A message to wannabe teachers - Stay away from teaching.

rainbowtrout · 08-03-2014 05:40PM

marienbad wrote: »

Of course you can and should talk about your own situation , but that is virtually all you talk about .

The biggest cause of anti-teacher sentiment is the unwillingness , not just now, but for decades ,to ever accept that it might be a good profession with great pay and conditions, compared to the economy of which it is part..

And the biggest problem with non teachers is their general unwillingness to accept that teaching conditions have changed radically, particularly in the last five years and that because a person works in a school as a teacher does not mean that they have a spectacular wage or even a wage that offers anything better than the dole.

Some of my students were asking about teaching as a potential career the other day as they had heard there weren't many jobs and other people had advised them to look at other careers. I explained very simply, without going into the details of mountains of paperwork, Croke Park hours, or Haddington Road that teachers on full hours get full pay, teachers on part time hours get part time pay.

I explained very simply that a new teacher starting on full hours could expect to earn about 30k. That to a 16 year old is massive money as they can't comprehend having more than pocket money by and large. I then gave the example of a part time teacher on 5-6 hours, a quarter of full hours, so a quarter of the wage 7.5k per year, but were in school every day because their classes were spread across the timetable. That in comparison to dole of approx. 9.8k per year.

Their first thought was 'who are the part timers in the school'. - This is a point I've made on this forum in the past and am doing again. Students see teachers as teachers, if they are in the school they assume they have the same working conditions as all other teachers in the school. They are not aware of who is part time and who is full time, they only differentiate between new and old. Their parents assume the same. As do the general public.

marienbad · 08-03-2014 05:49PM

rainbowtrout wrote: »

And the biggest problem with non teachers is their general unwillingness to accept that teaching conditions have changed radically, particularly in the last five years and that because a person works in a school as a teacher does not mean that they have a spectacular wage or even a wage that offers anything better than the dole.

Some of my students were asking about teaching as a potential career the other day as they had heard there weren't many jobs and other people had advised them to look at other careers. I explained very simply, without going into the details of mountains of paperwork, Croke Park hours, or Haddington Road that teachers on full hours get full pay, teachers on part time hours get part time pay.

I explained very simply that a new teacher starting on full hours could expect to earn about 30k. That to a 16 year old is massive money as they can't comprehend having more than pocket money by and large. I then gave the example of a part time teacher on 5-6 hours, a quarter of full hours, so a quarter of the wage 7.5k per year, but were in school every day because their classes were spread across the timetable. That in comparison to dole of approx. 9.8k per year.

Their first thought was 'who are the part timers in the school'. - This is a point I've made on this forum in the past and am doing again. Students see teachers as teachers, if they are in the school they assume they have the same working conditions as all other teachers in the school. They are not aware of who is part time and who is full time, they only differentiate between new and old. Their parents assume the same. As do the general public.

So is their a two-tier system in schools now then ?

Inspector Coptoor · 08-03-2014 05:56PM

4 tier technically

rainbowtrout · 08-03-2014 07:08PM

marienbad wrote: »

So is their a two-tier system in schools now then ?

4 tier as Inspector Coopter said, but even that aside, the fact that teachers entering into the profession can't get full time jobs is probably one of the biggest problems. Anyone entering any other job in the public service can apply for a job and it's an actual position with full hours: gardai, HSE, civil service etc. Apply for a job in teaching, an essential public service and at best you'll get a few part time hours. It has been devalued as a job, not only in terms of salary cuts but the fact that when a full time teacher retires their job is typically not advertised as a full time position, more often than not it is carved up into 2 or 3 jobs. You may argue that 'isn't it better for 2 or 3 people to get employment'? Well not if the wage is not sustainable for providing for a single person let alone a family, mortgage etc in the long run.

