The annual ASTI Easter strike threat

Quin_Dub

yabadabado wrote: »

Sorry , Michael Martin said in his address last week that they indended to have 80% of the adult population vaccinated by end of June .

The minister for health said similar,if the pharma companies keep the supply as promised, I'd see no reason why all teachers wouldn't be vaccinated by the time they return to the class room considering the youngest teachers would be probably 21/ 22 ?

If you go to that Omni-calculator site and manually adjust the vaccination rate you can see the impact of the increased supply.

The default on the site is a rate ~18k/day - They were averaging over 25k/day all last week and hit close to 30k on one of the days.

At the default rate of 18k it's saying I'll get my 1st shot in mid-August (I'm 50) , but if I adjust the daily rate to 25k/day it moves forward to the end of June and at 30k/day it's the start of June.

Even if I change my age to 25 , at 30k/day I'd get the 1st dose at the beginning of August and the 2nd at the end.

It also doesn't account for the impact of the J&J shot coming on stream shortly, which as it's a single dose will increase the speed of rollout still further. And as I understand it , the younger age groups are more likely to be getting the J&J dose.

History Queen

Lillyfae wrote: »

They're not the majority of teachers, and the risk has proven to be low thus far. Has even one teacher picked Covid-19 up at school and been seriously ill or hospitalized by it?



Where is the misinformation about the ASTI threatening strike action? It's great that you contact your own union directly, but when the union makes statements on behalf of their members it has to be assumed that that is what their members want. If it's not then the union is unfit for purpose. The negative attitude is borne out of the representation of the unions much of the time. If that's not the narrative that the majority of teachers hold then the union is lying- is that the case? Why aren't members leaving the ASTI in their droves if the ASTI are totally at odds with their members?

I'm not a member of the ASTI so I can't answer your questions. I didn't say there was misinformation about the ASTI threatening strike action.

Lillyfae

History Queen wrote: »

I'm not a member of the ASTI so I can't answer your questions. I didn't say there was misinformation about the ASTI threatening strike action.

Well this is a thread about the ASTI threatening a strike. Do you agree that an ASTI statement might give the impression that they are representing their members wishes? Would it be a massive stretch to think that the general public might form an opinion about ASTI teachers based on ASTI actions? If they ballot their members and their members vote to strike, would it be a fair assumption that ASTI teachers feel that they should be prioritised for vaccination ahead of more vulnerable groups?

History Queen

Lillyfae wrote: »

Well this is a thread about the ASTI threatening a strike. Do you agree that an ASTI statement might give the impression that they are representing their members wishes? Would it be a massive stretch to think that the general public might form an opinion about ASTI teachers based on ASTI actions? If they ballot their members and their members vote to strike, would it be a fair assumption that ASTI teachers feel that they should be prioritised for vaccination ahead of more vulnerable groups?

Seriously... stop. The ballot has to be conducted first. There are several forms of industrial action up to and including strike action but NONE of them will happen if the ballot doesn't pass first. Asking a question of members does not constitute a decision.

I have no interest in defending this. I am not here as your personal sounding board on all things education. I'm allowed have an opinion and express it without being hounded to answer all your questions. What vulnerable groups are ASTI asking to be prioritised ahead of?

meeeeh

I was under the impression that they will ballot for industrial action not that they will strike. They announced something similar a few times in last 12 months. It's the most toothless threat. Even if they vote for strike half of their members will get at least first dose before the strike and I very much doubt they will have much of an appetite to strike. At this stage it would be best to just ignore strike threats regarding vaccines or other covid actions because they won't happen.

Lillyfae

History Queen wrote: »

Seriously... stop. The ballot has to be conducted first. There are several forms of industrial action up to and including strike action but NONE of them will happen if the ballot doesn't pass first. Asking a question of members does not constitute a decision.

I have no interest in defending this. I am not here as your personal sounding board on all things education. I'm allowed have an opinion and express it without being hounded to answer all your questions. What vulnerable groups are ASTI asking to be prioritised ahead of?

