Garda, nurses, teachers and doctor's pay

esforum · 09-04-2016 01:13PM

maudgonner wrote: »

As far as I'm aware (and from what the IMPACT website tells me), the 10% reduction in salary for new entrants was put in place as part of the Croke Park agreement in 2011, which the public sector unions and garda representative bodies were very much part of. And there has been no move by the unions to force their removal in any of the negotiations since then, it would seem.

http://www.donegaldaily.com/2013/03/01/we-were-excluded-from-croke-park-ii-talks-says-garda-union-boss/

You must have been living under a rock in all honesty, the exclusion of Gardai was a hot topic at the time and there was various comments from both sides on the issue.

maudgonner wrote: »

And what I said was that by and large posters on this thread have acknowledged that the conditions forced on new entrants - i.e. the disparity in salaries vs pre-2011 entrants - is unfair. That's certainly been my impression of posters' opinion on that matter in this thread.

Then you are again misguided, I havent got time to quote my way through 70+ pages.

maudgonner · 09-04-2016 01:19PM

esforum wrote: »

http://www.donegaldaily.com/2013/03/01/we-were-excluded-from-croke-park-ii-talks-says-garda-union-boss/

You must have been living under a rock in all honesty, the exclusion of Gardai was a hot topic at the time and there was various comments from both sides on the issue.

The GRA voted by a majority of 75% to accept the Croke Park agreement, they were very much a part of it, whatever their role (or lack of it) in the negotiations.

esforum · 09-04-2016 01:25PM

maudgonner wrote: »

The GRA voted by a majority of 75% to accept the Croke Park agreement, they were very much a part of it, whatever their role (or lack of it) in the negotiations.

no, they werent. they (I and my colleagues) were told to vote yes or have worse done and sitting at home and then getting a phonecall about a decision made by other people is a very unusual interpretation of

maudgonner wrote: »

more senior members of the profession who did the deals that maintained their own position at the expense of the new entrants.

The GRA did no deal, can you at least accept that?

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/public-sector-warned-of-7pc-pay-cut-if-croke-park-deal-rejected-29175544.html

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/garda%C3%AD-warn-over-pay-talks-1.1071781

http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/0222/368994-garda-pay-protest/

http://www.thejournal.ie/gra-protest-dail-over-cuts-to-pay-838287-Mar2013/

maudgonner · 09-04-2016 01:34PM

esforum wrote: »

no, they werent. they (I and my colleagues) were told to vote yes or have worse done and sitting at home and then getting a phonecall about a decision made by other people is a very unusual interpretation of

The GRA did no deal, can you at least accept that?

Did they negotiate the deal? No, I can accept that.

When the deal was put before them and they were asked to vote on it? They voted yes. They signed up to the deal.

So it entirely depends on what you mean by 'did a deal'. I assume the terms of the deal were clear? And if they were somehow misled, why hasn't there been a move since then, including in Haddington Road, to immediately reverse the position?

The_Kew_Tour · 09-04-2016 02:34PM

esforum wrote: »

you are doing some serious dodging here, can you not just admit you were wrong? It was a minor comment, no one will think ill of you.

In relation to this debate, while I have to admit to getting a little bored with the news reports and the constant stream is mis-information being peddled, I found this article very interesting and informative:

http://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/people/nurses-teachers-garda%C3%AD-who-feel-undervalued-and-underpaid-1.2603483

I would urge people to have a read and keep an open mind.

So your saying the Kid has to teach himself?

I mean it's fairly obvious it's up to teacher to deliver a consistent set of good results for students.

Unless your teacher maybe

The_Kew_Tour · 09-04-2016 02:35PM

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

That's a cop out.

If a kid doesn't care & doesn't want to learn, it doesn't matter how good a teacher is

Woah

Steady on there. It's obvious you're going get students who don't care. I'm talking about **** teachers period.

I mean it's kinda obvious

Paulzx · 09-04-2016 02:45PM

maudgonner wrote: »

Did they negotiate the deal? No, I can accept that.

When the deal was put before them and they were asked to vote on it? They voted yes. They signed up to the deal.

So it entirely depends on what you mean by 'did a deal'. I assume the terms of the deal were clear? And if they were somehow misled, why hasn't there been a move since then, including in Haddington Road, to immediately reverse the position?

