Croke Park II preliminary Talks started today

fall wrote: »

660 teenagers a week. Everyone of them have individual needs.

individual needs? Do you mean having to learn all their names? Or do you teach the curriculum at different speeds and set different homework for 660 kids each week? Because that is what you're implying when you say they all have individual needs.

Sounds like you're just doing some cliched window dressing of your job? In school, 100% of my class did the same homework and were taught the same stuff at the same time...and the same material was trotted out to the kids from the previous year. Please spare us the 'every child is a unique snowflake' ****e to justify doing 22 hours classtime per week.

Head The Wall wrote: »

Does having more kids mean they have to stand for longer hours, no I don't think do. i also don't believe that every teacher has to deal with 660 individual kids every week. You are waffling, plain and simple

I notice how you haven't said its unacceptable to be assaulted or abused by those same pupils...............or is it just part of the job he signed up for, "plain and simple"

Head The Wall wrote: »

Does having more kids mean they have to stand for longer hours, no I don't think do. i also don't believe that every teacher has to deal with 660 individual kids every week. You are waffling, plain and simple

No I am not waffling as you so rudely put it. Just because you don't agree with me does not mean you can claim it is waffle. Mixed ability teaching is what teachers have to do these days. Yes in our day you were in a class of children with similar needs and a one size fits all approach was applied. Today you will have non readers to higher level in the one class and you have to differentiate to meet the needs of all students and that's before you address the children with behavioural difficulties. Also who deals with bullying? Who investigates, records, meets parents etc when any incident occurs. Who writes and reviews school policy. Who develops and researches new methodologies? The teacher does and I haven't even mentioned correcting, being a tutor etc. you now have to give comment only feedback which means homework needs individual advice on how to improve.
Have you taught in a school in the last five years? Challenge me with facts. Teaching has changed hugely in the last five years thank God. I now teach using Moodle and I.C.T. All of which required huge amounts of my own time to learn and develop and all this area evolves so fast the demands to constantly update your skills is ever present.
I work very hard but I will say I think three months off is not necessary. I personally would love to see the month of June being designated for professional ðevelopement. I think the kids need the three months to be kids. Please don't cherry pick from my post as it is all relevant.

antoobrien wrote: »

Kippy, I'm not trying to be argumentative here, but the governments position was summarised as effectively give us what we want (i.e. make a deal) or we'll do X. The unions position is effectively the same - we don't want this deal, give us what we want or we'll do Y.

How can one be described as bullyboy (I know you didn't use the term) and the other not when they are the same position?

As for trying to keep the standard of living, the government's broad aim is to try to keep the national standard of living in a position that affordable, sustainable and won't do long term damage to the economy. The PS is just one part of the puzzle (despite the doomsday scenarios that a few are trotting out).




I'm not arguing that in the slightest, any cuts are hard to take. I'm just shaking my head at the explicit hypocrisy of the unions calling the government bullies, when they are using the same tactics to try to get their aims.

The big difference being, the PS unions aren't looking to make any change. The government are, by demanding savings that affect lower and middle earners proportionally more than higher paid.... like themselves.

If they are serious about reforming payments to the PS, why not start by doing something about the fact that a number of people in state employment are also in recipt of state pensions, and willin some cases, be able to claim 3 or 4 huge pensions when they eventually "retire" to sit on various boards?

Oh, I firgot, this will affect themselves first. Any sign of Kenny giving up his teachers pension? or RED ruari refusing his sennate pension??


Labour, the workers party?? BO**YX

Head The Wall wrote: »

The fact that I have an issue with is where you said that a teacher that has 22 hours a week sees 30 different students in every class and therefore has 660 students a week to deal with. This is what I am calling waffle so unless you have facts to back it up it's waffle.

I didn't ask for an expose on what teachers do either, I'm well aware that there are teachers that do all you list and there are also plenty that don't do that amount of work. Don't go on as if all teachers are brilliant

Sorry but read my post, I didn't say different students, you did. Is that factual enough for you. You yourself said teachers have 22 hours class contact. The average class has 30 students. You referenced teachers when saying that lots of people spend 40 hours on their feet and that teachers have class contact of 22. I made the point regarding the intensity of what a teacher does, that in each of those hours there are 30 people to teach and care for.
The exposé as you put it was to highlight what happens outside of the 22 hours.
And as for don't go on as if all teachers are brilliant, where did I say that? Facts please!
Also as a matter of interest in what profession can anyone say everyone is brilliant.
I have heard nothing balanced or fair from your arguments.

