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

Exam Results - Delayed (Mod Warning: Post #383 & #420)

Sully

Since it seems to be official, and most people seem to know, the exam results are not being formalised until at least, if not later, week 7. This means while they are corrected they are not formalised by the various boards. This is due to the lecturers union requesting the delay until payments are issued, which were stopped, in relation to the exams.

Mod Edit

Two moderator warnings have now been issued in this thread.

Warning #1
Warning #2

Please read these warnings before posting in this topic. There will be no additional warnings and the moderators will issue bans/infractions if such warnings are ignored.

Thank You.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Sully

Ahem! wrote: »

Well, I guess you better hope it's not an exam question - as you blatantly haven't much of a clue

The answer is kinda in the name, however. It's a procedure for settling grievances......And what have you got here, prior to all the industrial actions, sabre-rattling and spleen venting?

In fact, if you were to think for a moment (yes, that's think! It's what's supposed to take place between your reading and reacting!) about some of the information that's already in the public domain, much of it actually quoted in your own posts above, then you might realise that what you have here is a fairly primitive example of the species.

As you quote above, for example, the matter of payment rests, it seems, upon competing interpretations of the dept. of education insistence that payment for marking exams now be adjusted on a pro-rata basis.

Management have interpreted this to mean 50% (that's about half Alpha!?!) due to the fact that WIT have moved to a modularised system that now exams students twice, rather than once, a year. On the other hand, and given that the TUI, as quoted in your own post Alpha, don't seem to be raising any objections to the pro-rata idea (just its interpretation) they are likely to be asking for something closer to 66% (two thirds!) due to the fact that assessment has typically moved from a single 3 hour exam model to two x two hour assessments.

If that isn't a basis for discussion then frankly I don't know what is? For all intents and purposes, and assuming an original rate of 8e, you are talking about a difference between the parties of 1.28e. If you can't negotiate that down, through the grievance procedure, and split the difference at somewhere around 60c then I''l readily admit your not a reactionary halfwit Alpha!

As it stands, however, the question is why is this not happening?

Well, it's not happening because management have refused to abide by the grievance procedure. And why have they done that? Well, theories abound.

What's clear to any sane and reasonable person, however, is that its got nothing to do with cash. An extra 60c per script is hardly going to necessitate the threatened cuts to essential services.

Nor has it got anything to do with the TUI being able to drag this out for years as Sully asserted above (again in seemingly perfect ignorance of the procedures!) Let me make it clear: There is simply no provision in the procedure that would allow for that to happen! The procedure is, after all, the designated means by which cases exactly such as this are meant to be settled - it is HOW stuff gets fixed, and is a binding process of escalation (if necessary) that terminates at the LRC.

The problems you have now are a classic example of what happens when you step outside of such procedures - i.e. industrial action, instransigence and collatoral damage.

**In relation to the second question Alpha I'm afraid to say you also failed that. ICTU action, or similar, may occasionally be deliberately vague, but the action outlined in relation to exams by the local TUI Branch representative in your post would have had to be written in the ballot forms handed out to all who voted.** Sorry to burst another conspiracy theory.........You happen to know who killed JFK though?????

Mod Note
Your contributions are welcome, but please stop getting personal towards other posters. Your getting very personal. Attack the post and not the poster please.

Mod Note

Drop the swearing please. Thanks.

Sully

Ahem! wrote: »

A lot of pretty incoherent posts on this thread. Most of them emanating from one source, however, it has to be said.

I'm beginning to loose my patience with union members coming in here and having a go at students, claiming their posts are not factual and then not 1) correcting them, or 2) pointing out (despite my requests) what posts are wrong. Will you do us the honour of telling us?

2brnot2b wrote: »

Let me begin by saying that I am a concerned lecturer, who has great sympathy for those students directly affected by the impending industrial action. However, I really do feel compelled to clarify a few points that have been made.

Firstly, the ballot carried out by the TUI was a secret ballot, so the assertion by an earlier poster that this was some sort of show of hands where lecturers felt compelled to vote a particular way is inaccurate. The ballot was carried out like a general election would be - ballot papers, returning officers, ballot boxes, and most importantly, votes counted by independent auditors. To clarify further, the 84% majority that voted in favour of industrial action, comprised members of the TUI (i.e. lecturers). Might I add, and whilst I do not have the figures for the turnout for the ballot, I would have to say that given it was a secret ballot, those lecturers who may have been opposed to the motion for industrial action, and who didn't vote, are the ones most deserving of your vitriol. In addition, and probably reflective of the poor management in WIT, the TUI in WIT has one of the largest memberships of any IOT. Lastly, the terms of the industrial action were clearly stated on the ballot paper, so anyone voting was well aware of what they were voting for.

I probably missed it, but who was suggesting that it was a "show of hands" in the way you suggest? At the end of the day, lecturers voted to continue withholding results and for industrial action. They either voted in favour or against so in some respects that is a "show of hands".