I'm asking your opinion on the ASTI strike action- you're not giving any opinion on it. The ASTI are asking for their members to be prioritised- that would mean a low risk 25 year old teacher would be ahead of a high risk 55 year old any person. That is prioritisation ahead of more at risk people. Someone more at risk would be bumped down the list.

From today's news:

"In a joint statement, the three unions said: “The motion will seek to commit the unions to work together to demand vaccine prioritisation for teachers. Should that fail, the motion will mandate the unions to explore any and all options, up to and including industrial action.”"

jrosen

I hope they dont strike but I always felt teachers should have been a priority when it came to vaccinations so I cant say im surprised by the recent developments. I do think anyone who is working in situations where they are exposed to large numbers of people who are going to be typically unvaccinated should be vaccinated before someone who can work from home.
The skeptic in me thinks this is more down to ease of rollout and to avoid the future uproar when its discovered how many people managed to wriggle their way into being vaccinated ahead of their time.

meeeeh

Lillyfae wrote: »

I'm asking your opinion on the ASTI strike action- you're not giving any opinion on it. The ASTI are asking for their members to be prioritised- that would mean a low risk 25 year old teacher would be ahead of a high risk 55 year old any person. That is prioritisation ahead of more at risk people. Someone more at risk would be bumped down the list.

From today's news:

"In a joint statement, the three unions said: “The motion will seek to commit the unions to work together to demand vaccine prioritisation for teachers. Should that fail, the motion will mandate the unions to explore any and all options, up to and including industrial action.”"

I don't think that statement implies they will strike. It basically says that if you don't give us what we want we will possibly ask our members if they possibly want to strike. And if they say yes we will maybe strike.

That being said whoever is doing especially ASTI media strategy should be fired.

History Queen

Lillyfae wrote: »

I'm asking your opinion on the ASTI strike action- you're not giving any opinion on it. The ASTI are asking for their members to be prioritised- that would mean a low risk 25 year old teacher would be ahead of a high risk 55 year old any person. That is prioritisation ahead of more at risk people. Someone more at risk would be bumped down the list.

From today's news:

"In a joint statement, the three unions said: “The motion will seek to commit the unions to work together to demand vaccine prioritisation for teachers. Should that fail, the motion will mandate the unions to explore any and all options, up to and including industrial action.”"

There is NO STRIKE ACTION seriously! Read the bloody quote you yourself just posted.


And they are not looking to be prioritised ahead of high risk 55 year olds? Where is your source for that? They are looking to retain the prioritsation they had under the previous outline which was (rightly) behind high risk people.

blanch152

The real hypocrisy of the teacher unions is yet to be seen on this issue. Come September, if a school attempts to dismiss a teacher who has refused to be vaccinated and is putting everyone else in the school at risk, the teacher unions will be up in arms defending that teacher.

Lillyfae

History Queen wrote: »

There is NO STRIKE ACTION seriously! Read the bloody quote you yourself just posted.

A strike is a form of industrial action, what do you think the three teacher's unions are proposing as this form of industrial action?

History Queen wrote: »

And they are not looking to be prioritised ahead of high risk 55 year olds? Where is your source for that? They are looking to retain the prioritsation they had under the previous outline which was rightly, behind high risk people.

But someone who is 55 will always be higher risk than someone younger than that. Under the prioritisation proposed, someone lower risk will definitely be vaccinated ahead of someone who is higher risk because age is a big risk factor. That is what you don't seem to be acknowledging here.

Sunny Disposition

Met a 70 year old man with asthma who is in a customer facing role this morning. Still has no idea when he’ll get the vaccination. Teachers need to cop the fck on here.

Pussyhands

If the government caves and gives in to teachers I've had it with them.

Tail is wagging the dog if this happens.

History Queen

Lillyfae wrote: »

A strike is a form of industrial action, what do you think the three teacher's unions are proposing as this form of industrial action?



But someone who is 55 will always be higher risk than someone younger than that. Under the prioritisation proposed, someone lower risk will definitely be vaccinated ahead of someone who is higher risk because age is a big risk factor. That is what you don't seem to be acknowledging here.

