Who do the Teachers think they are fooling?

ibarelycare

bobbbb wrote: »

TBH certain people just seem to resent anybody who might be in a better economic position than them. They also hate people who might have bought a house during their lives too. Nothing you can do to convince them otherwise. Its buried deep within them.

Cop on :rolleyes: Some people in this thread have admitted that they are quite comfortable, in fact maybe in a better position than teachers, so it's not about resentment, jealousy, bitterness, etc.

It's the fact that the teachers have an air of self-importance about them that makes them think they're above the recession. Why SHOULD they get pay cuts and have to pay higher taxes like the rest of the country? :cool:

And your point about people hating people who've bought houses? Wut???

bobbbb

gurramok wrote: »

Maybe i had a bad teacher?

Now, please educate yourself. How hard is to read about 'total income'?



Thanks for pointing out the superior pension, that will be letter E in the list and oh, the job security is point F

How am i making an idiot out of myself? List why.

Read back over your posts about pensions.

I guess you just cant help some people help themselves.

gurramok

bobbbb wrote: »

Read back over your posts about pensions.

I guess you just cant help some people help themselves.

Quote me.

bobbbb

ibarelycare wrote: »

Cop on :rolleyes: Some people in this thread have admitted that they are quite comfortable, in fact maybe in a better position than teachers, so it's not about resentment, jealousy, bitterness, etc.

It's the fact that the teachers have an air of self-importance about them that makes them think they're above the recession. Why SHOULD they get pay cuts and have to pay higher taxes like the rest of the country? :cool:

And your point about people hating people who've bought houses? Wut???

Cop on yourself. You've just outed yourself there havent you.

How are teachers above the recession. Id say they've already taken more of a hit on their take home pay (along with other public sector workers) than the rest of us. Wouldnt you?

Ask gurramok about people who have bought houses. Better yet search for his posts on property. Great fun.

ntlbell

kickoutthejams wrote: »

That my friend, depends on the company.


Oh dear.
It seems you don't realise the difference between the executive and judiciary.
The government has no say in the matter, you would be dealing with the courts.
Feel free to look up the Constitution on this one. You honestly think that a Constitutional breach would be acceptable, especially one as flagrant as this?

If you could prove you were fired because of union membership, it'd be a fairly open and shut case.
You could also bring it before the European Court of Human Rights (under Article 11 of the ECHR)



Shame, I'm an ex shelf-filler for Dunnes.

look, I have no need to be in a union there's very few people in Ireland do what I do I get treated extremely well I wouldn't dream for a second about getting involved in unions.

if i refuse to do what i do, regardless of how hard or easy it would be to replace me I'll be fired, no court hearing no unfair dismissal no quoting himan rights articles I'll be out of a job.

if more people started to join they would be gone out of the country in a heartbeat, they don't mess around when it comes to this nonsense.

they treat their staff well they pay them very well they expect the work to be done it gets done

refuse to it and your gone.

are you very young?

bobbbb

gurramok wrote: »

Quote me.

Read your posts. The last few pages are full of them. You wrote them and you cant remember them :rolleyes:.

Good God. Im going for a pint. Its like arguing with the wife here. you have some serious selective memory.

gurramok

bobbbb wrote: »

How are teachers above the recession. Id say they've already taken more of a hit on their take home pay (along with other public sector workers) than the rest of us. Wouldnt you?

Now, you are taking the mick.

How many of those nearly 400,000 unemployed were from the public sector?

I must tell my employer that the recent cut in my wages was fairytale type stuff then.

bobbbb wrote: »

Ask gurramok about people who have bought houses. Better yet search for his posts on property. Great fun.

Another gem, glad i provide amusement for you.

gurramok

bobbbb wrote: »

Read your posts. The last few pages are full of them. You wrote them and you cant remember them :rolleyes:.

Good God. Im going for a pint. Its like arguing with the wife here. you have some serious selective memory.

No.

You provide the detail of what you want to discuss of what i have already discussed.:D

Enjoy that pint, hope you can afford it with all the paycuts and all. Don't forget to phone the Dept of Education before you get drunk

Lockstep

ntlbell wrote: »

look, I have no need to be in a union there's very few people in Ireland do what I do I get treated extremely well I wouldn't dream for a second about getting involved in unions.

