nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

ASTI OctNov Action Post 1 for usual plea for restraint Especially New Posters

deiseindublin

I'm not ASTI (more's the pity) so haven't been talking to anybody in ASTI staffrooms.

What's the general feeling on the ground? What way will the vote go?

Just going to tweek this thread a bit as things have moved on since the ballot result.

As usual, keep it civil.

Address the points made (rather than the poster).

Avoid such terms as
"What planet are you on"
"Are you for real"

Any New posters to the forum should be reminded to read the charter.
'Three months holidays' 'only working 22hrs' 'performance related pay' are old, typically uninformed and very very tired. It Invariably ends up in derailing a thread and annoying folk too... but feel free to start a new thread. This type of stuff will be deleted.
As usual do not respond if you are a regular poster. Just report it as off topic and leave the rest to us (when we get around to it). Thanks.

MOD

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

amacca

Rules of the game IMO

If both sides initially dig their heels in and stand firm...first to blink or back down loses - actually a lose lose situation for both sides in the heel of the hunt

* If negotiation (and I mean an actual proper negotiation not this "its the only show in town bull****") where both sides issues are addressed takes place then perhaps some face saving (for both sides) solution can can happen which will probably contain a large smattering of can kicking (on the equal pay issue at very least and probably "reform" of the nonsensical CP hours given all the other unseen and seemingly unappreciated voluntary hours put in)

What I see happening for teachers

1) Payment of the SS.......I can't see how the Govt have a leg to stand on with this issue, it was part of a previous agreement whose terms have been honoured by teachers.......getting paid for work done was never contingent in entering into another agreement - if schools do have to shut on 7th then the blame lies squarely at the Govt door as they have reneged on an agreement with no excuse except for using it as a lever to bully a group of workers.......any hint of removal from payroll etc etc for this imo should be met with a strong united resistance for the kind of precedent it sets.........what is the point of agreeing to any "agreement" if this is how one side keeps the bargain and then attempts to treat the side who have kept their part of the bargain.

2) Existing steps towards pay equalisation with perhaps some window dressing of an extra sweetener and a promise of further steps towards pay equalisation in the future

more or less not much if anything beyond what TUI etc has already accepted but it may still have been a worthwhile exercise as perhaps they won't get to kick the can as far down the road as they were hoping too on this one.......without this kind of action I believe the Govt side would keep stringing this out indefinitely

3) No reduction on CP hours (which is wrong, very wrong imo) but much much more flexibility in how they can be used given the nature of the job and the amount of extra hours most teachers put in or are forced to put in due to the nature of the job nowadays....there are lots of necessary tasks that can't be avoided for all teachers that could come under the umbrella of CP, if the Govt doesn't accept this then they don't think they are necessary so they shouldn't be done.

(if 3 above doesn't happen then I wouldn't be surprised if a large cohort of teachers start to slowly withdraw much much more than the CP hours in free/voluntary labour they give but get no credit for and in some cases take abusee for doing..........and quite understandably imo)

Not a betting man but I'm interested to see how this develops.

km79

coillsaille wrote: »

I agree with you wholeheartedly acequion. But apparently withdrawing from the SnS scheme includes withdrawal from the opt out part of the scheme.

Also .........many people were not actually given the option to opt out SO if the people who did opt out were to be paid then it opens another can of worms!

coillsaille

acequion wrote: »

How could they legally get away with taking us off the payroll? And how could they legally get away with docking the pay of members who are already docked due to having opted out of S&S?

To me that smacks of tyranny. I would be gobsmacked if they got away with that,I really would!

I agree with you wholeheartedly acequion. But apparently withdrawing from the SnS scheme includes withdrawal from the opt out part of the scheme.

Eintrachtrob

feardeas wrote: »

Worrying is putting it mildly. They knew this was coming since last May. The stuff Pat King warned about is all coming to pass it appears.

Complete nonsense. King was an utter spoofer who gave away one term of condition of employment after another without so much of a word of opposition.

Time for calm.
The people who have known since last May are the DES.

There's a lot of politics going on, especially with Bruton. He sees himself as FG leader and possibly Taoiseach within a year. He's deliberately playing hardball to impress.

Let's take one stage at a time, and remember why we are taking strike and industrial action.

The strike is primarily for LPT pay restoration.
S&S industrial action is for the fact that we are not being paid for it when others are.

acequion

feardeas wrote: »

Worrying is putting it mildly. They knew this was coming since last May. The stuff Pat King warned about is all coming to pass it appears.

And so we should all back down like little sheep should we? Losing a lot of money is indeed worrying. But working for a bunch of tyrants who happen to be the Government of this state would actually worry me more.

acequion

How could they legally get away with taking us off the payroll? And how could they legally get away with docking the pay of members who are already docked due to having opted out of S&S?

