Newly Qualified Teachers Protest

gosplan · 24-10-2012 10:47PM

MysticalRain wrote: »

You do realize that's exactly what would have happened if you had taken a job in the private sector during the current recession? Is the public sector supposed to be immune to the laws of supply and demand under a capitalist economy that the rest of us are subjected to?

Arggggghhhhhhhh.

What is so complicated about this?

People in the private sector have had their wages decreased, yes ... but it's happened across the board.

If i get a job in a business, shop or restaurant tomorrow, I can expect to be on the same pay as everyone else doing exactly the same job. This is not the case with teaching now, that's the problem.

gosplan · 24-10-2012 10:48PM

Chucky the tree wrote: »

If that's the case they why wast he protest organised by the Unions who insisted on cuts happening to only new teachers? I'd have a lot more respect for protesting if you told the Unions to piss off.

Cause they're worried about having no members in the future.

My name is URL · 24-10-2012 10:50PM

NTMK wrote: »

really??? there was someone bitching about €32000 starting?
Im a recently graduated Scientist/engineer and if someone were to offer me €20000 id snap their hand off.

what's worse is that it makes all people who grew up during the boom look like spoilt twats :mad:

They weren't bitching about it really but they were saying that €32,000 is nothing and seemed to be genuine about it too. It was a vox-pop from the protest on RTE Drive Time, but I'm guessing/hoping that it was just the head-in-the-clouds opinion delusion of one person and that it's not a sentiment shared by very many.

In any case, I'd hate to have her teach my kids one day. Imagine being presently unemployed and just out of college & appearing to turn your nose up at such a high entry level salary. Gone are the days that teaching was viewed as a 'vocation' by those wanting to do it, if she was anything to go by.

kincsem · 24-10-2012 10:50PM

Is Robocop not allowed out these days?

Chucky the tree · 24-10-2012 10:51PM

gosplan wrote: »

Cause they're worried about having no members in the future.

I know. Student teachers should have organised it themselves. Organising it with the help of the people who sold them down the river seems very foolish on the part of the student teachers.

MysticalRain · 24-10-2012 10:52PM

gosplan wrote: »

Arggggghhhhhhhh.

What is so complicated about this?

People in the private sector have had their wages decreased, yes ... but it's happened across the board.

If i get a job in a business, shop or restaurant tomorrow, I can expect to be on the same pay as everyone else doing exactly the same job. This is not the case with teaching now, that's the problem.

That is simply not correct. Have you ever worked in the private sector? You do realize that established teachers have had pay cuts too?

Gbear · 24-10-2012 10:57PM

Grace16 wrote: »

So I was one of the student teachers marching earlier and a lot of people don't understand what we were marching for. We weren't out there saying that 32k is awful money and we want more, we know that we are beyond lucky to get that sort of money! We were protesting about the fact that it is only the NQTs who they are targeting and nobody else in the education sector. We are getting paid a lot less than people who qualified 2 years ago and we just want the Government to look at other places they can cut (maybe those who did qualify before us) rather than cutting our money every year. The main message was Equal Work for Equal Pay, not Give Us More Money

That's well and good but the government just can't cut where it would be fair to.

They can't bring in pay related to performance for the public sector.
They can't hit the high up Union members.

Because of populism and politicking it's not about everyone deciding what's fair for all, it's about people with their own agendas all pulling in their own direction and fighting their own battles.

How many civil servants will agree that they're incompetent morons? What useless waste of oxygen on 60k a year will voluntarily give up 20% of his wages so someone more deserving can get a better wage? How many people in any walk of life would do such a thing?

The battle needed to reign in the public sector is probably unwinnable. Humans aren't altruistic enough to put others before them and it's not really fair that they should be expected to be.
What we do need is a system for new public servants to be taken in on a more sustainable level so that 50 years down the line we're not facing the same bull****.

It's far easier to handicap people as they're on their way in rather than attacking the more senior members who are entrenched.

The kind of people involved in corporate fraud, tax evasion and so on in the private sector are just people, the same as those leeching money from the state. If you don't have systems in place to stop them (like getting rid of bull**** like automatic wage increments regardless of performance) then they'll take the piss.

Ally Dick · 24-10-2012 10:58PM

Newly qualified teachers need to fall into line with the rest of the public sector under Joke Park. If you are a new entrant to the HSE, you are paid buttons. Why should teachers be treated any different ?