Those who voted in favour, the "large majority" (hard to comment on that without an idea of how many actually voted), are the people students are more annoyed about. Its not about democracy or which side is right or wrong. Its about pulling in students as a scapegoat - again - while some lecturers demand more money. It seems that if lecturers are not getting their way, they decide to shove the students in the middle and screw them over when it has nothing to do with them at all. Thats what is angering people (along side the fact you all striked before the exams anyway - well, those who decided not to shop up North anyway).

As I said, I have great sympathy for students who do require results for interviews as this stage of their final year. However, these particular students comprise a very small number of the 1700 stated above. Most interviewers do not require any such information.

So, what, you could not care less about the others? Sure, why bother giving out results at all then? Oh and just to let you know - there are a lot of businesses that request results from previous years and latest exams when you apply for a job regardless of what year you are in. AOL being a good example, who employee mostly students. If your concern is final year students, then why not vote to withhold results from those not in the final year? Why not call for such a ballot? Because by voting for an all out withdrawal your showing you care about nobody but yourself.

Besides, surely a final year student should be aiming to do their best in their final semester regardless of previous performance, and not hedging their bets based on what they received in semester 7!

They do and will. However, plenty of students find it that bit easier knowing how they did. Its just for ease of mind. The performance will still be there but there are plenty of students who would just prefer to get the results so they know exactly how their "best" has been doing so far. It helps people get a clearer picture of how well they did going into the next semester working equally as hard. Students worry and panic. Its added stress they do not need. Its ease to brush it off and not care when it does not concern or bother you (well, when your told your not getting full payment I guess).

Finally, might I also point out that the release of results has never been the responsibility of lecturers. That job is in the remit of the Registrar. I suggest that if students want their results Tuesday they approach the office of the Registrar, who is at the end of the day the only body in the Institute with the power to issue results.

Has the Registrar been given the 'green and whites' with each students results to process? If you, as a lecturer, filled this in giving your grades to each student and have them sitting around your office/house/car then its your fault. If you gave it to the registrar who is on strike - its his fault. The information we are getting is that the problem is with the lecturers who wont even give an unofficial off the record result despite having corrected the exams.

From what I have read on this thread, much of the anger is directed at the lecturers in WIT. You may feel justified in this stance, but I can assure you that your anger is misplaced. Indeed, in my experience, students seem to think that lecturers have incredible powers in WIT - we can change timetables, conjure up exam results, sort out room/infrastructure issues. Not true I'm afraid. Apart from the Heads of School (the only academic staff in the college earning close to the €104,000 previously quoted), the rest of us just do what we are told (well until now that is!). I just have to question why the automatic jump to condemn the lecturers, without any consideration of the role of the WIT management in this.

Well, you are the people refusing to hand over the results - hardly misplaced anger. As for rooms and timetables - iv never blamed lecturers for that. People who do are just unfamiliar with how its all structured and works. As for "until now" - did you guys not strike before Christmas over pay? Seems that you stood up for yourselves well before now.

They are, after all, the ones who refused to negotiate with the TUI on this issue and have been forced to retract an earlier erroneous statement that this dispute is the result of an administrative error, not to mention the blatant lie that they informed lecturers of the cut in exams payments in June (FYI October 2009 was the 1st time any of us heard about it). They are also the ones that have flouted industrial relations law by refusing to abide by a national negoitiating framework.

Our understanding, and nobody has said otherwise, is that the college management have been trying to negotiate and offered you a deal which you refused to take. You are refusing because the Grievance Procedure set out is being ignored. I personally think that system has a major flaw - the person who lodged the dispute (in this case, the TUI) are the ones who need to request the LRC to step in. So by the college using this procedure, then we have the case where payments resume and the TUI could - in theory - carry on negotiating for another five years while enjoying the full payments the college are claiming they simply can not pay.

Iv never seen the management press release but I know that recent press coverage has been inaccurate, which is regretful. However, the college notified the TUI early summer (again, based on our information) but because it was your "summer holidays" the matter was not spoken about (TUI orders, not colleges) until October.

PS, a word of advice regarding your strike action - make sure what you are planning to do counts, like the TUI has. Do you really think that stopping lecturers going to classes, not attending classes, having a sit in etc. is really going to impact on us? After all, most of us are lazy, mean spirited, and don't bother going to classes at the best of times (apparently). So who would you be inconveniencing? -certainly not us!

Ah sure, we could always sit back and let you continue to use students as scapegoats and effectively not give two hoots about students as long as you get your money. Is that not what the TUI and Public Sector usually do when they have a problem - get on with it? Sure, they would never strike, vote for industrial action, use "go slows" or "work to rule" nonsense -certainly not you guys!

Perhaps it's time students, and their union, asked the powers that be (and I'm sorry folks that is not the lecturing staff) what exactly they are going to do to remedy this situation.

We did.

bettyboop22 wrote: »

Kathleen Moore Walsh is a strong minded woman. She is all about the law, rules and regulations and is by the book. I think our chances of us getting around her are slim to none!

