Can someone explain this story

Donald Trump · 24-04-2019 10:27pm

Moody_mona wrote: »

22 is contact class time. It's genuinely impossible to get by with that bare bones. In my experience the vast majority would put in at least an hour a day above that, be it following up discipline issues, photocopying or correcting. I accept not everyone does but that's not really the point.

Then there is S&S, which is paid technically I suppose in that it's worked into our payscale. If you were lucky enough to be in a position to opt out of this, then you need to take a paycut for the privilege. That averages out at slightly over an our a week of before or during school supervision, and substituting for teachers absent due to illness etc.

Not sure what S&S is. Supervision and S..omething?

I'm not giving out about the hours per week. I was just wondering how many classes it meant. I accept, and would have assumed, that more time is needed for preparation etc. But, to be honest, in most salaried professional "career" jobs, people work a fair bit outside of their contracted hours.

Moody_mona · 24-04-2019 11:22pm

Donald Trump wrote: »

Not sure what S&S is. Supervision and S..omething?

I'm not giving out about the hours per week. I was just wondering how many classes it meant. I accept, and would have assumed, that more time is needed for preparation etc. But, to be honest, in most salaried professional "career" jobs, people work a fair bit outside of their contracted hours.

Absolutely that's why I said it wasn't really the point ðŸ‘ sorry I used the two s words in that second paragraph, Supervision and Substition. Classes are either 40 minutes or 60 minutes now, so 33 classes or 22 classes respectively. Plus S&s.

evolving_doors · 25-04-2019 1:09am

Donald Trump wrote: »

Not fully. I'm still not sure why she started on 27k. Because from what I now understand, if she had taken enough college courses in what she wanted to teach, she would be on the "qualified" scale. Article might just be badly written though.

Another question for you. I read something which defined a full week as 22 hours. Is this correct? If you teach less (or more) is it pro-rated? And does 22 hours mean 22 contact hours? So, for example, I think in my school we used to have 40 minute classes. So a teacher would have needed to teach 33 classes a week for their full rota?

Ya let's just say the article didn't specify fully what her situation was. She was technically qualified at the right time But took another year to start a masters full time, which was not necessary for her job... but education and all that. Then there's the 8 hours vs someone else stuff...

But as you can see that's part of the problem, when you apply for teaching work its a bag of chaos you're jumping into with no certainty. Whereas when you apply to be an engineer im sure its somewhat more straightforward.

Yes 22 is just contact. Thou don't just swan in and rehash last year's lesson plans. Thou have to plan for the audience in front of you.

25-04-2019 1:51pm

evolving_doors wrote: »

So what do you recommend teachers do. Would you support an industrial action maybe?

Depends on what they were looking for.

I always thought that the public sector employees should have more flexibility in how their pensions are managed. That I would support. To me, it seems they pay a lot towards their pension while in the prime of life. And yes, the pension is excellent.

We all hope to have a long and healthy retirement. But many don't get that luxury. What good is an income of €30000 if you are sitting by the fire using an oxygen pump to breathe.

For me, I like being able to ramp up and down pension contributions as I please. The pension may not be as good, but still perfectly adequate for old age lifestyle. You'd be surprised how compound returns on investments can grow considering employer contributions and the fact that there is tax relief.

I would also support a cost of living allowance for the public sector working in cities.

But no way should there be run away increases in salaries. Teachers are extremely competitively paid compared to others in non managerial positions.

evolving_doors · 25-04-2019 3:29pm

salonfire wrote: »

Depends on what they were looking for.

I always thought that the public sector employees should have more flexibility in how their pensions are managed. That I would support. To me, it seems they pay a lot towards their pension while in the prime of life. And yes, the pension is excellent.

We all hope to have a long and healthy retirement. But many don't get that luxury. What good is an income of €30000 if you are sitting by the fire using an oxygen pump to breathe.