Lilyfae, I think we should leave it here as we are going to derail the thread. You are doing your usual twisting of words and ignoring when someone points out that you are incorrect. You used the term "high risk", if you look at the vaccination schedule you will see that 18-64 year olds at high risk were being prioritised ahead of teachers (as they should be).

If you mean a 55 year old is at higher risk than a 25 year old purely because of age, fine, I accept that. Which is why I accept the new roll out. As I have said.

As regards your misunderstanding regarding strike action, I andothers have tried to explain it to you. You don't or won't accept it for whatever reason.

Lillyfae

History Queen wrote: »

Lilyfae, I think we should leave it here as we are going to derail the thread. You are doing your usual twisting of words and ignoring when someone points out that you are incorrect. You used the term "high risk", if you look at the vaccination schedule you will see that 18-64 year olds at high risk were being prioritised ahead of teachers (as they should be).

If you mean a 55 year old is at higher risk than a 25 year old purely because of age, fine, I accept that. Which is why I accept the new roll out. As I have said.

As regards your misunderstanding regarding strike action, I andothers have tried to explain it to you. You don't or won't accept it for whatever reason.

Ok, I'm not derailing anything. I'm trying to have a discussion. Someone who is 55 is at a higher risk than someone younger. I'm not talking about someone who is diabetic or has a respiratory disease. I am not twisting any words. I'm just typing how I would talk. If you would like me to clarify what I mean then just ask. I would like you to clarify what kind of industrial action the teachers unions are proposing, because you haven't. You haven't even given your own opinion on the thread topic, you've just told others why their opinion is wrong.

Tokyo

Admin: Lillyfae, History Queen - you both seem to possess an almost unfaltering ability to hijack every thread you cross paths in, to the point where I am questioning both of your futures in the CA forum. You are both incapable of actual debate with each other, so I would strongly suggest putting each other on ignore. Next interaction with each other like this and I'm pulling both of your access to this forum.

Mr. teddywinkles

Beasty wrote: »

I actually disagree. Most teachers, in my experience, are entirely reasonable

The problem is it's the minority who shout loudest, giving an unfair impression of the profession. This is a very clear example of unionisation being a disaster as they use the excuse of representing their membership to make pretty outlandish claims

Well teachers should voice their disgust with all their union reps then.

PuddingBreath

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bp04W0HfEZc

This chap is calling it. A pile of theatre with the higher-ups in the civil service and politicians while distracting us from the problem.
Them.
Our next taoiseach is going to be a guy that brought his party from 1st to 3rd in votes and scraped in on the 5th count or something for his own seat, FFS.
The current leaders party is sitting at 11%
There was never a referendum on us having our basic liberties taken, but they did anyway.
The schools cannot close again. Children have lost enough of the basics they were use to already. Mine haven't seen any family since Xmas. But we're just law abiding fools

Cork Lass

Mr. teddywinkles wrote: »

Well teachers should voice their disgust with all their union reps then.

It would be interesting to see how a ballot would go if they are looking to strike.

PuddingBreath

Pussyhands wrote: »

If the government caves and gives in to teachers I've had it with them.

Tail is wagging the dog if this happens.

We're just being scammed IMO, I don't think much more of our lot as what's expressed about the US ones here

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bp04W0HfEZc

tayto lover

People should lay-off Unions.
Without them we’d be still working in the dark ages with little or no rights.
Take that from someone who worked in a job where there was no union a lot of years ago.

ax530

As it stands currently for medical staff who are vaccinated if they are 'close contact' they must isolate - due to this fact I do not see the advantage of giving teachers a priority on the vaccination a teacher will still miss school when they are a close contact so vaccinating them will not reduce numbers of teachers off. Anyone teacher is 'high risk' diabetic, old ect will already be prioritised based on those factors.
Early vaccines for teachers is not an advantage to the 'education system' just personally to teachers due to the peace of mind which comes with being vaccinated. As time goes on everyone will get this 'peace of mind' plus as we wait things are becoming safer with each vaccine administered.