Oh yes, lets just give up. This secretary will be to difficult to overpower. Should be over in the UN tbh - would solve all the problems over there, seeing as the chances of people getting around her are "slim to none!". :rolleyes:

alpha2zulu

bettyboop22 wrote: »

Kathleen Moore Walsh is a strong minded woman. She is all about the law, rules and regulations and is by the book. I think our chances of us getting around her are slim to none!

Are ya sure....our class is really not appreciating being bullied by TUI top brass. Next week will reveal a lot.

bettyboop22

Kathleen Moore Walsh is a strong minded woman. She is all about the law, rules and regulations and is by the book. I think our chances of us getting around her are slim to none!

alpha2zulu

2brnot2b wrote: »

Firstly, the ballot carried out by the TUI was a secret ballot, so the assertion by an earlier poster that this was some sort of show of hands where lecturers felt compelled to vote a particular way is inaccurate. The ballot was carried out like a general election would be - ballot papers, returning officers, ballot boxes, and most importantly, votes counted by independent auditors. To clarify further, the 84% majority that voted in favour of industrial action, comprised members of the TUI (i.e. lecturers). Might I add, and whilst I do not have the figures for the turnout for the ballot, I would have to say that given it was a secret ballot.

Thanks for clarifying that.

As I said, I have great sympathy for students who do require results for interviews as this stage of their final year. However, these particular students comprise a very small number of the 1700 stated above. Most interviewers do not require any such information.

I appreciate your sympathy but the TUI position is just not good enough. I dont know what particular school you work in but for us the latest results are incredibly imporatant.

Its just not good enough to put this sort of worry and pressure on 4th years. Leave us out of this and you still have over 8000 students to use in your negotiations. For us,this is the end result of 4 years work and for the TUI to hold a gun to our heads and potentially compromise our career prospects over a couple of euro, when the TUI members in most cases are on bullet proof contracts and earning anything between 39k and 104k per annum is frankly disgusting.

Aside from whatever is decided at the class rep meeting tomorrow, the issue of final year students is something that is going to seriously damage lecturers credability when this story really hits the national media this week, particularly since its only over potentially 1.28euro per student per exam, as alluded to by previous posters. (Theres been so much union mumbo jumbo in the TUI press releases its hard to decipher what the figure actually is)

2brnot2b

alpha 2 zulu wrote: »

Again my friend you have no evidence to substantiate that the ballot as you say yourself wasent "deliberately vague" and who exactly was included in the 84% figure, and how was the ballot carried out etc.Until clarified its still very much a valid point of discussion.

Let me begin by saying that I am a concerned lecturer, who has great sympathy for those students directly affected by the impending industrial action. However, I really do feel compelled to clarify a few points that have been made.

Firstly, the ballot carried out by the TUI was a secret ballot, so the assertion by an earlier poster that this was some sort of show of hands where lecturers felt compelled to vote a particular way is inaccurate. The ballot was carried out like a general election would be - ballot papers, returning officers, ballot boxes, and most importantly, votes counted by independent auditors. To clarify further, the 84% majority that voted in favour of industrial action, comprised members of the TUI (i.e. lecturers). Might I add, and whilst I do not have the figures for the turnout for the ballot, I would have to say that given it was a secret ballot, those lecturers who may have been opposed to the motion for industrial action, and who didn't vote, are the ones most deserving of your vitriol. In addition, and probably reflective of the poor management in WIT, the TUI in WIT has one of the largest memberships of any IOT. Lastly, the terms of the industrial action were clearly stated on the ballot paper, so anyone voting was well aware of what they were voting for.

alpha 2 zulu wrote: »

I
She and her shop stewards are holding the employment opportunities of 1700 final year/masters students as pawns in a dispute which is essntially over "precedence" and a 8euro payment per student on top of the salarys outlined above and pension contributions by the Government.

As I said, I have great sympathy for students who do require results for interviews as this stage of their final year. However, these particular students comprise a very small number of the 1700 stated above. Most interviewers do not require any such information.

Besides, surely a final year student should be aiming to do their best in their final semester regardless of previous performance, and not hedging their bets based on what they received in semester 7!

Finally, might I also point out that the release of results has never been the responsibility of lecturers. That job is in the remit of the Registrar. I suggest that if students want their results Tuesday they approach the office of the Registrar, who is at the end of the day the only body in the Institute with the power to issue results.

From what I have read on this thread, much of the anger is directed at the lecturers in WIT. You may feel justified in this stance, but I can assure you that your anger is misplaced. Indeed, in my experience, students seem to think that lecturers have incredible powers in WIT - we can change timetables, conjure up exam results, sort out room/infrastructure issues. Not true I'm afraid. Apart from the Heads of School (the only academic staff in the college earning close to the €104,000 previously quoted), the rest of us just do what we are told (well until now that is!). I just have to question why the automatic jump to condemn the lecturers, without any consideration of the role of the WIT management in this. They are, after all, the ones who refused to negotiate with the TUI on this issue and have been forced to retract an earlier erroneous statement that this dispute is the result of an administrative error, not to mention the blatant lie that they informed lecturers of the cut in exams payments in June (FYI October 2009 was the 1st time any of us heard about it). They are also the ones that have flouted industrial relations law by refusing to abide by a national negoitiating framework.