For me, I like being able to ramp up and down pension contributions as I please. The pension may not be as good, but still perfectly adequate for old age lifestyle. You'd be surprised how compound returns on investments can grow considering employer contributions and the fact that there is tax relief.

I would also support a cost of living allowance for the public sector working in cities.

But no way should there be run away increases in salaries. Teachers are extremely competitively paid compared to others in non managerial positions.

Says who? and compared to what profession?

But anyway,I agree the new public sector pension is indeed crap. Have a look at this report on the new pension scheme
https://paycommission.gov.ie/wp-content/uploads/INTO-TUI-pensions-1-Single-Scheme.pdf

On our assumptions, and based on this example, a public servant will contribute 88% - 95% of
the cost of the public service pension received

Pg. 8

and these figures are assuming you're, entering college at 17/18, Qualifying to be a teacher at 23 and working a full-time position from Day1 :pac::pac::pac::pac:. So given how rare that is, it's not exactly all that people make it out to be in terms of cost to the exchequer.

It will be interesting to see if the compulsory pension scheme ever comes along, it might open it up for public sector workers to administer their own fund, maybe pay off the mortgage instead so that you can better afford to send the kids to college while you're still working.

spurious · 25-04-2019 6:56pm

I did almost 30 years and have a pension of 16k.
That's real pension figures.

byhookorbycrook · 25-04-2019 7:41pm

"Your friend" is wrong, simple enough really.

Geuze · 26-04-2019 12:28pm

spurious wrote: »

I did almost 30 years and have a pension of 16k.
That's real pension figures.

My father did 38-39 years approx.

Pension = 35k approx

He retired on 71-72k approx.

spurious · 26-04-2019 2:31pm

Geuze wrote: »

My father did 38-39 years approx.

Pension = 35k approx

He retired on 71-72k approx.

Yes, if you do the full years and have a post the pension is decent enough. The trouble is, most today do not have the full service as they don't get a 'proper' job for years. Plus they have reworked how they calculate the pension.

Donald Trump · 26-04-2019 5:36pm

spurious wrote: »

Yes, if you do the full years and have a post the pension is decent enough. The trouble is, most today do not have the full service as they don't get a 'proper' job for years. Plus they have reworked how they calculate the pension.

How many full years did you work yourself? I am interested to know whether your situation would be common or an outlier. I would have thought that 30 years ago, the situation of teachers temping/subbing for years didn't really happen like it does now.

What age did you retire at too? That might have affected your pension. A previous job I had had both a defined contribution and a defined benefit component. From what I can remember, the way it was designed was that you would get a small enough percentage of your final salary (based on number of years worked) annually after retirement; plus your own contributed lump sum could be withdrawn (or used to buy an annuity) on retirement. I can't remember the exact figure but I think there was a 3% reduction on the defined benefit component for each you you retired early.

I'm not questioning the veracity of your figures, just wondering how common it might be.

spurious · 26-04-2019 5:52pm

I was part-time for two years before getting a temporary wt position and then after a year it became a permanent one. After I was appointed, the next full-time appointment in my VEC was 11 years later. Then a large group was appointed together, but many of them had been on part-time hours for years.

I could have stayed longer but frankly I had had enough of the abuse. I worked at the coalface where we regularly had substitute teachers who would do a morning and not come back in the afternoon. I witnessed colleagues being assaulted (knocked out in one case, sexually assaulted in another) and nothing was done about it. Day after day of that.

I did just short of 30 years. If I had stayed another 5 years or so I could probably have almost doubled my pension, but it was not worth it to me. Enough was enough. It's not all 'Dead Poet's Society'.

I was lucky I had no children to worry about putting through college etc., so I was in a position where I did not have to stick the abuse any more. I manage on my pension and supplement it with some exam work, an AirBnB room and marking mocks.

My position was split into three 'jobs' when I left.

Monotype · 26-04-2019 8:07pm

At present, you'd be looking at €16,733.85 under the new scheme for 40 years work (plus state contributory).