The burn out rate in the UK is 5 years, we are heading down that road with every cut and change to working conditions in Irish education. Do you want your children to be taught in a school where there is a revolving door as teachers come and go every year? Have teachers who are only there for a year to make some money and not stay for the long term because the working conditions don't make it viable any longer? Have them attending a school where there is a lack of experience on staff because people keep leaving? Do you want people teaching your children who view teaching as something to do for the year while they think of something else to do? Schools need to have a mix of newer and more experienced staff, not staff who keep trundling through the place on a few hours and move on to find something better the following year. People who put down roots in the community and get to know the students, people whose experience will benefit the students.

chippers · 08-03-2014 08:40PM

A friend from England was telling me that the situation in england has gotten so bad that they are now recruiting people straight from finishing their degree (not teaching degree) in a scheme called teach first. Basically, getting people to teach for a couple of years before entering their 'real' profession.

rainbowtrout · 08-03-2014 08:54PM

chippers wrote: »

A friend from England was telling me that the situation in england has gotten so bad that they are now recruiting people straight from finishing their degree (not teaching degree) in a scheme called teach first. Basically, getting people to teach for a couple of years before entering their 'real' profession.

I teach with a few teachers who did a year or two in the UK and they said there are a lot of Australians and New Zealanders teaching over there while they spend a year in London. It's essentially their gap year job and they move on afterwards.

A couple of my friends went teaching over there after they got the dip. They got what was known as a 'Golden Hello' which was a £5k bonus if they stayed in the job for one year in what was considered shortage subjects. Subjects like English and maths in which you would imagine there would be plenty of graduates. They taught for the year, took the bonus and came home with experience and £5k in the bank. We're not at that stage yet, but the working conditions are heading that way.

wolfyboy555 · 08-03-2014 09:03PM

chippers wrote: »

A friend from England was telling me that the situation in england has gotten so bad that they are now recruiting people straight from finishing their degree (not teaching degree) in a scheme called teach first. Basically, getting people to teach for a couple of years before entering their 'real' profession.

A programme on bbc3 followed some of these teachers over the course of the year. Worth a watch. It's on the bbc iplayer and it's called tough young teachers.

chippers · 08-03-2014 10:49PM

wolfyboy555 wrote: »

A programme on bbc3 followed some of these teachers over the course of the year. Worth a watch. It's on the bbc iplayer and it's called tough young teachers.

Cheers i'll check that out

Afroshack · 08-03-2014 11:07PM

chippers wrote: »

A friend from England was telling me that the situation in england has gotten so bad that they are now recruiting people straight from finishing their degree (not teaching degree) in a scheme called teach first. Basically, getting people to teach for a couple of years before entering their 'real' profession.

Schools also recruit in April for the incoming September - the turnover is so high they might have to organise recruitment for 10-15 new teachers every year and this usually takes a fair amount of time.

endakenny · 08-03-2014 11:16PM

rainbowtrout wrote: »

4 tier as Inspector Coopter said, but even that aside, the fact that teachers entering into the profession can't get full time jobs is probably one of the biggest problems. Anyone entering any other job in the public service can apply for a job and it's an actual position with full hours: gardai, HSE, civil service etc. Apply for a job in teaching, an essential public service and at best you'll get a few part time hours. It has been devalued as a job, not only in terms of salary cuts but the fact that when a full time teacher retires their job is typically not advertised as a full time position, more often than not it is carved up into 2 or 3 jobs. You may argue that 'isn't it better for 2 or 3 people to get employment'? Well not if the wage is not sustainable for providing for a single person let alone a family, mortgage etc in the long run.

If the Department of Education won't provide the money for a full-time replacement then there's nothing that the board of management can do about it.

evolving_doors · 08-03-2014 11:23PM

endakenny wrote: »

If the Department of Education won't provide the money for a full-time replacement then there's nothing that the board of management can do about it.

Whats this thread got to do with the BOM?

rainbowtrout · 08-03-2014 11:24PM

endakenny wrote: »

If the Department of Education won't provide the money for a full-time replacement then there's nothing that the board of management can do about it.

A full time teaching post is 22 hours. A school can advertise for a full time teacher for 22 hours or advertise for 2 teachers for 11 hours each. Or any other combination they wish. It will cost the same amount of money. It's not about funding.

Full time jobs are being split into multiple part time jobs. It's not always about subject combination either. E.g. English and History is a common combination yet a school can advertise for 14 hour position for English and 8 hour position for History even though the 22 hours came from a retiring English and History teacher who was on full hours.

seavill · 08-03-2014 11:28PM

In general the hours are replaced in full provided the school are not over quota. The point the previous poster was making was that the school principal then makes this into 2 or 3 jobs to suit themselves. With 2 to 3 teachers on small hours they can use them for supervision etc. when needed as they will generally be around, they would hope that they would be those that ask how high to jump as they are trying to impress to get more hours next year. and also if they get extra horus for resource or something mid year they can add them in very easily.