And where I ask is the President of WIT during all of this? (Is it just too easy to say he's holed up in his plush €157,000 office?!).

PS, a word of advice regarding your strike action - make sure what you are planning to do counts, like the TUI has. Do you really think that stopping lecturers going to classes, not attending classes, having a sit in etc. is really going to impact on us? After all, most of us are lazy, mean spirited, and don't bother going to classes at the best of times (apparently). So who would you be inconveniencing? -certainly not us!

Perhaps it's time students, and their union, asked the powers that be (and I'm sorry folks that is not the lecturing staff) what exactly they are going to do to remedy this situation.

Sully

therokerroar wrote: »

I would have thought that there would have been more notice given between the decision being made and the intended day of the strike (if it goes ahead) though?

There has been little talk of strike between the two student related parties getting involved in this. There is just speculation of what people may do and its caused wide spread belief there is a strike on the cards. Since the SU decided already (class rep vote) what to do until Monday and since they cant decide what to do until class reps speak on the Monday - there is nothing at all to suggest what could be done.

Regardless of what is done (if anything) - WITSU gave notice in a letter to the TUI and College they would escalate this week. So, I assume thats the time frame.

What do you reckon the chances are of a strike going ahead?

Its impossible to comment since its never once been discussed. The last meeting on the matter with class reps discussed what to do then and not what to do if nothing is resolved. Thats what tmrows meeting is about. If students are calling for it, I assume thats what the class reps will ask to be done. But I am hearing reports that students do not want a strike anyway. So, I really cant say because nobody knows what the "plan" to be voted on is.

Maxtor wrote: »

Would a strike change anything though?

It seems like the student body are the ones who keep getting messed around, like either way they still have their wages coming in..

Ugh I can't wait to finish College.

Iv no idea what could be done bar some sort of vocal campaign to apply pressure. Obvious options including strike or protest but there is probably loads more ideas. Either way, *something* needs to be done because if we sit around and twiddle our thumbs any longer nothing will be resolved. Some form of decent action which has direct impact needs to be done. We need to get noticed - no national media (barley RTE) have taken notice. If this remains the case, I cant see the TUI or College giving a toss.

Maxtor

Would a strike change anything though?

It seems like the student body are the ones who keep getting messed around, like either way they still have their wages coming in..

Ugh I can't wait to finish College.

therokerroar

Sully wrote: »

No. Nothing has been decided and won't be until its voted for at class rep council Monday afternoon.

I would have thought that there would have been more notice given between the decision being made and the intended day of the strike (if it goes ahead) though?

What do you reckon the chances are of a strike going ahead?

Sully

therokerroar wrote: »

Is there a strike on Tuesday then or what's the story?

No. Nothing has been decided and won't be until its voted for at class rep council Monday afternoon. There is rumours of strike but there has been no such decession called or requested by any party, that im aware of, at this stage.

therokerroar

Is there a strike on Tuesday then or what's the story?

alpha2zulu

MitchKoobski wrote: »

I do apologise at the moment for targeting part of this post at one user's argument.

Im starting to feel like Ahem! is just using a vast array of official terms and complicated explanations to put people off arguing against their posts.

Also, trying to pretend that they're just a concerned third party is getting pretty ridiculous at this point.

We can all (im sure most of us) freely admit that we are students and are directly concerned with this outcome and would like to discuss it without someone attempting to make our every worry and argument look juvenile and stupid, as if we are not allowed have an opinion of our own without being a member of the TUI or the WIT board.

Well said, the tone from our 3rd party informer is not much better than our visitor from TCD a few pages back.:D There is so much sarcasm in that post its even hard to translate.

Ahem! wrote: »

For all intents and purposes, and assuming an original rate of 8e, you are talking about a difference between the parties of 1.28e.

However even though Ahem! as a reliable source is very much in question given that they are a 3rd party, if it is in fact true that the TUI branch have gone down this track because of a measly 1.28e, it really doesent give them a leg to stand on in the p.r. stakes when some of their members are earning six figure salarys. It would be interesting if anybody could clarify that 1.28 figure.

Nor has it got anything to do with the TUI being able to drag this out for years as Sully asserted above (again in seemingly perfect ignorance of the procedures!) Let me make it clear: There is simply no provision in the procedure that would allow for that to happen! The procedure is, after all, the designated means by which cases exactly such as this are meant to be settled - it is HOW stuff gets fixed, and is a binding process of escalation (if necessary) that terminates at the LRC.

Again its totally baseless to say that the dispute cant be dragged out over an extended period. To us final year's the talking has gone on to long as it is. We only have weeks before this dispute does serious damage to our prospects for next year.