To me that smacks of tyranny. I would be gobsmacked if they got away with that,I really would!

feardeas

km79 wrote:

So we WONT be paid and they are CURRENTLY seeking legal advice Sure no rush with it !!!!! Are they still seeking legal advice on challenging FEMPI too WORRYING

Worrying is putting it mildly. They knew this was coming since last May. The stuff Pat King warned about is all coming to pass it appears.

coillsaille

Eintrachtrob wrote: »

They cannot provide information without it being fully correct.

I'd be highly surprised if they haven't been in contact with lawyers at this stage.

I spoke to an SC member today. The pay docking issue is been looked at by lawyers alright.
They're trying to get a meeting held to come up with a response to the threatened pay docking but because of ongoing talks with DES and the strike day it will be Friday before that happens. They hope to get some guidance out to members before close of school that day. So I was told anyway.

evolving_doors

km79 wrote: »

So we WONT be paid and they are CURRENTLY seeking legal advice
Sure no rush with it !!!!! Are they still seeking legal advice on challenging FEMPI too
WORRYING

I think this can only be tested out in the courts though (and we know how long that'd take!).

evolving_doors

student46 wrote: »

Me and our fellow students plan to go to school, if teachers are there and the school open we will go in.

That's if either teacher or student gets past the locked gates!

And, if you do go in and you have an accident when there is no supervision do you think all parents in the country would be willing to sign a waiver beforehand for any claims towards the school?

For a school to decide to let you in with no supervision, they might as well as be handing you a flamethrower and telling you to have a good time. It wont happen unless there is adequate supervision. I dunno maybe the dept will be able to hire a bunch of strangers to come in (without the cooperation of the school!).

km79

MacGyver007 wrote: »

ASTI members have been told to show up for work on November 7, whatever happens.

http://www.asti.ie/uploads/media/School_Steward_Information_Notice.pdf

So we WONT be paid and they are CURRENTLY seeking legal advice
Sure no rush with it !!!!! Are they still seeking legal advice on challenging FEMPI too
WORRYING

student46

Me and our fellow students plan to go to school, if teachers are there and the school open we will go in.

MacGyver007

In a letter to stewards issued this afternoon, ASTI members have been told to show up for work on November 7.

http://www.asti.ie/uploads/media/School_Steward_Information_Notice.pdf

acequion

Well at my recent branch meeting they told us that it would be illegal for the Gov to not pay us if schools have to close due to no SnS. Im not well up on the legal ramifications but surely that would make sense? Where is this idea of not being paid coming from?

km79

Eintrachtrob wrote: »

They cannot provide information without it being fully correct.

I'd be highly surprised if they haven't been in contact with lawyers at this stage.

If they have why can't they say ?
They like the govt have had PLENTY of time to prepare for this
It's time to inform their members so we can plan out financial affairs accordingly

Eintrachtrob

km79 wrote: »

Have they sought legal advice on what will happen in the event if DES not paying staff ?
Are we likely not to be paid ?
They can provide lots more info than currently

They cannot provide information without it being fully correct.

I'd be highly surprised if they haven't been in contact with lawyers at this stage.

Spiro66

student46 wrote: »

If teachers are going to be there to teach class but not due S+S can I go in to their classes and leave the school grounds for lunch or if a teacher is sick?

If teachers are there why can't I go to class? My LC is important and if teachers are saying they should be paid cause they are in the school to be able to teach why can't I go to class, I will leave the grounds for lunch break so they won't have to cover S+S.

I plan to go to school on Thrusday and will go to my classes unless the school is locked. If the teachers are there I will be in class.

Your point is valid however no teacher will stop you attending class. Boards of management, the teachers employers may prevent you attending school. Be assured that when the dispute ends your teachers will do whatever it takes to help you with your studies.

km79

Eintrachtrob wrote: »

The ones we need clarification from are the DES.

ASTI have been more than clear - 7 strike dates announced. No S&S from 7th Nov. Can't ask for more clearer than that.

Have they sought legal advice on what will happen in the event if DES not paying staff ?
Are we likely not to be paid ?
They can provide lots more info than currently

Eintrachtrob

Like another poster, I too am in on Monday 7th with the staff, although the students will not be in.

The Principal & the BoM are unsure of whether we get paid for this date.

I'm not really sure how this is going to work out.

Eintrachtrob

km79 wrote: »

Asti need to come out with FACTS on what WILL happen soon
But of an information vacuum at the moment .........

The ones we need clarification from are the DES.

ASTI have been more than clear - 7 strike dates announced. No S&S from 7th Nov. Can't ask for more clearer than that.

km79

Asti need to come out with FACTS on what WILL happen soon
But of an information vacuum at the moment .........