I am not saying all principals are like this I am just saying it can happen when one full time job is split between a few people.

If a school is under quota a teacher leaves that teacher needs to be replaced in full, just maybe not with one single person.

We were told in a VEC before that all the contracts that we had (those non CID people) were split to help those getting the contracts. Their logic was that if my hours were made up of some from X teacher on leave, some from Y teacher on secondment, some from traveler hours, some from resource, some from special allocations etc. etc. etc. that way if some of the hours are lost e.g. that teh person on secondment returns everyone will lose some hours rather than one person losing a job.
This was basically a lie. It allowed them to mess around with people have them between different schools on the scheme, and cut hours here and there without them being noticable becuase "no one lost a job"
the way the hours were broken up also gave them grounds for several people to be rejected CIDs becuase part of their hours were not CID type hours. This way they kept their CID teacher level low as they wanted

endakenny · 09-03-2014 12:06AM

Armelodie wrote: »

Whats this thread got to do with the BOM?

The BOM is the employer of a teacher and is responsible for advertising for a replacement for a departing teacher. In my quote of the post I replied to, I highlighted the point I was dealing with.

endakenny · 09-03-2014 12:10AM

seavill wrote: »

In general the hours are replaced in full provided the school are not over quota. The point the previous poster was making was that the school principal then makes this into 2 or 3 jobs to suit themselves. With 2 to 3 teachers on small hours they can use them for supervision etc. when needed as they will generally be around, they would hope that they would be those that ask how high to jump as they are trying to impress to get more hours next year. and also if they get extra horus for resource or something mid year they can add them in very easily.

I am not saying all principals are like this I am just saying it can happen when one full time job is split between a few people.

If a school is under quota a teacher leaves that teacher needs to be replaced in full, just maybe not with one single person.

We were told in a VEC before that all the contracts that we had (those non CID people) were split to help those getting the contracts. Their logic was that if my hours were made up of some from X teacher on leave, some from Y teacher on secondment, some from traveler hours, some from resource, some from special allocations etc. etc. etc. that way if some of the hours are lost e.g. that teh person on secondment returns everyone will lose some hours rather than one person losing a job.
This was basically a lie. It allowed them to mess around with people have them between different schools on the scheme, and cut hours here and there without them being noticable becuase "no one lost a job"
the way the hours were broken up also gave them grounds for several people to be rejected CIDs becuase part of their hours were not CID type hours. This way they kept their CID teacher level low as they wanted

Why would a principal feel inconvenienced by the replacement of a retired teacher with a full-time teacher? After all, the Department, not the principal, pays the salary.

rainbowtrout · 09-03-2014 12:18AM

endakenny wrote: »

Why would a principal feel inconvenienced by the replacement of a retired teacher with a full-time teacher? After all, the Department, not the principal, pays the salary.

Because a teacher on part time hours is less secure in their job. They're likely to do more voluntary work to try and keep in with management in the hope they'll get more hours. Hiring two part timers instead of one full timer means there's two teachers in this position and it means there are two teachers who can be cajoled into doing extra curricular instead of one. Two teachers to provide free supervision instead of one. It's a form of exploitation really.

Principals certainly have a certain role in the casualisation of teaching but the VECs/Dept of Education are sanctioning these contracts so they are not blameless either

endakenny · 09-03-2014 12:27AM

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Because a teacher on part time hours is less secure in their job. They're likely to do more voluntary work to try and keep in with management in the hope they'll get more hours. Hiring two part timers instead of one full timer means there's two teachers in this position and it means there are two teachers who can be cajoled into doing extra curricular instead of one. Two teachers to provide free supervision instead of one. It's a form of exploitation really.

Principals certainly have a certain role in the casualisation of teaching but the VECs/Dept of Education are sanctioning these contracts so they are not blameless either

Given that every teacher is obliged to do S&S under HRA except for those who had not done it before HRA and have chosen to opt-out, there's no need for the principal to employ part-time teachers to do S&S.

With regard to extracurricular activity, why won't the ASTI and the TUI issue the following ultimatum to the JMB?

"Replace retired teachers with full-time teachers only or we'll direct our members to pull the plug on extra-curricular activity?"

