judeboy101 wrote: » Schools were smaller, discipline was more direct and less jerry the giraffe.:D
coillsaille wrote: » Standing committee have finished their meeting with no change in position. They have taken legal advice on the wage docking but are seeking further clarification after Wednesday's circular from DES.
km79 wrote: » Jesus h They have had long enough to get legal advice on this It was flagged weeks ago
political analyst wrote: » What evidence is there that it has been made more difficult to discipline unruly pupils? By the way, where did you get "jerry the giraffe" from?
Millem wrote: » What annoys me is that we so many hours ourselves that can't be used towards Croke park. I wish the gov would just let each of us choose how we do our CP. We were given a blank sheet on it and told to record the s and s classes we covered. Why can't we just be handed another sheet and record CP hours. Like eg a teacher going to subject association conference, after school pdst courses, online courses, extra curricular activities, organising school events, even giving extra classss (which happens a lot in my school) etc etc. Instead in our school is it meetings or guest speakers that are a waste of time.
Rossdoc81 wrote: » Had a meeting in our school today and everyone (all ASTI school) decided not to sign the form, and that we will arrive to the school on 7th of November whether we are locked out or not. The BOM meets next week to make the decision on whether to open or not.
coillsaille wrote: Standing committee have finished their meeting with no change in position. They have taken legal advice on the wage docking but are seeking further clarification after Wednesday's circular from DES.
feardeas wrote: » I can't see how they couldn't have got this advice since blast May. I'm wondering whether a deal is more or less reached and this is all shadow boxing and window dressing. Or perhaps the legal advice doesn't hold good news which would mean that this is going to be an unmitigated disaster. Nobody, irrespective of how we voted, wants the latter.
Icsics wrote: » What about the 'opt out' teachers in closed schools?
Gebgbegb wrote: Forget about the legal advice... it's just that, advice...in these cases nobody knows how it will play out in a court, but rest assured legal council on both sides will recommend going forward with a case (and billing for their time accordingly ).
feardeas wrote: » In cases like this the advice is key. It's why the pension levy etc were not challenged because the advice was that it was worthless to do so. This isn't a case of taking action for whiplash.
Pursefan wrote: » I teach in a voluntary secondary school who employ a number of non teaching staff to supervise at lunchtime. We would be able to employ them during the day to cover the SnS rots but our principal will not even consider it at BOM level. The JMB want to close the schools so to force the two sides together.
worseforwear wrote: » And who do you anticipate would organise the roster in the mornings?
km79 wrote: » The secretary ?
worseforwear wrote: » Not very fair to ask the secretary to pick up the slack. Either the teachers want to take a stand or not. They would be more than happy to have the school closed so long as they got paid. However when they realised wouldn't get paid, they expect others to facilitate keeping the school open. I've read most of the posts in this discussion and a couple of items stand out for me. 1. The big gripe seems to be more about doing the croke park hours than the sns. I whole heartedly agree that having meetings and guest speakers for the sake of it is nothing but punisment for everybody. There are 15 to 20 hours required for school planning for the proper running of the school. Teachers should then be given credit for much of the voluntary and extra curricular they do. However managing and verifying this would be very complicated. I know a good few teachers who didn't complete any of the 5 discretionary hours last year and that in turn causes reluctance to allow flexibility. 2. There are virtually no comments regarding the impact on the students of having the schools closed indefinitely. , and what ramifications might this have on the school as a whole. Just my observation
"worseforwear wrote: » 2. There are virtually no comments regarding the impact on the students of having the schools closed indefinitely. , and what ramifications might this have on the school as a whole. Just my observation
Gebgbegb wrote: » I bet you'll find that the secretary will be instructed not to organise the rota. The JMB want to close the schools. Either the ASTI teachers do it unpaid, or nobody does it!
coillsaille wrote: » This one, (no 1 was rational) is a bit infuriating. There are no comments about it because all teachers on this forum know that the impact on students is the biggest discouragement for industrial action that causes school closures. No teacher worth their salt wants to lose any class time, with a state exam year class especially The thing is though the students are in the secondary system for 5 years. The teachers are in it for 35-40 years. But more importantly there's the students and teachers of the years ahead.
worseforwear wrote: » I agree, however I don't think teachers are doing themselves justice in this discussion. Much of the tone gives the impression that they would be content to sit back for as long as it takes despite the impact on students and the school in a wider context. Don't ask me to do cpark hours, don't ask me to do Sns , just let me teach my classes. Unfortunately the life of a school requires much more than this. Many teachers will no doubt give of there own time to make up lost tuition time, however this doesn't come across in the discussion. Yes students are in school for 5 years but it's their one opportunity at 2nd level education, and teachers are getting paid during their 35-40 years, so I don't think this part of the argument stands up. My view overall is that members have been very poorly advised by the ASTI leadership. It was presented as don't agree to lansdowne road and you won't have to do CPark. Very few teachers were made fully aware of the consequences of the rejection. I.e. Loss of increments, still in fempi, loss of sns payments and loss of ward report benefits. CID's were pushed from 2 years to 4 yrs That certainly wasn't helping younger teachers. I'm just a little sceptical of the leadership's motives
km79 wrote: » http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/garda-pay-dispute-new-pre-shift-payment-offered-1.2847581 gardai to be offered extra pay for the 15 minute period BEFORE they start their shift...........