Donald Trump · 26-04-2019 11:19pm

Monotype wrote: »

At present, you'd be looking at €16,733.85 under the new scheme for 40 years work (plus state contributory).

Would I be right in assuming that your final pension is also index/inflation linked?

And what age would you start drawing down that 16.7k? That makes a big difference too.

I know a teacher that retired early a few years ago because if he didn't retire then, he'd have been worse off. There was either some package or rules were getting changed so he retired early......kind of another example of the ones there already pulling up the lsdder!

evolving_doors · 27-04-2019 10:43am

Donald Trump wrote: »

Would I be right in assuming that your final pension is also index/inflation linked?

And what age would you start drawing down that 16.7k? That makes a big difference too.

I know a teacher that retired early a few years ago because if he didn't retire then, he'd have been worse off. There was either some package or rules were getting changed so he retired early......kind of another example of the ones there already pulling up the lsdder!

Ahh so he should have stayed on and taken a financial hit.... for the benefit of the newly qualified teachers, what?

Was that early retirement scheme implemented at the unions behest. Again, you're still barking on about pulling up the ladder going down rabbit holes.

You have to take a long term view during pay cuts. Things like money can be fought back for (albeit at a slow pace), but it is changes to work practices which are the real danger. I'm sure that the hope is the pay-scales and pensions can be improved given time, but trying to undo things like croke park hours, s&s, paperwork initiatives, curriculum changes etc. is very difficult.

Could you imaging if the original proposal of 100% teacher certification for the junior cycle was implemented?? As much as we question the CBA's, AT's they were a necessary compromise to maintain the integrity of the system. And whether you like it or not changes to the educational system always have an impact on the work conditions of teachers.
So there were many attacks on the profession... in retrospect maybe the union couldn't fight them all.

Donald Trump · 27-04-2019 11:00pm

Well is it not a common refrain when pointing out about pensions that retired teachers pay is paid out of current expenditure? Rather than an actual pension pot being set aside to cover the pensions? Because a friend of mine used to try and argue that it couldn't be valued as a pension because it wasn't a pension. It was just going to be his salary. In other words, if I tried to argue that a public sector pension of X per years was equivalent to a pension pot of Y on retirement, then teachers say "it's not, because it's paid as a current expense"

evolving_doors · 28-04-2019 9:19am

Donald Trump wrote: »

Well is it not a common refrain when pointing out about pensions that retired teachers pay is paid out of current expenditure? Rather than an actual pension pot being set aside to cover the pensions? Because a friend of mine used to try and argue that it couldn't be valued as a pension because it wasn't a pension. It was just going to be his salary. In other words, if I tried to argue that a public sector pension of X per years was equivalent to a pension pot of Y on retirement, then teachers say "it's not, because it's paid as a current expense"

Are you proposing a pension reserve fund?

Donald Trump · 28-04-2019 4:37pm

evolving_doors wrote: »

Are you proposing a pension reserve fund?

I'm pointing out that, as I understand it, current and retired teachers salaries come out of the same pot. Is this understanding correct?

When it comes to national budget and allocation, education will rightfully fight its turf to increase its own resources and allocation. So what they did was allow those older teachers to retire early on better conditions than younger ones. Is that not correct? In essence they said "Here you go. You can have this option that will give you a larger slice of the pot compared to new people for the rest of your days".

So there is less remaining in the pot for younger people in order to pay for that. Ladder is pulled up. No? I'm open to correction.

byhookorbycrook · 28-04-2019 5:39pm

Ah pensions , the “ gold plated “ etc.etc. I have been paying into my pension since I was 20 . No choice . Not too many private workers do , then give out about the public sector getting something they don’t . In many cases , new entrants will pay more into their pension than they will ever receive back .

evolving_doors · 28-04-2019 6:13pm

Donald Trump wrote: »

I'm pointing out that, as I understand it, current and retired teachers salaries come out of the same pot. Is this understanding correct?