2011abc · 24-10-2012 10:59PM

Lots of bitter 'haters' here.During the Tiger years we were expected to settle for our 'safe, secure, pensionable' jobs on our miserable salaries while similarly qualified people got six figure , lotto win annual pay cheques (plus 'bonuses'!) A less qualified friend of mine earned 45k when I was on 15k ...100k when I was on 35-40k and then the gap opened up even more ...Reality check folks ,you expected us to settle for a THIRD of your salary when times were good but we're meant to take the same or less when things are bad ...you cant be expected to loose on the swings AND the roundabout just cos its a 'vocation'...
Anyway as has been said over and over no new teachers are getting 41/32 or 27k ,there are NO jobs for them ,if theyre lucky theyre existing on 2-12 hours work a week .
Great work all the same that the spin doctors have done with the public vs private thing !

bluecode · 24-10-2012 11:00PM

I am related by marriage to several teachers. They are realistic. Apparently unlike most of the marchers. The fact of the matter is that the pay of new teachers will not be increased to match that of the older teachers. The only reality is that teacher's pay will be reduced.

If teachers cannot do the sums on this then I wonder why they're in the profession in the first place.

They are overpaid. I'm sorry but that's the reality.

They may not think it that but that's the way it is.

I don't want to knock teachers not least because several of my in laws are teachers. Because they are decent people they tell me how it is.

Ironically of all professions in the public service. They are one of the most I respect most. Revenue being another.

But you cannot ignore reality.

Once again, the Croke park agreement is trying to hide the reality.

gosplan · 24-10-2012 11:04PM

Chucky the tree wrote: »

I know. Student teachers should have organised it themselves. Organising it with the help of the people who sold them down the river seems very foolish on the part of the student teachers.

Absolutly right but fairly hard to get a load of people organised from all over the country without something like a union.

Make no mistake though, this was the Unions publically coming out and showing support for student teachers - nothing more.

And people have no idea of the trouble all this will cause. Teaching is changing rapidly - the internet generation have guaranteed that kids now will not tune in just to be talked through some powerpoint slides or a lecture held at the blackboard. The NQT's for the next ten years will be the country's most valuable resource as they get these kids and understand this world. They will essentially be able to teach the i-generation in a way that's meaningful to them which is the only way anyone will learn.

And since people are getting into economics here, then they should understand that everyone responds to incentives. In my mind there could be no greater disincentive or demotivational factor than to tell someone that the person beside them, who doesn't put in half the preparation work, or do half the job that they do, is and will be on far more money than them ... for ever.

It's not about teachers being rich - it's about techers being satisfied and motivated. Everyone remember that old disillusioned teacher they had that didn't care anymore and had no enthusaisim for the job, imagine what schools would be like if all the younger teachers were like that?

mikemac1 · 24-10-2012 11:04PM

2011abc wrote: »

you expected us to settle for a THIRD of your salary when times were good but we're meant to take the same or less when things are bad

What does "your salary" mean?

The famous average industrial wage that you hear on the news is around 34k or so, maybe a bit lower

Entry into teaching is about the same

Do you think there are lots of boardsies pulling over 100k?

MysticalRain · 24-10-2012 11:05PM

2011abc wrote: »

Reality check folks ,you expected us to settle for a THIRD of your salary when times were good but we're meant to take the same or less when things are bad ...you cant be expected to loose on the swings AND the roundabout just cos its a 'vocation'...

That argument would actually make sense if most folks in the private sector were on 100k and the teachers unions weren't demanding that the ebb and flow of the economy shouldn't apply to them.

Anyway as has been said over and over no new teachers are getting 41/32 or 27k ,there are NO jobs for them ,if theyre lucky theyre existing on 2-12 hours work a week .
Great work all the same that the spin doctors have done with the public vs private thing !

I think that argument does make sense in the case of teachers on part time or temporary contracts. I wouldn't however have much sympathy for a newly qualified teacher working full time on 32k.

gosplan · 24-10-2012 11:08PM

MysticalRain wrote: »

That is simply not correct. Have you ever worked in the private sector? You do realize that established teachers have had pay cuts too?

Yes. And I never saw someone else on a different payscale/bonus scheme than me for doing the exact same job.

If you first taught for a single hour on Jan 31st 2011, you get paid 20% more than someone who started the next day. That's the issue.

bluecode · 24-10-2012 11:09PM

2011abc wrote: »

Lots of bitter 'haters' here.During the Tiger years we were expected to settle for our 'safe, secure, pensionable' jobs on our miserable salaries while similarly qualified people got six figure , lotto win annual pay cheques (plus 'bonuses'!) A less qualified friend of mine earned 45k when I was on 15k ...100k when I was on 35-40k and then the gap opened up even more ...Reality check folks ,you expected us to settle for a THIRD of your salary when times were good but we're meant to take the same or less when things are bad ...you cant be expected to loose on the swings AND the roundabout just cos its a 'vocation'...
Anyway as has been said over and over no new teachers are getting 41/32 or 27k ,there are NO jobs for them ,if theyre lucky theyre existing on 2-12 hours work a week .
Great work all the same that the spin doctors have done with the public vs private thing !