BanditLuke

Lillyfae wrote: »

Ok, I'm not derailing anything. I'm trying to have a discussion. Someone who is 55 is at a higher risk than someone younger. I'm not talking about someone who is diabetic or has a respiratory disease. I am not twisting any words. I'm just typing how I would talk. If you would like me to clarify what I mean then just ask. I would like you to clarify what kind of industrial action the teachers unions are proposing, because you haven't. You haven't even given your own opinion on the thread topic, you've just told others why their opinion is wrong.

Are you 55 and working in a small room with 30 other people?

Are you a school bus driver driving a tiny room with 15 kids?

These people should be vaccinated because they are at risk but instead this government in making it more important for a 55 year old working from home sitting in front of a laptop a bigger priority than both these groups.

BanditLuke

Sunny Disposition wrote: »

Met a 70 year old man with asthma who is in a customer facing role this morning. Still has no idea when he’ll get the vaccination. Teachers need to cop the fck on here.

That's nothing to do with the teachers.

Lillyfae

BanditLuke wrote: »

Are you 55 and working in a small room with 30 other people?

Are you a school bus driver driving a tiny room with 15 kids?

These people should be vaccinated because they are at risk but instead this government in making it more important for a 55 year old working from home sitting in front of a laptop a bigger priority than both these groups.

No and no. But I believe anyone who is 55 and working in a small room with 30 other people (not to mention 55 and working in a crowded factory) should be vaccinated before someone who is 25 and working in a small room with 30 other people. By the time September comes everyone is supposed to have been vaccinated twice anyway, and teachers will have been off since June so will have the same amount of risk as someone working from home.

My position is that all teachers should be vaccinated before me, certainly, but alot of them will be because of my age.

Pussyhands

tayto lover wrote: »

People should lay-off Unions.
Without them we’d be still working in the dark ages with little or no rights.
Take that from someone who worked in a job where there was no union a lot of years ago.

A union has a place where they protect the rights of employees.

I have no time for unions who go out of their way to get the very best for the employees at the expense of the company they work for...

It's essentially blackmail.

That's why there's **** all innovation or efficiency in unionised workplaces.

A unions place is the likes of Amazon where employees are forced to pee in bottles....not for squeezing every last cent they can from a company.

Quin_Dub

BanditLuke wrote: »

Are you 55 and working in a small room with 30 other people?

Are you a school bus driver driving a tiny room with 15 kids?

These people should be vaccinated because they are at risk but instead this government in making it more important for a 55 year old working from home sitting in front of a laptop a bigger priority than both these groups.

I think the key issue here is down to speed/efficiency.

Now that the 1st two "most medically vulnerable" groups have been done , the next phase has to be about getting the vaccine to as many people as quickly as possible.

In your examples above - Is that teacher at more of a risk than a production line factory worker or a shop assistant that is seeing possibly hundreds of different people every single day?

Is the school bus driver more at risk than any other bus driver ,or taxi driver for example?

There are countless examples of sub-sets of people that could potentially legitimately claim to be at "increased risk".

Bottom line - The focus must be on speed and simplicity.

Trying to layer on multiple other filters makes the scheduling job much slower and much harder to optimise. There'll always be someone saying their sub-set is more deserving.

Go in reverse order of DOB and just get stuck in to wading through the population.

It's the most efficient and overall the most equitable.

Cork Lass

BanditLuke wrote: »

Are you 55 and working in a small room with 30 other people?

Are you a school bus driver driving a tiny room with 15 kids?

These people should be vaccinated because they are at risk but instead this government in making it more important for a 55 year old working from home sitting in front of a laptop a bigger priority than both these groups.

The 55 year old working from home is not being prioritised over a 55 yr old teacher or bus driver - they will all be in the same cohort.

BanditLuke

The bottom line is the virus spreads in crowded conditions, it thrives there. Teachers, bus drivers etc.. and anyone else who works in crowded conditions should be vaccinated as a matter of priority.

BanditLuke

Cork Lass wrote: »

The 55 year old working from home is not being prioritised over a 55 yr old teacher or bus driver - they will all be in the same cohort.

Yes but they are being put ahead of the 40 year old bus driver or teacher who will encounter countless close household contacts in a small environment daily,