When it comes to national budget and allocation, education will rightfully fight its turf to increase its own resources and allocation. So what they did was allow those older teachers to retire early on better conditions than younger ones. Is that not correct? In essence they said "Here you go. You can have this option that will give you a larger slice of the pot compared to new people for the rest of your days".

So there is less remaining in the pot for younger people in order to pay for that. Ladder is pulled up. No? I'm open to correction.

Anyhow, retiring teachers early saves an absolute fortune to the exchequer. So you let someone go who's at the top of the scale and then when the Pupil Teacher Ratio is cut there's a saving of 60K right there.
In the worst possible scenario you are retiring that teacher early for 60K+ and bringing in a full time permanent teacher on 36K. How many full-time permanent posts do you see on educationposts.ie ?

Are you in support of the junior teachers returning to the previous pensions scheme?

Donald Trump · 28-04-2019 7:59pm

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

Ah pensions , the “ gold plated “ etc.etc. I have been paying into my pension since I was 20 . No choice . Not too many private workers do , then give out about the public sector getting something they don’t . In many cases , new entrants will pay more into their pension than they will ever receive back .

How much is deducted out of your pension for arguments sake?

Lets take a 42 year old with a degree and a HDip who is on point 17 of the scale. They are on 56,131 + 4918 + 1236 = 62285. How much is deducted out of that to go towards your defined benefit component of your pension. I don't mean whatever you personally want to invest in outside of that. That is your own business. I mean how much from that 62285 is deducted purely for the provision of that part

Donald Trump · 28-04-2019 8:00pm

evolving_doors wrote: »

How many full-time permanent posts do you see on educationposts.ie ?

I have no idea. I'd say not too many though. People already on the gravy train probably want to stay on it!

evolving_doors wrote: »

Anyhow, retiring teachers early saves an absolute fortune to the exchequer. So you let someone go who's at the top of the scale and then when the Pupil Teacher Ratio is cut there's a saving of 60K right there.

Can you explain your workings for me. Because I was under the impression that when they are retired, they still have income? The only way to save 60k would be if their income post retirement was zero!

Or suppose Mr. Murphy was on 60k a year. He gets early retirement and then Mr. Ryan gets taken on at increment 1 and also has a HDip = 36318 + 1236 = 37554. There is only a saving (in the short term) if Mr. Murphy's pension is on less than 22,446 a year. Am I reading the pay scales incorrectly? I could be.

Are there any other benefits upon retirement? As in health care etc?

evolving_doors · 28-04-2019 8:41pm

People on the gravy train?

Ok I'm done.

"Genuine question" me #####

Ignore.

Donald Trump · 28-04-2019 9:56pm

evolving_doors wrote: »

People on the gravy train?

Ok I'm done.

"Genuine question" me #####

Ignore.

Never answered my points about pensions being paid out of same pot as salary. Seemed happy to answer until figures were asked or questioned. :cool:

Sir123 · 28-04-2019 10:15pm

Donald Trump wrote: »

Never answered my points about pensions being paid out of same pot as salary. Seemed happy to answer until figures were asked or questioned. :cool:

A quick Google will give you the answer and the standard superannuation costs we pay as well as the additional superannuation charge we pay in addtion to the above. They both come out of our salary. Regardless of whether pensions are paid from current expenditure, we do make a contribution generally for 40 plus years and we also expect our employer to contribute as is the norm elsewhere.

Donald Trump · 28-04-2019 11:28pm

Sir123 wrote: »

A quick Google will give you the answer and the standard superannuation costs we pay as well as the additional superannuation charge we pay in addtion to the above. They both come out of our salary. Regardless of whether pensions are paid from current expenditure, we do make a contribution generally for 40 plus years and we also expect our employer to contribute as is the norm elsewhere.