All these "deals" were done with a not so veiled threat hanging over public sector staff. There was no choice for staff.

For example the "Croke Park Agreement" was to run until 2014. The present government unilaterally broke the agreement in 2013 and introduced Haddington road. Before the unions had even balloted their members the government voted in the FEMPI legislation. In other words "do what we say or we'll press the nuclear button."

Doesn't seem to have been much choice there. No other employer in the state would be allowed behave in that way but when your employer writes the legislation and could adjust it to suit itself you don't have much choice. This is the type of climate which applied when new wage scales were brought in.

It doesn't excuse it but it certainly helps explain it

Paulzx · 09-04-2016 02:47PM

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

So your saying the Kid has to teach himself?

I mean it's fairly obvious it's up to teacher to deliver a consistent set of good results for students.

Unless your teacher maybe

What do you quantify as "good results?"

esforum · 09-04-2016 02:48PM

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

So your saying the Kid has to teach himself?

I mean it's fairly obvious it's up to teacher to deliver a consistent set of good results for students.

Unless your teacher maybe

are you drunk?

esforum · 09-04-2016 02:48PM

maudgonner wrote: »

Did they negotiate the deal? No, I can accept that.

When the deal was put before them and they were asked to vote on it? They voted yes. They signed up to the deal.

So it entirely depends on what you mean by 'did a deal'. I assume the terms of the deal were clear? And if they were somehow misled, why hasn't there been a move since then, including in Haddington Road, to immediately reverse the position?

they didnt do a deal. thats a fact, doing a deal means negotiating, we both know thats what it means. You can blame some like SIPTU but Gardai, no.

Did you read the links? Vote yes for a deal you had no input into or all get hit with legislation reducing your pay anyway. That was what was voted for, also remember there was a recruitment freeze so at the time there were no recruits to screw over. Its not a unions job to fight for people who not only do not pay sub every week but havent even been recruited yet.

Cmon now, if that was put to you or any companies employees, the answer would be simple. Especially when SIPTU who actually negotiated the deal threatened their members that a no vote would not only result in reductions but also job losses.

Job losses in an area that cant (alledgedly) have job losses.

As for haddington road, I cant comment on what was said and done except for SIPTU threatening wide spread industrial action if the sick leave terms didnt include Gardai, we were once again not privy to the negotiations.

Note however that Gardai did indeed reject Haddington 2, the first one we actually got to be present during.

maudgonner · 09-04-2016 02:55PM

esforum wrote: »

they didnt do a deal. thats a fact, doing a deal means negotiating, we both know thats what it means. You can blame some like SIPTU but Gardai, no.

Did you read the links? Vote yes for a deal you had no input into or all get hit with legislation reducing your pay anyway. That was what was voted for, also remember there was a recruitment freeze so at the time there were no recruits to screw over. Its not a unions job to fight for people who not only do not pay sub every week but havent even been recruited yet.

Cmon now, if that was put to you or any companies employees, the answer would be simple. Especially when SIPTU who actually negotiated the deal threatened their members that a no vote would not only result in reductions but also job losses.

Job losses in an area that cant (alledgedly) have job losses.

As for haddington road, I cant comment on what was said and done except for SIPTU threatening wide spread industrial action if the sick leave terms didnt include Gardai, we were once again not privy to the negotiations.

Note however that Gardai did indeed reject Haddington 2, the first one we actually got to be present during.

That's rubbish imo. If you sign up to a deal then you've done a deal. You know what you're getting, you know the trade-offs and you accept them rather than risk the alternative.

The unions brokered the deal to protect the salaries of their then members, as you've admitted. The members accepted the deal. Now you're complaining at its unfairness. And you stated above:

Personally I think restoration would be favoured, it would I presume include new entrants anyway as the base pay would go up and increments reinstalled.

So you want an increase in base pay, which would filter its way up through the payscale to benefit all members. Doing nothing to remove the disparity between the salaries of new entrants and pre-2011 entrants. Maintaining the situation as it is, instead of righting a wrong.

The_Kew_Tour · 09-04-2016 03:06PM

Paulzx wrote: »

What do you quantify as "good results?"