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

I read this article in todays Independant by John Drennan. It was mainly the contents of an address by Maurice Hayes a PS mandrin as he Drennan describes. While a short piece it is inciteful.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/civil-service-putting-own-privileges-before-state-29120374.html

Oh the irony.

You said inciteful, but I'm pretty sure you meant insightful... so you were unintentionally right.

Head The Wall wrote: »

The fact that I have an issue with is where you said that a teacher that has 22 hours a week sees 30 different students in every class and therefore has 660 students a week to deal with. This is what I am calling waffle so unless you have facts to back it up it's waffle.

I didn't ask for an expose on what teachers do either, I'm well aware that there are teachers that do all you list and there are also plenty that don't do that amount of work. Don't go on as if all teachers are brilliant

Lads what are ye actually arguing about here? Are ye trying to say a teacher is overpaid because others stay on their feet longer and are paid less? Is is really that simplistic? First people had a go at nurses because they acted like Florence Nightingales and didn't get attached enough and therefore should have their pay cut. Now its the turn of teachers! Who's next? Plumbers, farmers, bank clerks?

^ As someone outside the PS and union system I couldn't really agree with that. It appears to me that union bosses want to keep their membership happy so they'll keep paying their union dues and in turn the bosses can keep their seriously inflated salaries.

creedp wrote: »

The bigger boys are looking after their own positions and selling the smaller unions down the river. For example the so called Public Sector Committee is really only a forum for the bigger PS unions to negotiate a deal which satisfies their members only -

its even worse than that as IMPACT and SIPTU seem to be ready tos ell out sections of their own members to keep majority happy

If agreed this could see a lot of members leave their current union

creedp wrote: »

Wasn't it Impact and SIPTU represented the Public Sector Committee during the negotiations? Some objectivity there!

and the PSEU - what could possibly link the 3?:rolleyes:

kceire wrote: »

Aib up 6% and IBRC up 16%.

When the government scrapped the towards 2016 pay rises in 2009 to the PS, my mates in AIB still got them.

Its all very interesting isn't. We have so many people constantly hammering on about how the private sector cuts pay when in trouble .. the problem is the lack of widespread evidence to support this assertion. Like a lot of claims peddled by people in support of slashing PS pay .. chief amongst them 'your employer is broke and must cut pay .. PS get real'!

I'd prefer to go with my own limited evidence in this regard. I checked with my extended family who are in the private sector and no one has had a pay cut. Worst case scenario is a pay feeze while others are getting annual pay increases and bonuses. This refers to jobs in the food manufacturing industry, pharmaceutical, private healthcare/dental, financial services, small IT support company and 2 banks. I asked the guy in the IT company how things were going and he said things are quiet and a couple of people were let go but there was no question of pay cuts.

So despite all the hysterical comments that the PS should get real about pay cuts its pretty obvious that its only PS workers who are sufferring widespread substantial pay cuts in Ireland at present. I found it interesting to listen to the woman (missed her name) operating Vinnie B's twitter machine last night when she said that the ordinary bank workers who were not directly involved in the banking collapse will now suffer greatly from pay cuts! I'm sure she thought the same about the PS workers who have actually sufferred pay cuts.

themoneyguy wrote: »

This report states that there was a 6% increase in salary in one bank ( due to a contractual increase in 2009) but a 11% decrease in overall remuneration from 2008 to date .... Sorry but isnt this a net paycut of 5%?

Had a quick look at report ..seemed pretty clear to me that pay increases have been awarded across the board in 2012 and are planned for 2013.

http://static.rasset.ie/documents/business/mercer-report-on-bank-remuneration.pdf#page=24&zoom=auto,0,237

Interesting summary on page 95 of report

Had a quick look at report ..seemed pretty clear to me that pay increases have been awarded across the board in 2012 and are planned for 2013.

http://static.rasset.ie/documents/bu...oom=auto,0,237

Interesting summary on page 95 of report

at the very least, the pay should have been frozen for everyone except for key personnel from when they were bailed out until we are in the clear economy wise. Ill be the first to comment on Ps pay, pensions, perks, etc... but when you read about this, sounds like its taking the p*ss out of public servants and the rest of the private sector alike!