ICTU action, or similar, may occasionally be deliberately vague, but the action outlined in relation to exams by the local TUI Branch representative in your post would have had to be written in the ballot forms handed out to all who voted.**

Again my friend you have no evidence to substantiate that the ballot as you say yourself wasent "deliberately vague" and who exactly was included in the 84% figure, and how was the ballot carried out etc.Until clarified its still very much a valid point of discussion.
As myself and other posters have mentioned here previously, the feedback we are getting from a substantial number of lecturers is that the TUI branch heads have very much gone on a solo run in terms of the course of industrial action decided on. Thats fact, we've heard it for ourselves.

Well, I guess you better hope it's not an exam question - as you blatantly haven't much of a clue!

Once again, cheap attempt to intimidate and drag the discussion off topic.

MitchKoobski

I do apologise at the moment for targeting part of this post at one user's argument.

Im starting to feel like Ahem! is just using a vast array of official terms and complicated explanations to put people off arguing against their posts.

Also, trying to pretend that they're just a concerned third party is getting pretty ridiculous at this point.

We can all (im sure most of us) freely admit that we are students and are directly concerned with this outcome and would like to discuss it without someone attempting to make our every worry and argument look juvenile and stupid, as if we are not allowed have an opinion of our own without being a member of the TUI or the WIT board.

Hailhail1967

Ahem you seem very informed and while i am not, i am a second year student in wit and from speakin to lecturers who are willing to talk, they are saying there is a list of further disagreements that the lecturering staff intend to hold managment too, this would seem to me the reason why 60c is becoming such an issue, any truth to that???

Ahem!

Well, I guess you better hope it's not an exam question - as you blatantly haven't much of a clue!

The answer is kinda in the name, however. It's a procedure for settling grievances......And what have you got here, prior to all the industrial actions, sabre-rattling and spleen venting?

In fact, if you were to think for a moment (yes, that's think! It's what's supposed to take place between your reading and reacting!) about some of the information that's already in the public domain, much of it actually quoted in your own posts above, then you might realise that what you have here is a fairly primitive example of the species.

As you quote above, for example, the matter of payment rests, it seems, upon competing interpretations of the dept. of education insistence that payment for marking exams now be adjusted on a pro-rata basis.

Management have interpreted this to mean 50% (that's about half Alpha!?!) due to the fact that WIT have moved to a modularised system that now exams students twice, rather than once, a year. On the other hand, and given that the TUI, as quoted in your own post Alpha, don't seem to be raising any objections to the pro-rata idea (just its interpretation) they are likely to be asking for something closer to 66% (two thirds!) due to the fact that assessment has typically moved from a single 3 hour exam model to two x two hour assessments.

If that isn't a basis for discussion then frankly I don't know what is? For all intents and purposes, and assuming an original rate of 8e, you are talking about a difference between the parties of 1.28e. If you can't negotiate that down, through the grievance procedure, and split the difference at somewhere around 60c then I''l readily admit your not a reactionary halfwit Alpha!

As it stands, however, the question is why is this not happening?

Well, it's not happening because management have refused to abide by the grievance procedure. And why have they done that? Well, theories abound.

What's clear to any sane and reasonable person, however, is that its got nothing to do with cash. An extra 60c per script is hardly going to necessitate the threatened cuts to essential services.

Nor has it got anything to do with the TUI being able to drag this out for years as Sully asserted above (again in seemingly perfect ignorance of the procedures!) Let me make it clear: There is simply no provision in the procedure that would allow for that to happen! The procedure is, after all, the designated means by which cases exactly such as this are meant to be settled - it is HOW stuff gets fixed, and is a binding process of escalation (if necessary) that terminates at the LRC.

The problems you have now are a classic example of what happens when you step outside of such procedures - i.e. industrial action, instransigence and collatoral damage.

**In relation to the second question Alpha I'm afraid to say you also failed that. ICTU action, or similar, may occasionally be deliberately vague, but the action outlined in relation to exams by the local TUI Branch representative in your post would have had to be written in the ballot forms handed out to all who voted.** Sorry to burst another conspiracy theory.........You happen to know who killed JFK though?????

alpha2zulu

Ahem! wrote: »

Alpha, just a couple of questions?
What exactly do you think a grievance procedure is? And what's it for?

Whats this, an exam question??

Secondly, do you really believe that a you can have a ballot for 'industrial action' that doesn't clearly state what the proposed action is?

Happens all the time. Union vote on industrial action, then union heads decide on what action they deem appropiate. Many examples of it available with a quick Google.;)

A lot of pretty incoherent posts on this thread.

Well to those of us who are more than

Ahem! wrote: »

just a concerned third party

in this dispute and have a direct interest in this, much of what I wrote will make perfect sense.

Ahem!

A lot of pretty incoherent posts on this thread. Most of them emanating from one source, however, it has to be said.

Alpha, just a couple of questions?

What exactly do you think a grievance procedure is? And what's it for?