Reality check for you most of us didn't get the money you got in the public service. Sure there were people on ridiculous money. But they were the EXCEPTION. Let's spell it out again, in the private sector you get paid on the basis of PROFITS made. Not on the basis of your position. Not only that you got effed out if you failed to meet your requirement.

Did that happen to you? No it didn't. I was made redundant from a highly successful multinational company because it was no longer making enough money from the plant I was working in. Not that the company overall was making money but just my part of it.

Did that happen to you. No of course not. You were protected by benchmarking.

Get over yourself.

KamiKazeKitten · 24-10-2012 11:11PM

bluecode wrote: »

I am related by marriage to several teachers. They are realistic. Apparently unlike most of the marchers. The fact of the matter is that the pay of new teachers will not be increased to match that of the older teachers. The only reality is that teacher's pay will be reduced.

The net income of a teacher starting in September 2008 was €557 per week.
The net income of a teacher starting in September 2012 is €406 per week.

Everyone knows that teachers pay will have to be cut, but cuts should affect all teachers equally, not just NQTs. Equal work deserves equal pay.

My name is URL · 24-10-2012 11:13PM

2011abc wrote: »

Lots of bitter 'haters' here.During the Tiger years we were expected to settle for our 'safe, secure, pensionable' jobs on our miserable salaries while similarly qualified people got six figure , lotto win annual pay cheques (plus 'bonuses'!) A less qualified friend of mine earned 45k when I was on 15k ...100k when I was on 35-40k and then the gap opened up even more ...Reality check folks ,you expected us to settle for a THIRD of your salary when times were good but we're meant to take the same or less when things are bad ...you cant be expected to loose on the swings AND the roundabout just cos its a 'vocation'...
Anyway as has been said over and over no new teachers are getting 41/32 or 27k ,there are NO jobs for them ,if theyre lucky theyre existing on 2-12 hours work a week .
Great work all the same that the spin doctors have done with the public vs private thing !

Aside from the silly 'them versus us' tone of your post, you appear to be saying that just because builders etc earned inflated amounts of money during a boom; that somehow you also should have been entitled to such extravagant, unsustainable and unrealistic pay levels. And now that the playing field is being leveled you think you should be protected from the reality?

PC CDROM · 24-10-2012 11:15PM

I want a life style. Being teacher no afford that.

NEXT!

I hate the simplicity.

Tisserand · 24-10-2012 11:15PM

I live in midlands town....teachers on strike last week and planning future strikes...why?...one of their colleagues transferred from one school to another at the other end of the town and another colleague transferred to a school in another town in the same county. This makes me so angry. I would work ANYWHERE if I could get a job. Laid off two years ago from a private sector job - took 80% reduction in income i.e. previous salary vs the dole. You lot need to start listening to the radio and watching the tv and taking in the situation the economy is in.

bluecode · 24-10-2012 11:17PM

KamiKazeKitten wrote: »

The net income of a teacher starting in September 2008 was €557 per week.
The net income of a teacher starting in September 2012 is €406 per week.

Everyone knows that teachers pay will have to be cut, but cuts should affect all teachers equally, not just NQTs. Equal work deserves equal pay.

Yes but gist of the protest is that new teacher's pay should be increased to match older teachers.

That is not realistic. The only reason teacher's pay is not cut is because of the Croke park agreement. Not only that my teacher relatives are very cynical about the so called savings introduced as part of the agreement.

I do not want to pick on teachers specifically, not least because I love my sisters in law. But the whole public service seem to be living in cloud cuckoo land. Maybe not them but their unions seem to think they can escape the reality that pay cuts are inevitable.

Sorry but that's the way it is.

MysticalRain · 24-10-2012 11:19PM

gosplan wrote: »

Yes. And I never saw someone else on a different payscale/bonus scheme than me for doing the exact same job.

If you first taught for a single hour on Jan 31st 2011, you get paid 20% more than someone who started the next day. That's the issue.

