feardeas wrote: » Possibly, yes. However there will need to be at least the progress the other unions got with lpt along with clear unambiguous language that the government intends to have full equalisation in a reasonable timeframe. Averting closure on Monday is the primary aim of the government I'd say and would be good pr for ASTI. I just think it will mean CP hours etc. The dept need to make it clear to JMB that the 8 up to 10 hours will be flexible. I believe that the dept want it done. The talks to succeed LRA will possibly be brought forward but I think when this is over the stomach for prolonged industrial action may be weakened.
Daisy 55 wrote: Doubt if JC is being discussed at all.
seavill wrote: » This is the second time you posted this comment but everyone ignored it the first time. How exactly would we have known that it was dependant on acceptance of LRA. LRA did not exist two or three years ago when we signed up to this agreement. Our agreement was do S&S for the length of HRA and get two payments for this in 2017 and 2018. Where was it written that we had to agree to another agreement? Which parts of LRA do we guess are dependant on another agreement in 2 years time? Can you tel us this or do we just guess? Which deals that the government tell us are we supposed to believe and which ones do we guess are linked to something else that doesn't yet exist that may or may not happen in two years time? Your bull sh1t is really annoying at times. If we went back to the sign up to HRA and were writing here that the government can't be trusted and they won't follow through on what they promise you would be the first one on here criticising us. How about you make some meaningful comtribution to the thread rather than just constantly throwing out stupid questions to try wind people up. I would estimate that 80% of your posts are just questions to wind people up.
judeboy101 wrote: » feardeas wrote: » Possibly, yes. However there will need to be at least the progress the other unions got with lpt along with clear unambiguous language that the government intends to have full equalisation in a reasonable timeframe. Averting closure on Monday is the primary aim of the government I'd say and would be good pr for ASTI. I just think it will mean CP hours etc. The dept need to make it clear to JMB that the 8 up to 10 hours will be flexible. I believe that the dept want it done. The talks to succeed LRA will possibly be brought forward but I think when this is over the stomach for prolonged industrial action may be weakened. In my mind damage has been done. In every BOM that has decided to lock teachers out the parents reps have sided with the jmb . staff will ever forget that their own employer was willing to lock the gates and that the parents of every student supported in through their reps.
km79 wrote: » What difference would that make ? Nobody in an Asti school will get paid if the doirs are locked right ? Asti members will sign attendance form take photos etc What will non union members do?
Daisy 55 wrote: » Doubt if JC is being discussed at all.
Gebgbegb wrote: » I think it makes a big difference if principals are being pitted against teachers because of an unrecognised union... who do/does the JMB take their mandate from?
Gebgbegb wrote: » One more ballot could see the ASTI in LR... Or maybe LR 1.1Then the dept gets its beloved new (Although copied from England) Junior cert, strikes over, everyone in LR. Assuming Gardai jump in.... That'll be a victory worth aspiring to for any minister / party.
seavill wrote: » No one knows what way decisions went at BOMs. Some may have come down to a vote with parents or teachers voting against a proposal but once a decision has been reached that is the decision of the full board so don't be too quick to blame individuals on boards as you don't know what actually happened behind the scenes
judeboy101 wrote: » If you are in a jmb school you will get a standard issue letter from the bom. Pre printed just like the decision is pre ordained. Usual strawman argument about health and safety, but jmb advice is that h&s ends when school ends so its ok to open school to outside business e.g. Grind schools, gym training, step aerobics etc.
km79 wrote: 2 days of talks and not a peep? Something's a foot
seavill wrote: » You completely missed my point. Just because a parent or teacher sit on a BOM and the decision of the BOM was to close the school hat doesn't mean they agree with it or voted for it. That was all I'm saying
feardeas wrote: » Also very convenient that the guards are centre of attention. I'm thinking announcement Friday evening for the nine o clock news. So maybe deal tomorrow .Assume SC are on stand by to meet Friday.
judeboy101 wrote: » SC are planning on meeting Fri afternoon
km79 wrote: » could they leave it any later ! Sunday evening maybe
deiseindublin wrote: » No, she said teachers think they're being locked out. Is it just me or does anybody else think that IM actually gets off on the strikes? She sounds absolutely delighted with it, no matter how ugly it gets!
CWF wrote: » BOM in our school have suggested to parents that they keep their kids at home on Monday because for health and safety reasons. School is open for teachers and we're expected to be available for timetabled periods. Do we still get paid? Any students that arrive will be sent home.
Moody_mona wrote: » I'm in the same position. Don't think we'll be paid.
Moody_mona wrote: » I don't think there's anything for the department to clarify. Their circular says of students aren't in teachers who are unavailable to fulfil their s&s duties won't be paid. I presume we have to go in case of retrospective pay? But that's naive and optimistic of me.
judeboy101 wrote: » How will they be sent home? Asti directive means you cant get involved in s&s so who will tell them to leave?