Secondly, do you really believe that a you can have a ballot for 'industrial action' that doesn't clearly state what the proposed action is?

alpha2zulu

As predicted the TUI branch secrtary has launched a rebuttle to the negative publicity of the last few days.
http://www.wlrfm.com/tabId/503/itemId/3602/TUI-says-it-was-never-consulted-about-changes-to-e.aspx

Saturday, January 30th 2010
The Teachers Union of Ireland branch at WIT says it was never consulted about changes to exam payment rates.
Students at Waterford Institute of Technology will not receive their exam results on Tuesday as expected because of a dispute between lecturers and the college.
Teachers Union of Ireland members at the Institute have voted overwhelmingly in favour of industrial action after the college attempted to cut the amount of money they are paid to correct exams
They have agreed not to turn in exam rates, draft future exams or mark future exams until the situation is resolved.
TUI Branch Secretary Kathleen Moore Walsh says in October 2009 the institute slashed the exam marking rate without any consultation with them.
"We asked back in October what this decision was based upon and we were told three specific things and one of those was the fact that other rates were being paid at other institutes of technology. We've called around institutes and the issue is different in each institute. We were the first institute to go completely to semesterisation five years ago at that point all it said in the circular from the department was that the rate should be pro-rata. There has been no determination as to what pro-rata means and nationally this issue is on the agenda to be discussed. WIT unilaterally slashed it and we have found that the rates are all over the place at the other institutes"
She says they were not informed of any administrative error which resulted them in being paid too much to correct exams.
"For work we had done in June and September they retrospectively slashed it. We filed a grievance and began working through our grievance procedure on this issue when in December WIT decided it didn't want to be bound by this agreement when it stepped outside this agreement, that's what's caused the problem at this point.

However the last line of her monologue to WLR is the most telling of how pathetic the actions of the TUI is in all this....pretty much confirming its not about the 8 euro fee but rather breaking certain 'grievance procedures'

You know, we didn't want to drag the students into this and if we were within our grievance procedure no other party would be involved in this at all"

Hopefully all the class reps will bear this nonsense from the TUI and the branch secretary in mind when it comes to decideing what action to take next week. The TUI cant seem to see past the fact that students are potentially facing a salary of 0k next year as a result of the bully boy tactics employed and imposed on regular TUI members by the TUI Waterford top brass. If that is not a reasonable 'grievance' by students I dont know what is.

Bear in mind also the regular lecturers were balloted for industrial action...not whether or not to hold students futures to ransom. I very much doubt the figure 84% percent support among lecturers who voted would have held.

dlofnep

lugha wrote: »

Slightly OT but could somebody explain why exactly it is important for final year students to have their results? I read up thread that in some cases they will be asked for them in job interviews and such. But how does this work for applicants who are in non-semesterized college, who presumably have no results to cite until they get their overall qualification at the end of the academic year? Or are such students at a disadvantage in this respect?

I applied for my masters and they want all my results for exams taken thus far. It would be nice to know if I'm in line for a 2.1 or not though - and whether I need to quit work to make up for it. I'm hoping I have done well, but you can never tell with some lecturers.

lugha

alpha 2 zulu wrote: »

She and her shop stewards are holding the employment opportunities of 1700 final year/masters students as pawns in a dispute which is essntially over "precedence" and a 8euro payment per student on top of the salarys outlined above and pension contributions by the Government.

Slightly OT but could somebody explain why exactly it is important for final year students to have their results? I read up thread that in some cases they will be asked for them in job interviews and such. But how does this work for applicants who are in non-semesterized college, who presumably have no results to cite until they get their overall qualification at the end of the academic year? Or are such students at a disadvantage in this respect?

alpha2zulu

jonsey wrote: »

A friend of mine who lectures part time said that the exam payment is only the start of things that the college are trying to change in the contracts and they want to set a precedent. They want to extend opening hours (as mentionned several times in this thread), reduce hours given for course leadership roles and reduce the double-weighting on masters hours, which if it comes in will probably mean that some of the better lecturers will not want to teach the masters courses.

If they want to do something about these alledged proposals to extend hours etc, its a battle for another day. Its a cop-out to try and snowball in other issues into what is purely a dispute involving withholding the results. I'm guessing your not a final year student because I guarantee you we have a lot more to worry about rather than

that the college are trying to change in the contracts and they want to set a precedent

because they have a job guaranteed for next year in almost all cases...we don't! What do you expect us to say....that everything the TUI has done to hold us to ransom is a-ok because the WIT broke a precedent! Nonsense.

To show the kind of two faced hypocrisy of the TUI in this dispute, you just need to look at the "concern" of the WIT TUI branch secretary for the plight of the unemployed last month:

Branch Secretary Kathleen Moore Walsh says the budget will undoubtedly lead to more unemployment in the private sector in Waterford.
http://www.wlrfm.com/tabId/503/itemId/3432/pageId/3/TUI-members-at-WIT-say-the-cuts-in-public-sector.aspx

Yet just over a month later the mask has very much slipped. The employment opportunities of 1700 final year/masters students are being held as pawns in a dispute which is essntially over "precedence" and a 8euro payment per student on top of the salarys outlined above and pension contributions by the Government.