Look that's fine. But is my point not valid that because some people were allowed to cash out early at higher pension, that it leaves less in the pot for younger workers?

Imagine if a business worked like that - paying salary to it's retired staff out of current income. Then trying to explain to new staff that they can't get a raise because Jimmy who retired early a few years ago needs to be be given better conditions than those that are still working.

I googled and this is what I see: https://www.asti.ie/pay-and-conditions/retirement-pensions/superannuation-pension-scheme/

You make a 5% contribution of your current salary. When you retire, that 5% of your current salary returns a lump sum of 3.75% of your final salary plus 1.25% of your final salary each year for as long as you live. That's incredible to be fair.

Here is an example of a typical annuity https://www.irishlifecorporatebusiness.ie/annuities-0
At 65, to purchase a payment of 4,500 a year for life will cost you 75k. The multiple is 16.67. So suppose you are on 40k now. And suppose that by the time you retire you are on equivalent of 60k. (Additionally it is actually also effectively inflation linked which is extremely valuable). So that single payment of 2k that you pay now will return back a value of 14.75k (in today's money) to you.

That's the figures. Yes, in private sector employers make contributions, but the difference in value is big.

That's considering even an early career teacher. Suppose you are 1 year to retirement and your salary is 60k. In that last year you pay 3k. At the end of the year you get a lump sum of 2.25k back immediately and get recurring payments which would be valued at 12.5k (at that point in time) back. 14.75k is an almost 400% return on your contribution for that year. (that's not even considering the fact that you pay it evenly over the year....which would actually inflate the actual annualised return rate far higher if we wanted to be pedantic!)

Nice if you can get it!

.

Your non-teacher neighbour who puts 10% of their 60k salary into their pot, matched by their employer 1-for-1, will have about 12.1k value added to their pension value.

Or to compare a different way, if they also take back 2.25k immediately, they can have a retirement income of 49.25 per month from the total self-contributed 10% + employers 10% matched. You will have 62.50 a month from your 5% contribution.....you're getting a rate of 2.5 times better off.....which is why people tend to focus on your pensions!

Monotype · 29-04-2019 12:08am

Don’t forget pension related deduction and spouses and children deduction.

Donald Trump · 29-04-2019 12:23am

Monotype wrote: »

Don’t forget pension related deduction and spouses and children deduction.

Ok. But, I am assuming from the name that that allows for your pension to be extended past your own life to cover for dependents? So it is in effect an extra insurance (which would increase the 16.67 multiplier from the Irish life link for an annuity)

Donald Trump · 29-04-2019 12:37am

Anyway. thread went off on a tangent I hadn't meant it to go down. Don't worry too much about the off-tangent stuff :-)

Monotype · 29-04-2019 8:30am

No, I think you’re on to something. You should continue investigating. Check out the two deductions I mentioned. Consider various cases too, married, single etc.

Geuze · 29-04-2019 10:11am

Donald Trump wrote: »

How much is deducted out of your pension for arguments sake?

Lets take a 42 year old with a degree and a HDip who is on point 17 of the scale. They are on 56,131 + 4918 + 1236 = 62285. How much is deducted out of that to go towards your defined benefit component of your pension. I don't mean whatever you personally want to invest in outside of that. That is your own business. I mean how much from that 62285 is deducted purely for the provision of that part

Donald,

most PS pay 6.5% pension contributions, (5% main scheme, 1.5% S&C).

Plus the 10% PRD introduced in 2009, now re-named the ASC.

19-05-2019 9:20pm

evolving_doors wrote: »

Says who? and compared to what profession?

Teacher scale begins at €36000 (for a 9 month year so pro-rated annually is €48000) which is among the highest if not highest of all graduate employment.
Since teaching is paid for 9 months, other employment opportunities are available to increase even further.