Is the casualisation of secondary teaching more common in State schools than in voluntary schools?

evolving_doors · 09-03-2014 12:56AM

endakenny wrote: »

Why would a principal feel inconvenienced by the replacement of a retired teacher with a full-time teacher? After all, the Department, not the principal, pays the salary.

Also you have to take into account subject combination, subjects the school can offer, subjects they can maintain and timetabling.
If one teacher retires e.g. maths and geography with an 80/20 split. Consider the benefits of employing a maths teacher with biology and a geography and english teacher.. all 4 subjects pretty popular and hey! if the hours aren't there the following year then they can be reduced or increased accordingly. I would imagine that timetabling would be easier also.... you could tailor it to the subjects you wanted rather than having to tailor it to the 1 teacher.

opticalillusion · 09-03-2014 03:55AM

While I'm under no illusions, I find this thread very disheartening.

I have a degree at the moment that is worth nothing to me. I'm in a temporary contract earning a little over minimum wage, I'm nearly 30. I hummed and hawed about doing primary teaching for years because I had to go back and do the leaving cert again. Now that's behind me, and I'm currently applying for Hibernia and I have to try get a student loan for 10K to do the course. I've never had a loan in my life. This thread has me crapping myself.

I've tried to put all this 'calling' behind me but I just can't, I'm too old now to be having any other 'life altering' decisions. There is nothing else I want to do, do you suggest I just carry on forever in minimum wage type jobs? I once had a job where I was earning 28K and that was loads for me. I know you may laugh but the way my life is panning out at the moment, 30K is a huge amount for me.
I wouldn't mind moving abroad for a while in the hopes that things may pick up here, possibly England but now ye are putting me off that too.

Is there nothing positive about teaching anymore?? When I was deciding a few years ago if it was worth it or not, it was actually teachers that told me I should go for it.

whiteandlight · 09-03-2014 04:12AM

opticalillusion wrote: »

While I'm under no illusions, I find this thread very disheartening.

I have a degree at the moment that is worth nothing to me. I'm in a temporary contract earning a little over minimum wage, I'm nearly 30. I hummed and hawed about doing primary teaching for years because I had to go back and do the leaving cert again. Now that's behind me, and I'm currently applying for Hibernia and I have to try get a student loan for 10K to do the course. I've never had a loan in my life. This thread has me crapping myself.

I've tried to put all this 'calling' behind me but I just can't, I'm too old now to be having any other 'life altering' decisions. There is nothing else I want to do, do you suggest I just carry on forever in minimum wage type jobs? I once had a job where I was earning 28K and that was loads for me. I know you may laugh but the way my life is panning out at the moment, 30K is a huge amount for me.
I wouldn't mind moving abroad for a while in the hopes that things may pick up here, possibly England but now ye are putting me off that too.

Is there nothing positive about teaching anymore?? When I was deciding a few years ago if it was worth it or not, it was actually teachers that told me I should go for it.

No one is suggesting you carry on forever in minimum wage jobs. What we are saying is that there is no job security in teaching, its extremely difficult to get even a temporary full time contract. The baseline salary may look wonderful but as has been pointed out, it is very hard to get that salary even within several years of graduation. 30k is a wonderful starting salary, the problem is getting it

Permanent jobs are as scarce as hens teeth. A look at education posts today where all jobs have to be advertised shows just 17 primary teaching posts available, 12 are maternity leave which means you have no long term rights as a teacher. 3 are part time and 2 are substitute positions. The situation is worse at second level with 18 posts available only half of which are full hours (you still won't get paid for the holidays for most of these). At least with primary if you get the job it involves full hours.

I graduated 5 years ago and even then I knew that things were going to be tough so I'm not sure who was advising you about teaching then. I'm still nowhere near a full time secure position (second level).

Having said all that teaching can be great if you love to teach. There is just no denying that things are very tough out here. If you are willing to emigrate Irish teachers appear to be in demand abroad.

opticalillusion · 09-03-2014 05:26AM

Thanks for that.