The TUI position is a total joke, but I aint laughing...

jonsey

alpha 2 zulu wrote: »

I'd imagine the PR expenses are nothing compared to the salarys needed to lecture 10000 or so full time students. Every college needs some sort of PR machine. The battle to encourage school leavers to come here is just like any business really
Wthout the current level of students you can be sure the lecturer count would be reduced too.
[/FONT][/FONT]

Obviously the lecturing costs would be more than the PR costs but that's because teaching is the main job for a college. My marketing lecturer (who I won't name) said that the college spent €1.3m on PR consultants and a similar amount on advertising eventhough that lecturer and some of their colleagues offered to devise a campaign free of charge. I'm sure some of them have good experience of working in the real world and would have the expertise to do the job. It's hard to know the effectiveness of tv and radio ads anyway when most people going to WIT are from the nearby region and would probably be more swayed by the lecturer who went to visit them (as they did to my school) and their career guidance. I was only using PR anyway as an example of the amount of money spent by the college over the last few years. Money spent on the new card readers in the library and other waste is one reason why the college say they can't afford to pay for exam corrections at the current rate. How about the money spent on webct eventhough moodle (free of charge) was available all along. When times were good they threw money at things (partly in the hope of getting university status) and now that the $hit has hit the fan they're trying to take it off the lecturers who have already taken a few hits (I know nobody will feel sorry for them but they're not all earning phenomenal salaries).

Regarding the facebook page I think the language used and the attitude that all lecturers are **** etc isn't helpful imo. I know that lecturers can earn €104,000 but you'd probably have to be there for close to 30 years and I'd say someone with a masters or phd and 30 years experience would be earning a similar amount. A friend of mine who lectures part time said that the exam payment is only the start of things that the college are trying to change in the contracts and they want to set a precedent. They want to extend opening hours (as mentionned several times in this thread), reduce hours given for course leadership roles and reduce the double-weighting on masters hours, which if it comes in will probably mean that some of the better lecturers will not want to teach the masters courses.

beegirl

As people keep posting up that list of salaries I would like to point out that a lot of lecturers don't have full-time contracts... so some of your lecturers might be on the very lowest point of the Assistant Lecturer scale, earning, for example, a third of the salary if they do a third of the full-time hours. I think people assume that all their lecturers have money coming out their ears which is not true.

I am only saying this to clarify the point that not all lecturers are automatically on great money, not to try and say that they should be paid for the exam marking!

alpha2zulu

jonsey wrote: »

Do you know how many lecturers are earning this amount or how many years a lecturer has to work to earn that sort of salary.

It would be relatively few and would need at least 20-25
years of service I would imagine which is why I said up to 104k in earnings. It's fact!

Its there to provide context of how a few measly euro in pay are holding the final year students to ransom

As am sure your aware the handy TUI increments chart illustrates the stepped progress up the payscale based on your postion. Make of it what you will.
Every few years you climb up the levels. http://www.tui.ie/_fileupload/TUI_News_Special_Jan_2010.pdf

SALARY SCALES IN
INSTITUTES OF TECHNOLOGY
wef 1/1/10
Assistant Lecturer 1/1/10

1 €39,715 5 €45,568
2 €41,320 6 €46,878
3 €42,960 7 €48,190
4 €44,256 8 €49,487

College Teacher

1 €37,016 9 €50,629
2 €38,657 10 €52,313
3 €40,304 11 €54,000
4 €41,941 12 €56,209
5 €43,602 13 €58,419
6 €45,242 14 €60,157
7 €46,882 15 €64,052
8 €48,532 16 €65,837

Lecturer Scale 1

1 €47,620 7 €65,467
2 €49,932 8 €67,516
3 €51,824 9 €69,563
4 €53,741 10 €71,613
5 €56,144 11 €73,669
6 €63,363

Lecturer Scale/L2

1 €53,607 7 €74,848
2 €56,121 8 €77,086
3 €65,889 9 €79,322
4 €68,118 10 €81,570
5 €70,351 11 €83,811
6 €72,594
Long Service Increments
LSI 1 €2,284
LSI 2 €1,916

Senior Lecturer I

1 €74,006 5 €83,734
2 €86,441 6 €86,160
3 €78,866 7 €88,598
4 €81,307 8 €91,021

Senior Lecturer Scale II

1 €76,407 6 €88,021
2 €78,732 7 €90,341
3 €81,051 8 €92,666
4 €83,375 9 €94,984
5 €85,701 10 €97,520

Senior Lecturer III

1 €82,014 6 €95,971
2 €84,804 7 €98,973
3 €87,596 8 €101,787
4 €90,389 9 €104,770
5 €93,180

Asst Lecturer Hourly
Part Time Rate @ 1/1/10

€63.04

It leads to things like that facebook page which doesn't do us any favours as it aggressively and unfairly attacks all lecturers. I hope none of lecturers see what some of their students are saying - the said students might wish they never got their results.