That varies from student to student and school. Schools should be looking to see improvement year to year

The_Kew_Tour · 09-04-2016 03:07PM

esforum wrote: »

are you drunk?

So you can't come up with a civil reply?

Irony

esforum · 09-04-2016 03:18PM

maudgonner wrote: »

That's rubbish imo. If you sign up to a deal then you've done a deal. You know what you're getting, you know the trade-offs and you accept them rather than risk the alternative.

ok whatever,

maudgonner wrote: »

The unions brokered the deal to protect the salaries of their then members, as you've admitted. The members accepted the deal. Now you're complaining at its unfairness.

I dont recall complaining that any of the agreements were unfair, I think they are unfair but i dont recall stating it and once again, the GRA were not part of the process so my union did in fact NOT broker a deal for me as I am not part of a union and my rep body was not present while I personally voted no. I am therefore free to disagree with any of the deals that I see fit.

maudgonner wrote: »

So you want an increase in base pay, which would filter its way up through the payscale to benefit all members. Doing nothing to remove the disparity between the salaries of new entrants and pre-2011 entrants. Maintaining the situation as it is, instead of righting a wrong.

why cant it be both? Why cant we all get a rise and they get the rent allowance back? But yes, if its a straight choice of all Gardai get a raise or only new Gardai get a raise, of course I want all. Are you suggesting that anyone would be foolish enough to do otherwise? Theres no logic in that.

Obviously they would still be on less than me, they have less service.

esforum · 09-04-2016 03:19PM

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

So you can't come up with a civil reply?

Irony

not to gibberish no, I genuinely cannot fathom what train of thought led to your comment. So please for the third time i ask, what two way system did you mean? Its a simple enough question, please clarify your original comment

and asking a question is civil, I didnt insult you.

Paulzx · 09-04-2016 03:20PM

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

That varies from student to student and school. Schools should be looking to see improvement year to year

I'm sorry but you still haven't explained what you mean by "good results"

Improvements in what exactly?

I'm just interested in how you think a school should be judged with regards to performance

The_Kew_Tour · 09-04-2016 03:26PM

esforum wrote: »

not to gibberish no, I genuinely cannot fathom what train of thought led to your comment. So please for the third time i ask, what two way system did you mean? Its a simple enough question, please clarify your original comment

and asking a question is civil, I didnt insult you.

It's up to a teacher to get as much as he can to give students the best chance he/she can.

If a pupil is not willing to learn that's fine.

If a pupil is being held back by awful teacher(s) then teachers should be getting P45.

Like what happens in other jobs you don't perform you get axe.

My father had fork out 600euro for my brother to go Bruce College last week. My brother says he learnt more in that week then 2 years with his Maths and English teacher

It's not 2 way street which you can jack **** alk you like about it, but that's just awful Teachers holding back students.

The_Kew_Tour · 09-04-2016 03:29PM

Paulzx wrote: »

I'm sorry but you still haven't explained what you mean by "good results"

Improvements in what exactly?

I'm just interested in how you think a school should be judged with regards to performance

Well in fairness you can't expect everyone to get 600 points can we?

I mean 100 points might be awful for 1 person, but fantastic for another

But you know that

Paulzx · 09-04-2016 03:41PM

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

Well in fairness you can't expect everyone to get 600 points can we?

I mean 100 points might be awful for 1 person, but fantastic for another

But you know that

You seem to know it as well.

So back to the original question (again)

You introduced the term "good results"

What do you mean by it?(again)

Little CuChulainn · 09-04-2016 03:44PM

maudgonner wrote: »

That's rubbish imo. If you sign up to a deal then you've done a deal. You know what you're getting, you know the trade-offs and you accept them rather than risk the alternative.

The unions brokered the deal to protect the salaries of their then members, as you've admitted. The members accepted the deal. Now you're complaining at its unfairness. And you stated above:

So you want an increase in base pay, which would filter its way up through the payscale to benefit all members. Doing nothing to remove the disparity between the salaries of new entrants and pre-2011 entrants. Maintaining the situation as it is, instead of righting a wrong.

You're talking through your arse. The GRA weren't even allowed attend the talks for Croke Park. The vote was irrelevant. It's like holding a gun to someones head and asking them if you mind if they take your tv or would you prefer they shoot you and take it instead. There was no accepting it because there was no choice. Gardaí did not have the power to take meaningful industrial action at that time either.