Looking further up the scale, keep an eye on the annual salary surveys that are released each year, e.g. here

To give a few quick examples of various roles comparable to the teaching salaries:

Commercial Accountant
Operational Risk Manager
Junior Legal Counsel
C / C++ Developer
IT Systems Engineer
etc

19-05-2019 9:22pm

spurious wrote: »

I did almost 30 years and have a pension of 16k.
That's real pension figures.

This simply isn't true.

Only when challenged do you admit the true scenario where it is early retirement. Of course if you retire early, the pension is not the same.

19-05-2019 9:25pm

Geuze wrote: »

Donald,

most PS pay 6.5% pension contributions, (5% main scheme, 1.5% S&C).

Plus the 10% PRD introduced in 2009, now re-named the ASC.

Come-on now, this is a complete lie.
Everyone gets a pay slip. It is obviously not 10%.

The threshold is something like €28000, so someone on €50000 pays maybe €1800 or 3.6% of their gross in ASC.

mtoutlemonde · 19-05-2019 9:27pm

salonfire wrote: »

Teacher scale begins at €36000 (for a 9 month year so pro-rated annually is €48000) which is among the highest if not highest of all graduate employment.
Since teaching is paid for 9 months, other employment opportunities are available to increase even further.

Looking further up the scale, keep an eye on the annual salary surveys that are released each year, e.g. here

To give a few quick examples of various roles comparable to the teaching salaries:

Commercial Accountant
Operational Risk Manager
Junior Legal Counsel
C / C++ Developer
IT Systems Engineer
etc

No graduate will get near that €36,000 for years (unless they have an in demand subject and in Dublin) due to years subbing/part time hours.

I don't know why everyone has a problem with teachers salaries - it's open to everyone as a career - in the words of Padraig Flynn - try it sometime - you'll be loaded after a few years!!!

spurious · 19-05-2019 10:00pm

salonfire wrote: »

This simply isn't true.

Only when challenged do you admit the true scenario where it is early retirement. Of course if you retire early, the pension is not the same.

I never misled anyone. I did 30 years. I never said I did 40.

Take your gripes about teachers elsewhere please and do not imply I lied. Take that back thank you.

evolving_doors · 19-05-2019 10:32pm

salonfire wrote: »

Teacher scale begins at €36000 (for a 9 month year so pro-rated annually is €48000) which is among the highest if not highest of all graduate employment.
Since teaching is paid for 9 months, other employment opportunities are available to increase even further.

Looking further up the scale, keep an eye on the annual salary surveys that are released each year, e.g. here

To give a few quick examples of various roles comparable to the teaching salaries:

Commercial Accountant
Operational Risk Manager
Junior Legal Counsel
C / C++ Developer
IT Systems Engineer
etc

Apples and oranges but let's go with the first example anyway.

Commercial Accountant 55-70k ...

How many years does it take to get be a candidate for this job?
https://www.irishjobs.ie/Jobs/Project-Commercial-Accountant-North-Dubin-8327680.aspx

The spec just says

Candidate requirements:

1. Qualified Accountant

2. Excellent communication and report writing skills

3. Strong commercial acumen

4. Good understanding of investment appraisal techniques

It's for 60k min, so how many years do you reckon it would take a secondary school teacher to get that 60k?

evolving_doors · 19-05-2019 10:40pm

mtoutlemonde wrote: »

No graduate will get near that €36,000 for years (unless they have an in demand subject and in Dublin) due to years subbing/part time hours.

I don't know why everyone has a problem with teachers salaries - it's open to everyone as a career - in the words of Padraig Flynn - try it sometime - you'll be loaded after a few years!!!

I find It's usually either an accountant or engineer that claims to know what I had for breakfast like they're peekin in my window taking notes on a clipboard. Then telling me later twas caviar.
And the old tag line of 'i work(ed) in another area of education myself ' or the best ones about a sister teacher in her gold plated rolls flying off to Dubai.

The bitterness is strong.