Where abroad do you think? Oz is out because they won't take you on for a visa after age 30 apparently. Not that I ever liked the place anyway to be honest. Don't think UAE would be for me either, culture wise.

donegal11 · 09-03-2014 06:04AM

Musicmental85 wrote: »

No one is suggesting you carry on forever in minimum wage jobs. What we are saying is that there is no job security in teaching, its extremely difficult to get even a temporary full time contract. The baseline salary may look wonderful but as has been pointed out, it is very hard to get that salary even within several years of graduation. 30k is a wonderful starting salary, the problem is getting it. If you don't get paid for your holidays for example you are down to 20k odd already

Is there some secret that makes holiday pay worth more? Because it's my understanding whether you get paid during the holidays is irrelevant. If you don't get a contract for the full year your hourly/weekly pay is higher(incorporating holidays) during term leaving you in the exact same position and potential you could claim benefits during the holidays depending who handled your claim leaving you better off again:pac:. Or am I missing something?

Jimmy Iovine · 09-03-2014 07:29AM

opticalillusion wrote: »

Thanks for that.

Where abroad do you think? Oz is out because they won't take you on for a visa after age 30 apparently. Not that I ever liked the place anyway to be honest. Don't think UAE would be for me either, culture wise.

Three are loads of primary jobs in England. If you prepare well then you'll have no problem.

This time last year I applied for a job in London for which only for other people applied also. It's far different to Ireland.

I couldn't recommend it enough.

Also if you book flights well enough in advance then you can get home twice every half term.

Icsics · 09-03-2014 10:17AM

Regarding the splitting of jobs, also remember that the more teachers in the school, the higher the allowance for Principal & Deputy. That's the reality.

bbam · 09-03-2014 10:29AM

The only change I can see from OP post is teaching is now being brought into line with the insecurity, workload, and general conditions of most other careers in the private sector.
That's just an observation, I take no satisfaction in the changes. I choose my career and you chose yours.

acequion · 09-03-2014 11:21AM

bbam wrote: »

The only change I can see from OP post is teaching is now being brought into line with the insecurity, workload, and general conditions of most other careers in the private sector.
That's just an observation, I take no satisfaction in the changes. I choose my career and you chose yours.

Rather than the other way around.Which is how,in a so called progressive modern society,it should be. But then neo liberalism is the enemy of all workers and therefore is socially regressive

Where will it all end? :mad:

spurious · 09-03-2014 11:54AM

Icsics wrote: »

Regarding the splitting of jobs, also remember that the more teachers in the school, the higher the allowance for Principal & Deputy. That's the reality.

Not really, it's worked out on Wholetime Equivalents, not just how many teachers there are.

whiteandlight · 09-03-2014 11:58AM

donegal11 wrote: »

Is there some secret that makes holiday pay worth more? Because it's my understanding whether you get paid during the holidays is irrelevant. If you don't get a contract for the full year your hourly/weekly pay is higher(incorporating holidays) during term leaving you in the exact same position and potential you could claim benefits during the holidays depending who handled your claim leaving you better off again:pac:. Or am I missing something?

Fixed. Sorry I phrased wrong due to tiredness.

At second level if appointed after nov 1 you lose out on holiday pay. You've lost three months of the school year so are down a quarter of the annual salary. Someone in primary may know if this applies there too

Moody_mona · 09-03-2014 12:36PM

It does apply in primary also. Although there is back pay, at both levels, IF you sure a temporary post in September: easier said than done.

implausible · 09-03-2014 01:10PM

bbam wrote: »

The only change I can see from OP post is teaching is now being brought into line with the insecurity, workload, and general conditions of most other careers in the private sector.
That's just an observation, I take no satisfaction in the changes. I choose my career and you chose yours.

Observation taken on board, but to bring it back to "won't somebody please think of the children?" the knock-on effect is that students may have at least five demoralised, overworked teachers for one subject in five years, a guidance counsellor who doesn't have time to meet them, unless it's a major crisis like a suicide attempt, a yearhead who hasn't been replaced or a yearhead who regularly has to leave their class to deal with crises elsewhere.

In line with the private sector is all well and good, but schools are not banks whose aim is to turn a profit or a factory whose aim is to maximise production of an item. What we do (without trying to go down the line of "teaching is a vocation") is try to educate the whole student.

The general public's desire to see us "brought into line" is incredibly ill-informed and short-sighted. Ill-informed as people seem to be unaware of all of the cuts sustained so far and short-sighted as it is their kids and the education system that will ultimately suffer.

A message to wannabe teachers - Stay away from teaching.

Comments