I don't see whats aggresive about the FB group, its merely posing a question and is useful in keeping students up to date on whats going on. The debate on the site is pretty tame considering some of the views out there.

Also, instead of worrying about lecturer's salaries why not ask who released the press release yesterday (before the balot was even completed!). The answer is the college's PR company. Why aren't we up in arms about all the money the college gives to that company?

I'd imagine the PR expenses are nothing compared to the salarys needed to lecture 10000 or so full time students. Every college needs some sort of PR machine. The battle to encourage school leavers to come here is just like any business really
Wthout the current level of students you can be sure the lecturer count would be reduced too.

Sully

Clano wrote: »

yeah i saw that alpha, dosent tell us much do:mad::mad:
i suppose well have to wait til monday to find out anything

Any action that WITSU is to take must be voted on by the Class Rep Council. So, at the moment, they are bound by the original vote to do nothing until voted on again. The next vote will be on Monday and reps were asked to contact their classes and ask them what action they wanted taken, then go back to WITSU with the information. Therefore, options will be ready to be voted on at the EGM on Monday.

jonsey

alpha 2 zulu wrote: »

Its partcularly pathetic given that these same lecturers are earning anything up to 104k plus State pension contributions per annum. You might ask why we arent up in arms with WIT management...well its because they aint the ones holding on to the green n' whites.

Do you know how many lecturers are earning this amount or how many years a lecturer has to work to earn that sort of salary. It's like saying that people in the public sector should put up with higher taxes because they can earn up to €10m a year. Why does it have nothing to do with the management just because the lecturers have the green and whites. Why not blame the management for either making the "mistake" in the first place, cutting the fees without negotiation and contrary to the official grievance procedure, issuing press releases with blatant lies and for all the money that was wasted by the management over the last few years. Also not all lecturers are of the same opinion (I know one of mine isn't anyway and it's unlikely that he is the only one).

When some posters say that our fees go towards paying for exams to be corrected then they are wrong. Exam payments come form the government. Our fees go to the registrars office. When Feb 2nd comes and we don't get our results then why not go down to the registrars office and ask them where the results are - the processing of exam results is what they deal with. Also, instead of worrying about lecturer's salaries why not ask who released the press release yesterday (before the balot was even completed!). The answer is the college's PR company. Why aren't we up in arms about all the money the college gives to that company?

I want my results as much as the next person but I can see where the lecturers are coming from and who knows what is really going on behind the scenes. The college have more funds to throw at PR so we generally get their side and our lecturers are an easy target as we rarely see "the management" as they are in their cosy offices hiding from all of this. Also, is there any policy on this board about editing posts that are completely factually incorrect such as the one saying that lecturers get €25 per script? A lot of people on here are intelligent and also read the whole thread but others will dip in and will take a figure like that at face value and spread false facts. It's akin to rumours about immigrants getting thousands of euro towards a new car that used to circulate years ago. When people hear controversial things like that they can spread like wildfire and people are often not interested in the truth when it comes out. It leads to things like that facebook page which doesn't do us any favours as it aggressively and unfairly attacks all lecturers. I hope none of lecturers see what some of their students are saying - the said students might wish they never got their results.

Clano

yeah i saw that alpha, dosent tell us much do:mad::mad:
i suppose well have to wait til monday to find out anything

alpha2zulu

Clano wrote: »

Any updates lately sul???? heard the union are given the reps daily updates or something??

This has been put up on the WITSU site.

Class Rep Council will be held @ 5pm Monday 1 February in the Main Auditorium.

No decisions have been made regarding strikes/protests etc. UNTIL that meeting!

Please express your opinion to your Class Rep about what YOU want YOUR Union to do & ask them to drop it in to your SU office before 5pm today Thursday, so we can get options ready for discussion and decision at Mondays meeting.

We remain in contact with both the TUI and the College and will continue to bring you developments as they occur.

If you require any further information please call into your SU Office.

Regards,
WITSU Sabbatical Officers

and from the FB page theirs a meeting Tomorrow afternoon between WITSU and TUI so hopefully we might hear some news tomorrow.

*** ATTENTION WIT STUDENTS! Please ensure that you, or someone from your Class calls into our Offices before 5pm with a plan from your class regarding the current TUI-WIT Dispute. WITSU will hold an executive meeting at 12pm tomorrow and will be meeting with the TUI at 2.30pm. STUDENTS INPUT IS VITAL. ***

Clano

Any updates lately sul???? heard the union are given the reps daily updates or something??

Sully

Mod Note:
Okay folks, lets all take a breather for a moment. No need for things to get out of hand or for getting angry towards others. If you feel like loosing the cool with someone, best to just ignore them or walk away for a while rather then replying. The usual Boards.ie and Forum Charter rules do still apply here, for everyone.

So lets keep the discussion ongoing, civil and as peaceful as possible please.

Thanks.