Inspector Coptoor · 19-05-2019 10:40pm

salonfire wrote: »

Teacher scale begins at €36000 (for a 9 month year so pro-rated annually is €48000) which is among the highest if not highest of all graduate employment.
Since teaching is paid for 9 months, other employment opportunities are available to increase even further.

Looking further up the scale, keep an eye on the annual salary surveys that are released each year, e.g. here

To give a few quick examples of various roles comparable to the teaching salaries:

Commercial Accountant
Operational Risk Manager
Junior Legal Counsel
C / C++ Developer
IT Systems Engineer
etc

So you’re literally pulling an extra €12k a year out of your arse?

Seriously?
You need to get a grip

Also, and this point is important.
Teachers are not just graduates, they are double graduates.
Degree and masters and for many, especially in science and languages, this can take 6 years to obtain.

A starting salary of €36k for 6 years in university is reasonable I would have thought.

evolving_doors · 19-05-2019 10:47pm

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

So you’re literally pulling an extra €12k a year out of your arse?

Seriously?
You need to get a grip

Also, and this point is important.
Teachers are not just graduates, they are double graduates.
Degree and masters and for many, especially in science and languages, this can take 6 years to obtain.

A starting salary of €36k for 6 years in university is reasonable I would have thought.

Well if they can extrapolate out 48k pro rata, then they can %%%%%%: extrapolate back in the extra curricular, lunchtime meetings and work I bring home every night.

I notice these experts never disclose their own pay slips, pension plans and qualifications.

How do ya like dem apples ... and oranges?

Donald Trump · 19-05-2019 10:55pm

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

Also, and this point is important.
Teachers are not just graduates, they are double graduates.
Degree and masters and for many, especially in science and languages, this can take 6 years to obtain.

Well la-de-dah
A level 9 qualification is de-rigueur in an awful lot of jobs in the real world if you ever want to lift yourself off the bottom rung of the ladder.

Fair play and all, but teachers don't have a monopoly on being educated.

Inspector Coptoor · 19-05-2019 10:59pm

Donald Trump wrote: »

Well la-de-dah
A level 9 qualification is de-rigueur in an awful lot of jobs in the real world if you ever want to lift yourself off the bottom rung of the ladder.

Fair play and all, but teachers don't have a monopoly on being educated.

The point in making is that when I qualified as a graduate, I had to pay to do my level 9.
If you’re a graduate from commerce, you can go straight in to work for the big 4 who will pay you while you do your postgraduate/professional studies.

You are not comparing like with like in any way, shape or form and you seem intent on having a go at our terms and conditions.

Jog on

19-05-2019 11:01pm

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

So you’re literally pulling an extra €12k a year out of your arse?

That's the facts is it not? You can correct me if I am wrong.
Salaries are paid for 9 months. Pro-rated over 12 months is €48000.
Others work for an extra three months each year so it is only fair to highlight pro rated terms as well.

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

Also, and this point is important.
Teachers are not just graduates, they are double graduates.
Degree and masters and for many, especially in science and languages, this can take 6 years to obtain.

A starting salary of €36k for 6 years in university is reasonable I would have thought.

This is not unique to just teachers, but a Masters and further education (e.g. QFA or accounting exams) is a pretty a must have for others as well. Used to be a Leaving Cert could get you a job in the civil service. It wouldn't even get you a look in now, where a degree is a de-facto requirement to have the best chance of starting as a clerical officer for example.

19-05-2019 11:03pm

evolving_doors wrote: »

Well if they can extrapolate out 48k pro rata, then they can %%%%%%: extrapolate back in the extra curricular, lunchtime meetings and work I bring home every night.

I notice these experts never disclose their own pay slips, pension plans and qualifications.

How do ya like dem apples ... and oranges?

There is time built into the work week to allow for non-class time. They are teachers that work extra on top of that, but again, that's not unique to the teaching profession.

