in a strange way benefited me, because I’ve learned that if I want change, or my voice heard, I need to make it heard. My parents were very active in the union from the 60s until the 90s, indeed I think they actually met at an INTO meeting. The union they remember is not the one that exists today. But, as a couple of you said, the union is only as strong as the people who attend and participate in meetings.

ThePiedPiper

History Queen wrote: »

Building momentum only applies to serving members so the door is wide open to post 2021 teachers being on another pay scale. To me a vote yes is selling out future colleagues. Also it does not address pay inequality.

I am qualified since 2013, on pre 2011 payscale
as I was moved back on it 2 years ago due to work I did in a primary school years ago, but im on the new pension.

Vote No.

History Queen, I’m not in any way trying to be difficult, I’m just looking for information. In what way is it selling out future teachers? And when you say it doesn’t achieve equality, do you mean in relation to pensions or allowances?

History Queen

ThePiedPiper wrote: »

History Queen, I’m not in any way trying to be difficult, I’m just looking for information. In what way is it selling out future teachers? And when you say it doesn’t achieve equality, do you mean in relation to pensions or allowances?

It doesn't achieve equality in relation to pay, allowances or pension. It sells out future teachers in exactly the same way as CrokePark sold out post 2011 teachers by only ensuring that the conditions of existing members are protected. That mistake was made unconsciously before and unions were hammered for it. If it is made now it is made in the full knowledge that future members are not protected. I can't live with that.

Alex86Eire

I'd have had a few comments alright from older teachers when pay ballots arise saying they don't care about the LPTs as so many of them jumped ship from ASTI - TUI, they don't attend branch meetings etc.

As someone who attends branch meetings it is annoying. Those people have been very much in the minority though thankfully.

mtoutlemonde

Alex86Eire wrote: »

I'd have had a few comments alright from older teachers when pay ballots arise saying they don't care about the LPTs as so many of them jumped ship from ASTI - TUI, they don't attend branch meetings etc.

As someone who attends branch meetings it is annoying. Those people have been very much in the minority though thankfully.

When it comes to it - there should only be one teacher union for post primary - it would stop this kind of talk. I'm the youngest at my branch meetings and I'm teaching a while. Young teachers just are not being educated on the importance of joining a union. I think I read here that a certain home ec training college was not allowing their students to join a union while on placement. Madness.

scooby77

INTO has accepted Building Momentum by 80.6% yes to 14.9% no with 59.1% turnout.

Smacruairi

The amount of spinbots the into had for a yes vote was incredible

rainbowtrout

Smacruairi wrote: »

The amount of spinbots the into had for a yes vote was incredible

To be fair INTO rarely reject proposals/go on strike, it's not that surprising really.

Treppen

scooby77 wrote: »

INTO has accepted Building Momentum by 80.6% yes to 14.9% no with 59.1% turnout.

Is it any wonder.

I think the INTO got a hop when Norma announced schools were going to open in January. Of course the INTO 100% agree initially. But judging by all the threats to leave from INTO members on VFT they sat up straight fairly lively... But of course left it to the ASTI to give an outright no.

I wonder some day will there be a real tipping point in INTO.

Smacruairi

I'm secondary, the sister is primary, and it's like chalk and cheese in terms of staffrooms approach to the issue. Secondary far more aware of the deal, oldee members dissatisfied and as you see by asti result, far more militant.

Primary seems to be clueless young ones in the into who don't really care and just listen to what they're told in the primary teaching blogs they read, fill of the type of DES shills who just want to pad out their cv to get out of the classroom. Sorry to wirelessdude and all the other primary teachers here who are very much aware of what's going on but I had to actually explain the craic to the sister and she said her staffroom didn't really care?

joebloggs32

The TUI will also be recomending a no vote.

They have not voted yet as they have always had ballots in their workplace. They are currently trying to gather up postal addresses for their members to allow for the possibility of a postal ballot.
The result will also be a rejection.

The INTO are going to try and put the additional sectoral money into their principals pockets.
As the INTO had a much higher proportion of principals in their membership, and many of them actually holding active roles in the union, its not surprising that they have decided to welcome the agreement with open arms.

Sir123

I’m absolutely raging with INTO, yet not surprised one bit as they have never stood up for post 2011 teachers.

I suppose ASTI will be left on their own. Only hope is that TUI will follow suit and actually join forces with us for once. We have to work together and not against each other. Co-ordination is key.

Shame on the INTO and John Boyle on their continued media platform to push for a YES vote and also for scaremongering teachers that “may not get that increment skip”.

I’ve been silent on here for a while and I’m furious today with INTO. They have no backbone whatsoever. If they lost about 2-3,000 union subscriptions would they think differently I wonder? 😡

Mardy Bum

The INTO is a right wing organisation that masquerades as a union. I would suggest that the majority of its senior leadership would totally reject the idea of labelling themselves as left wing which is deeply problematic if you are leading a UNION.

ThePiedPiper

My wife and I, both INTO post 2011 entrants, voted No. When I started this thread, it was coming from a position of a vacuum of information given to primary teachers. There was no objective unbiased views on the agreement, and at the branch meetings when I put forward a couple of questions, they were brushed aside.

I’m not surprised it’s played out like this. For years, it’s exactly why I felt like our union didn’t have a care for new entrants. They’ll like to say they have alright, and try to preach that everything achieved on the equality issue has been because of their hard work. Unfortunately, there are just too many people completely uninterested in it, and we’ve been let down again.

Thanks to everyone for your informed opinions, it’s a sad state of affairs that primary teachers need to go to boards for objective advice.

scooby77

Seemingly a big sticking point for ASTI and secondary TUI was restoration of old H.Dip allowance for post 2011 entrants.
Primary never got that anyway so irrelevant.

Sir123

scooby77 wrote: »

Seemingly a big sticking point for ASTI and secondary TUI was restoration of old H.Dip allowance for post 2011 entrants.
Primary never got that anyway so irrelevant.

That’s very true and I think it should be restored. It’s hard to believe that 10 years later that we’re still in this mess.

On the bright side, at least those of us in ASTI also rejected these “new initiatives” that INTO gladly accepted.

Sir123

ThePiedPiper wrote: »

My wife and I, both INTO post 2011 entrants, voted No. When I started this thread, it was coming from a position of a vacuum of information given to primary teachers. There was no objective unbiased views on the agreement, and at the branch meetings when I put forward a couple of questions, they were brushed aside.

I’m not surprised it’s played out like this. For years, it’s exactly why I felt like our union didn’t have a care for new entrants. They’ll like to say they have alright, and try to preach that everything achieved on the equality issue has been because of their hard work. Unfortunately, there are just too many people completely uninterested in it, and we’ve been let down again.

Thanks to everyone for your informed opinions, it’s a sad state of affairs that primary teachers need to go to boards for objective advice.

I agree with you 100%. John Boyle wouldn’t even blink an eyelid at any of his lesser paid teachers. Only alternative is a mass exodus of members that actually makes INTO question their direction and their members’ dissatisfaction. Unless this happens, the continuation of INTO rolling over to proposals is going to last forever more.

Sad day for the profession.

Treppen

Sir123 wrote: »

I agree with you 100%. John Boyle wouldn’t even blink an eyelid at any of his lesser paid teachers. Only alternative is a mass exodus of members that actually makes INTO question their direction and their members’ dissatisfaction. Unless this happens, the continuation of INTO rolling over to proposals is going to continue forever more.

Sad day for the profession.

INTO were all ready to reopen schools fully in January until they saw threats of exodus to forsa. See how quick the leaders changed their tune.