NufcNavan

political analyst wrote: »

Carl O'Brien wrote in today's Irish Times that some ASTI members feel that they were left in the dark over the fact that withdrawal from supervision cover would lead to indefinite school closures.

If true then some teachers need to jump into reality.

scout353

political analyst wrote: »

Carl O'Brien wrote in today's Irish Times that some ASTI members feel that they were left in the dark over the fact that withdrawal from supervision cover would lead to indefinite school closures.

How can teachers not realise this.

Surely it was the intention (as in all industrial actions) to cause disruption so as to highlight their case.

Teachers will be available for work on Monday 7th Nov - they are not available for S&S. Surely this is similar to the Gardai last week going to work but not working the Pulse system.

However, the DES is now using the JMB and other bodies to force the issue by locking out teachers on the grounds of health & safety. By doing this the DES can then try(?) to stop paying teachers from the Monday.

What I can't understand is that the DES is willing to pay outsiders to the do the work that they have refused to pay teachers to do.

It just seems to me that ASTI had the balls to stand up and be counted by rejecting LRA and the Gov is going to great lengths to ensure that they pay dearly for that rejection (as was their right by the way)

political analyst

Carl O'Brien wrote in today's Irish Times that some ASTI members feel that they were left in the dark over the fact that withdrawal from supervision cover would lead to indefinite school closures.

downthemiddle

coillsaille wrote: »

That's just about the strike days. Doesn't give any clarification on the week of Nov 7th.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2016/1025/826653-asti-teachers-strike/

The President of the Teachers' Union of Ireland, meanwhile, has said that if schools close on Thursday, then TUI members expect to be paid.
Joanne Irwin said that should schools remain open when ASTI members begin strike action, then TUI members will be available for work.
However, speaking on RTÉ's Morning Ireland, Ms Irwin said that members would be reluctant to pass a picket.
She said that there over 200 schools where teachers are all TUI members, so these will remain open.
There are also over 200 schools where teachers are members of both the TUI and the ASTI, a decision on whether these schools will remain open on Thursday is expected to be known by this evening.
She added that no TUI member would undertake the work of an ASTI colleague.
"We are not on strike. This is a strike by our ASTI colleagues so because we're not on strike our members will be getting paid on Thursday. We are available for work and will go to work if the schools are open.
"If you are a member of TUI we are saying that it is normal trade union practice in relation to any industrial disputes, that you would not undertake the work of a colleague who is in dispute."
Ms Irwin said that the TUI expected the public pay commission to address differential pay scales and this has been written into an agreement made between the TUI and the Department of Education.
She said that should the public pay commission fail to address this, then the TUI has a mandate to take action.
Meanwhile, the Department of Education has issued instructions to schools as to how to record staff absences on the seven ASTI strike days.
Schools have been advised that attendance or otherwise on those days of all staff employed by the school should be recorded.
The Department's online payroll system has a special category for absence due to "strike in school".

coillsaille

downthemiddle wrote: »

For people seeking clarification

http://www.education.ie/en/Circulars-and-Forms/Active-Circulars/cl0070_2016.pdf

That's just about the strike days. Doesn't give any clarification on the week of Nov 7th.

student46

If teachers are going to be there to teach class but not due S+S can I go in to their classes and leave the school grounds for lunch or if a teacher is sick?

If teachers are there why can't I go to class? My LC is important and if teachers are saying they should be paid cause they are in the school to be able to teach why can't I go to class, I will leave the grounds for lunch break so they won't have to cover S+S.

I plan to go to school on Thrusday and will go to my classes unless the school is locked. If the teachers are there I will be in class.

downthemiddle

For people seeking clarification

http://www.education.ie/en/Circulars-and-Forms/Active-Circulars/cl0070_2016.pdf

coillsaille

Gebgbegb wrote: »

But what can a school do, Allow pupils in and then put them at risk/have an accident when there's no S&S?
It's just a closure on health and safety grounds... not a deliberate lockout.

No question of allowing students in and there never was. Parents and students can be informed that the school is closed to students. That should have no bearing on whether the school is open for staff. We often had planning days where it was staff only and the school was closed to students.
But now BOMs, under JMB advice/instructions, are saying they can't take the "risk" of even a single student turning up and getting injured so the school has to be locked up. It's a feeble excuse. First of all surely the school is absolved of any liability if parents were informed not to send students in. Secondly all it would take is a BOM member hanging around that morning to turn away any students in the highly unlikely event that some showed up.
No, as far as I can see it's a lockout. It will strengthen the DES's hand in not paying us if they can say we weren't in school which is why the JMB is pushing this.

evolving_doors

But what can a school do, Allow pupils in and then put them at risk/have an accident when there's no S&S?
It's just a closure on health and safety grounds... not a deliberate lockout.