deiseindublin wrote: » I'm sure some TUI voters only voted yes to ensure they got the s&s payment, doesn't seem fair then if it's seperated for ASTI.
man_no_plan wrote: » Well it would limit the school closure to strike days only for a start and to be fair the ASTI shouldn't have to do it unpaid.
Gebgbegb wrote: » On the contrary, people will be dumbed down rather than wise up. Newer teachers coming through will just think of it as 'part of the job' when asked.
coillsaille wrote: » I suppose in fairness deise that it's worth remembering that the SnS payments were part of HRA and never had anything to do with LRA, until the DES connected the two things as we approached the end of HRA. So if they finally honoured their part of the previous agreement I don't see why TUI would see it as affecting their decision to sign up to the current agreement.
km79 wrote: » Very true actually
deiseindublin wrote: » I take offense to that Mrwhite1970. I'm TUI, I'm not impressed with their Yes to LRA, I voted No, as did every other TUI member that I know. I'm totally behind the ASTI but at the end of the day TUI were told that they wouldn't get S&S if they voted No, most members didn't have the balls to vote No and see what happened but if LRA and S&S are not separated, then TUI should be looking for a reballot, or at least that's what I'd like to see.
Mrwhite1970 wrote: » No personal offence meant but it begs question why are you in TUI ??. You are free to join ASTI. You must know tui worse than asti for cave ins
deiseindublin wrote: » ASTI don't have negotiating rights in my school.
Darwin wrote: » The thing I don't get is TUI members emphatically rejected the LRA on the "first go":http://www.tui.ie/press-releases/tui-members-emphatically-reject-lansdowne-road-agreement-.7652.html Everyone I know (third level) voted no on the "second go", and in my wife's school same thing too, despite the best efforts of the TUI executive to convince us otherwise (our local TUI branch was advising on a no vote). One begins to wonder if the count was rigged.
km79 wrote: » That would solve that problem But then the TUI...........and all the other issues
joebloggs32 wrote: » Well to balance your spurious accusations against the integrity of the vote, almost everyone I know in my branch voted for it.
Darwin wrote: » Out of interest, what swung them from saying no to yes? Also, do you not find it strange that their ASTI colleagues kept their original point of view (i.e. no)? It makes no sense to me.
coillsaille wrote: » There are people in the ASTI who voted to accept LRA. There are people in the TUI who voted to reject. In each union a majority decided otherwise. Regarding the Ward report being denied to ASTI members, well that's just crying out for one single court case to prove such discrimination is illegal.
joebloggs32 wrote: » I remember some members at a meeting saying the department wouldn't follow through on the threats, but guess what, they have.
joebloggs32 wrote: » Funnily enough this week in my school two ASTI members both told me how they voted this month. Each one voted no!
Millem wrote: » Mr white a Tui member can not switch unions now as there is a dispute on.
political analyst wrote: » Why doesn't the ASTI encourage some of its members to take such a case? What has the ASTI got to lose? Doesn't the ASTI have lots of money, given the dues that its members pay?
coillsaille wrote: There are people in the ASTI who voted to accept LRA. There are people in the TUI who voted to reject. In each union a majority decided otherwise. Regarding the Ward report being denied to ASTI members, well that's just crying out for one single court case to prove such discrimination is illegal.
Mrwhite1970 wrote: » Who gives a flying ****about the TUI. They always cave in first. They will no doubt.benefit if we get anything. If department cave on s and s you press advantage. Stick knife further in. GOD knows they did it to us enough times.