I'm sorry, but that's life. I started on a lot less in my first IT job than some who graduated during the dotcom bubble. Far from being ungrateful, I just got on with it and made he best of the situation.

gosplan · 24-10-2012 11:19PM

Tisserand wrote: »

I live in midlands town....teachers on strike last week and planning future strikes...why?...one of their colleagues transferred from one school to another at the other end of the town and another colleague transferred to a school in another town in the same county.

I don't get this. Not trying to get embroiled in anything but is that why they were striking or something?? A transfer?

Tisserand · 24-10-2012 11:20PM

That is exactly why they are striking

dory · 24-10-2012 11:21PM

Where is the €32k figure coming from? A new secondary teacher makes €27k a year IF they get fulltime hours. The norm is 12 hours so €13.5k a year. I think that is the problemo.

gosplan · 24-10-2012 11:21PM

MysticalRain wrote: »

I'm sorry, but that's life. I started on a lot less in my first IT job than some who graduated during the dotcom bubble. Far from being ungrateful, I just got on with it and made he best of the situation.

What?? So to clarify. When you started after the dotcom crash, the wages of other people that were working with you at the same time, doing the same job, had not come down to the level that you were starting at.

KamiKazeKitten · 24-10-2012 11:22PM

bluecode wrote: »

Yes but gist of the protest is that new teacher's pay should be increased to match older teachers.

That is not realistic. The only reason teacher's pay is not cut is because of the Croke park agreement. Not only that my teacher relatives are very cynical about the so called savings introduced as part of the agreement.

I do not want to pick on teachers specifically, not least because I love my sisters in law. But the whole public service seem to be living in cloud cuckoo land. Maybe not them but their unions seem to think they can escape the reality that pay cuts are inevitable.

Sorry but that's the way it is.

No, it isn't.
I am a student teacher, and would have been at that protest but currently prepping for teaching practice meant I didn't leave the school til about 5 o'clock and wouldn't have gotten in on time.

The gist of the protest is that the pay cuts are unfair. The students I'm in college with aren't idiots. We're in a recession, of course things must be cut. All we ask is that the cuts are equal, as it is they are creating a two tier system.

vamos! · 24-10-2012 11:22PM

Tisserand wrote: »

I live in midlands town....teachers on strike last week and planning future strikes...why?...one of their colleagues transferred from one school to another at the other end of the town and another colleague transferred to a school in another town in the same county. This makes me so angry. I would work ANYWHERE if I could get a job. Laid off two years ago from a private sector job - took 80% reduction in income i.e. previous salary vs the dole. You lot need to start listening to the radio and watching the tv and taking in the situation the economy is in.

I took a 60% decrease last year, as I had no choice but to take part-time hours. I still hadtowork5days a week. I have also worked in more schools than years I am qualified and have worked in a number of counties. I am currently more than a hundred miles from where I want to be, in a school I would prefer not to be in. A job is a job though and I can't afford to be overly picky.

gosplan · 24-10-2012 11:22PM

Tisserand wrote: »

That is exactly why they are striking

Were they forced transfers??

MagicSean · 24-10-2012 11:22PM

The protest was against the establishment of a two tier system.

As they are new teachers and graduates it wasn't really "their" unions who agreed to it was it?

As far as I'm concerned teachers are some of the most important people in the country. They are responsible for educating and caring for the children who will make up our society in the future. And as with every single job in the universe, the more it pays the better the quality of applicant to choose from.

Wages should have been the last thing to be cut from the education budget. What exactly does the rest of the Education budget get spent on anyway?

A_Sober_Paddy · 24-10-2012 11:24PM

krudler wrote: »

32 grand a year before tax? isnt all that much tbh ,I used to be of the "ah shure they get all summer off" brigade until I knew a teacher and she works a lot, a LOT of hours she doesnt get paid for. How many people here would take work home from their office or job and sit there most of the evening and do it for no extra money? I sure as sh1te wouldnt.

Not to mention all the crap they put up with from kids, parents, interfering government bodies, these days if a kid is being bold and not doing their work its not the kids or parents fault, its the teachers,so they get screwed in every facet of their job.

That's the job, teachers have to correct and set exams, that's part of the job. If you don't wish to deal with kids, then don't teach, if you can't take stick...its all part of the job that they should know about before doing there HDip, and if they don't know that then its there own fault and nobody else's, same with nurses(if you don't want to wash old people don't become a nurse, also nurses aren't doctors despite what they may think).

I don't fancy being one of those people who works 50/60 hours a week on salary and only get paid for 35/40 hours, so I won't be taking one of those jobs, its fairly simple...If a part of the job is something you hate or don't want to do, then look for a different career...

Newly Qualified Teachers Protest

Comments