The GRA are looking for pay parity and restoration. Both will affect new recruits for the better. Pay restoration would probably effect them more in the short term because it would be a bigger jump in pay, especially if it included the rent allowance.

The_Kew_Tour · 09-04-2016 03:47PM

Paulzx wrote: »

You seem to know it as well.

So back to the original question (again)

You introduced the term "good results"

What do you mean by it?(again)

I'll answer this so (again)

Getting the most for the students and doing best you can for students. All students and ambitions will vary greatly but if teacher treats the job like they should then that's all they can do and students will benefit.

Hopefully don't have answer this( again)

esforum · 09-04-2016 03:54PM

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

It's up to a teacher to get as much as he can to give students the best chance he/she can.

If a pupil is not willing to learn that's fine.

If a pupil is being held back by awful teacher(s) then teachers should be getting P45.

Like what happens in other jobs you don't perform you get axe.

My father had fork out 600euro for my brother to go Bruce College last week. My brother says he learnt more in that week then 2 years with his Maths and English teacher

It's not 2 way street which you can jack **** alk you like about it, but that's just awful Teachers holding back students.

thats fine, I dont actually disagree with any of it but not a single bit explains how you think the two way system comment is rubbish. You accepted that if a student isnt arse then theres nothing the teacher can do, therefore a good education requires two way communication and effort.

A good teacher with a receptive pupil, two way system.
teacher gets paid, pupil gets education, two way exchange

your brother probable didnt bother his arse in school but now daddy is paying serious money for him to get educated and your brother has woken up to the fact that he actually needs to try he is getting an education.

I know that scenario, I have a lazy bollox of a younger brother who failed the leaving, he had the same teachers are me.

The_Kew_Tour · 09-04-2016 04:01PM

esforum wrote: »

thats fine, I dont actually disagree with any of it but not a single bit explains how you think the two way system comment is rubbish. You accepted that if a student isnt arse then theres nothing the teacher can do, therefore a good education requires two way communication and effort.

A good teacher with a receptive pupil, two way system.
teacher gets paid, pupil gets education, two way exchange

your brother probable didnt bother his arse in school but now daddy is paying serious money for him to get educated and your brother has woken up to the fact that he actually needs to try he is getting an education.

I know that scenario, I have a lazy bollox of a younger brother who failed the leaving, he had the same teachers are me.

Lot if great teachers out there. And in fairness most do their best, but all I'm saying is that teachers should have price themselves.

My brother is lot more ambitious then I'll ever be. I was but of lazy ****ed in school so that 100% my fault not teachers, but my best friend had his parents fork out 1000s for grinds in Physics and Maths. He got in around 570 but while that looks good on teachers, it could not be further from truth.

I think a good teacher will make sure a parent never needs spend another cent on outside assistant.

Inspector Coptoor · 09-04-2016 04:14PM

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

.

I think a good teacher will make sure a parent never needs spend another cent on outside assistant.

I have a serious issue with this statement.

In class sizes of 30, in a 40 min class, that would give you 1 min 20 Seconds of individual time with a student 4-5 times per week.

What people pay for with grinds is one on one attention for a prolonged period of time, something that cannot be done in a lot of subjects due to large numbers in classes.

I'm lucky I teach a subject that can't have 15-18 in a class and I can pay a lot more attention to my students at LC but I have 28 in a class in the junior cycle subject I each.

It's very difficult to get around to everyone and to differentiate to all abilities when classes aren't streamed.

You did, at least acknowledge, that not all students can expect 600 points and I would say the follow on from this is it would be very very difficult to ever out in parameters to to use performance related pay indicators in teaching.

mulbot · 09-04-2016 04:18PM

esforum wrote: »

thats fine, I dont actually disagree with any of it but not a single bit explains how you think the two way system comment is rubbish. You accepted that if a student isnt arse then theres nothing the teacher can do, therefore a good education requires two way communication and effort.

A good teacher with a receptive pupil, two way system.
teacher gets paid, pupil gets education, two way exchange

your brother probable didnt bother his arse in school but now daddy is paying serious money for him to get educated and your brother has woken up to the fact that he actually needs to try he is getting an education.