Donald Trump · 19-05-2019 11:04pm

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

The point in making is that when I qualified as a graduate, I had to pay to do my level 9.
If you’re a graduate from commerce, you can go straight in to work for the big 4 who will pay you while you do your postgraduate/professional studies.

You are not comparing like with like in any way, shape or form and you seem intent on having a go at our terms and conditions.

Jog on

Jog on there yourself. Sure isn't that terrible that you had to pay for something yourself.....the same as any accountant who wants to do a MSc in accounting before starting.

Ah sure the handy life of a trainee accountant doing 80 hours a week in audit for PWC. So handy that they can study for exams and, get this, they don't even need to have 3 months off for the Summer to recover from the stress. Would ya credit it? All the while getting paid about 22k a year........

Poor oul' teachers. Terrible life. Nothing really stopping you from spending your long Summers, or your long Halloween, Christmas or Easter Holidays, or any of your long post 4pm evenings studying for and passing the same accountancy exams if you want to. I'm not saying teachers are overpaid but they are by no means entitled to give it the poor mouth

Inspector Coptoor · 19-05-2019 11:05pm

salonfire wrote: »

That's the facts is it not? You can correct me if I am wrong.
Salaries are paid for 9 months. Pro-rated over 12 months is €48000.
Others work for an extra three months each year so it is only fair to highlight pro rated terms as well.

This is not unique to just teachers, but a Masters and further education (e.g. QFA or accounting exams) is a pretty a must have for others as well. Used to be a Leaving Cert could get you a job in the civil service. It wouldn't even get you a look in now, where a degree is a de-facto requirement to have the best chance of starting as a clerical officer for example.

So you’re telling me that if a teacher earns €36k in 2018, does no other work of any sort, that he/she has really earned €48k?

I know full well what it’s like in civil service.
I temped as a CO for summers when in college and have a family member who started 4 years ago, got in with a degree as you say and is now up to HEO and on around €46k.

19-05-2019 11:05pm

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

The point in making is that when I qualified as a graduate, I had to pay to do my level 9.
If you’re a graduate from commerce, you can go straight in to work for the big 4 who will pay you while you do your postgraduate/professional studies.

You are not comparing like with like in any way, shape or form and you seem intent on having a go at our terms and conditions.

Jog on

Nobody is having a go. This is a discussion forum. There will be others who see things differently to you and will bring up a different perspective.

Inspector Coptoor · 19-05-2019 11:06pm

Donald Trump wrote: »

Jog on there yourself. Sure isn't that terrible that you had to pay for something yourself.....the same as any accountant who wants to do a MSc in accounting before starting.

Ah sure the handy life of a trainee accountant doing 80 hours a week in audit for PWC. So handy that they can study for exams and, get this, they don't even need to have 3 months off for the Summer to recover from the stress. Would ya credit it? All the while getting paid about 20k a year........

Poor oul' teachers. Terrible life.

Sure look, I’ll jog on so.

It is indeed a hard life.

The three best reasons to be a teacher are coming up.

I’ll be sure to enjoy them.

Don’t get too green

19-05-2019 11:12pm

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

Sure look, I’ll jog on so.

It is indeed a hard life.

The three best reasons to be a teacher are coming up.

I’ll be sure to enjoy them.

Don’t get too green

Exactly. This is an excellent point. Such a same this positivity isn't a little more forthcoming among all the negativity shown on this forum to provide some more balance to those that may be viewing to try decide if teaching is the career for them or not.

spurious · 19-05-2019 11:24pm

Teaching. Go for it, but do not come back crying about how nobody told you how difficult it would be to get a proper job.

Year after year we have people posting here who think it will be different for them and the teacher training courses are only too happy to take their money, knowing full well there are not enough jobs in the market they are flooding.

That is the real scandal.

mtoutlemonde · 19-05-2019 11:31pm

A lot of bitterness for us teachers tonight and we only having ten days left ... those in post primary. Then we can start the nixers and holidays in the sun

Can someone explain this story

Comments