I know that scenario, I have a lazy bollox of a younger brother who failed the leaving, he had the same teachers are me.

Can I ask you,what do you consider to be the benchmark for the talent/skills of a teacher

Paulzx · 09-04-2016 05:51PM

mulbot wrote: »

Can I ask you,what do you consider to be the benchmark for the talent/skills of a teacher

There can't be one.

One school considers it an achievement to get 100% of their students to third level.

Another school considers it an achievement to get their students to attend school.

It's apples and oranges

maudgonner · 09-04-2016 05:54PM

esforum wrote: »

why cant it be both? Why cant we all get a rise and they get the rent allowance back? But yes, if its a straight choice of all Gardai get a raise or only new Gardai get a raise, of course I want all. Are you suggesting that anyone would be foolish enough to do otherwise? Theres no logic in that.

Obviously they would still be on less than me, they have less service.

There's a limit to how much the country can afford. That's the way finances work. It's a question as to how that money gets allocated. So all Gardaí can get a raise or that money can be used to give new entrants a proper pay boost, that gets them on level terms to the equivalent pre-2011 entrant.

Nobody is suggesting a flat pay-structure. So no, no new Garda should be paid the same as someone with more years of service. But pay parity would mean that they also wouldn't be paid less than someone with equal service, as is now the case.

And if it were up to me, the money to give pay parity pay would at least partly come from savings further up the pay scale, because that's fair. Senior public servants benefited at the cost of new entrants, why shouldn't they bear some of the responsibility for that.

maudgonner · 09-04-2016 06:01PM

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

You're talking through your arse. The GRA weren't even allowed attend the talks for Croke Park. The vote was irrelevant. It's like holding a gun to someones head and asking them if you mind if they take your tv or would you prefer they shoot you and take it instead. There was no accepting it because there was no choice. Gardaí did not have the power to take meaningful industrial action at that time either.

The GRA are looking for pay parity and restoration. Both will affect new recruits for the better. Pay restoration would probably effect them more in the short term because it would be a bigger jump in pay, especially if it included the rent allowance.

We've established that they weren't part of the negotiations for Croke Park. The agreement was still put to their members, who voted by 75% to accept. They were free to turn it down, they didn't. By a clear margin they thought the deal was acceptable. And if it was holding a gun to their heads, if they had absolutely no choice, why did 25% vote it down? Clearly there was a choice, they made it and rather than accept responsibility for it they want to blame someone else.

And the GRA have been present in subsequent pay agreements, correct? Pay agreements that upheld the pay disparity and were approved by members? So it clearly wasn't a dealbreaker. And it isn't even now, if you're happy to favour pay restoration over pay parity.

discus · 09-04-2016 06:35PM

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

My father had fork out 600euro for my brother to go Bruce College last week. My brother says he learnt more in that week then 2 years with his Maths and English teacher

It's not 2 way street which you can jack **** alk you like about it, but that's just awful Teachers holding back students.

esforum wrote: »

your brother probable didnt bother his arse in school but now daddy is paying serious money for him to get educated and your brother has woken up to the fact that he actually needs to try he is getting an education.

Precisely. Students don't value their day to day teacher because they don't see the value in the free education they are getting.

The_Kew_Tour · 09-04-2016 06:58PM

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

I have a serious issue with this statement.

In class sizes of 30, in a 40 min class, that would give you 1 min 20 Seconds of individual time with a student 4-5 times per week.

What people pay for with grinds is one on one attention for a prolonged period of time, something that cannot be done in a lot of subjects due to large numbers in classes.

I'm lucky I teach a subject that can't have 15-18 in a class and I can pay a lot more attention to my students at LC but I have 28 in a class in the junior cycle subject I each.

It's very difficult to get around to everyone and to differentiate to all abilities when classes aren't streamed.

You did, at least acknowledge, that not all students can expect 600 points and I would say the follow on from this is it would be very very difficult to ever out in parameters to to use performance related pay indicators in teaching.

And the issue I have is that a good teacher will get through to a class. Not individually

Look at Lecturers. They teach to couple hundred sometimes and yet the good ones don't need go around individually

Garda, nurses, teachers and doctor's pay

Comments