RIght, well that's great for you. You don't have to join a union. No one will force you to.
However, being forced not to join a union isn't on.

If you are PMing me your form where you were obliged not to join a union, you might want to take it up with the courts or the ECHR. They would be very interested in this clear breach of your Constitutional rights.

ntlbell wrote: »

if i refuse to do what i do, regardless of how hard or easy it would be to replace me I'll be fired, no court hearing no unfair dismissal no quoting himan rights articles I'll be out of a job.

Right, and if you refuse to work because you are striking and colleagues are doing the same, the employer has two options based purely on the strike;
Fire all of you
Fire none of you

You do realise the courts differentiate between not doing your job and striking?
The ECHR isn't a human rights article, it is a binding piece of EU law. You seem to think employers are above the law.

ntlbell wrote: »

if more people started to join they would be gone out of the country in a heartbeat, they don't mess around when it comes to this nonsense.

And you're sure of this?
When I lived in Belgium and France, unionisation seemed fairly heavy and the economes were fine.

ntlbell wrote: »

they treat their staff well they pay them very well they expect the work to be done it gets done

refuse to it and your gone.

I'm glad to see you worked in jobs where you were paid and treated well.
I never had that luxury.

Even if I did, I'd see no harm in joining a union. If they employer is treating me well, then the union will have no qualms with them.
If they're not...then the union can get involved.
It's rather like buying health insurance. Sure it might seem irrelevant if you're healthy but suddenly you're sick and things aren't looking too rosy.

ntlbell wrote: »

are you very young?

I fail to see why this is relevant. Unless it's an attempt to patronise me based on my age.
I already said I am in university giving an indication of my age.
Or, my age is on my profile.

Up to you really.

ntlbell

kickoutthejams wrote: »

RIght, well that's great for you. You don't have to join a union. No one will force you to.
However, being forced not to join a union isn't on.

Maybe Forced was the wrong word, I'll grab it and you'll see what I mean I can't recall the exact wording but I'm pretty sure how it's worded lets you know where you stand without being "ilegal" this is one of the biggest software company's in the world, not some mugs.

kickoutthejams wrote: »

If you are PMing me your form where you were obliged not to join a union, you might want to take it up with the courts or the ECHR. They would be very interested in this clear breach of your Constitutional rights.

Well I don't work for the particular company anymore, but I'm fairly sure there's something to the same affect in my current one, I'll root them both out

kickoutthejams wrote: »

Right, and if you refuse to work because you are striking and colleagues are doing the same, the employer has two options based purely on the strike;
Fire all of you
Fire none of you

Firing all of us wouldn't be a problem.
They wouldn't think twice.

kickoutthejams wrote: »

You do realise the courts differentiate between not doing your job and striking?
The ECHR isn't a human rights article, it is a binding piece of EU law. You seem to think employers are above the law.

That maybe so but it's not going to do me much good when I'm on the dole. Company's get rid of people they don't want every single day, they do it legally they're pretty clever.

kickoutthejams wrote: »

And you're sure of this?
When I lived in Belgium and France, unionisation seemed fairly heavy and the economes were fine.

Like I said one was in holland, unions tried to be brought in within weeks they were in ireland and everyone in holland lost thier job they didn't think twice

kickoutthejams wrote: »

Even if I did, I'd see no harm in joining a union. If they employer is treating me well, then the union will have no qualms with them.
If they're not...then the union can get involved.
It's rather like buying health insurance. Sure it might seem irrelevant if you're healthy but suddenly you're sick and things aren't looking too rosy.

Again, they don't recognize unions, there would be no discussions you would get your warnings and you'd be fired it's that simple

kickoutthejams wrote: »

I fail to see why this is relevant. Unless it's an attempt to patronise me based on my age.
I already said I am in university giving an indication of my age.
Or, my age is on my profile.

Up to you really.

because you have some very black/white idealistic views that I had and most have when they're young as they haven't seen enough to realise that laws/contracts/doing the right thing doesn't always bring the result you thought or expect

I've rocked enough boats to realise I usually just get flung out of them with no life jacket

Lockstep

ntlbell wrote: »

Maybe Forced was the wrong word, I'll grab it and you'll see what I mean I can't recall the exact wording but I'm pretty sure how it's worded lets you know where you stand without being "ilegal" this is one of the biggest software company's in the world, not some mugs.

If it infringed on your right to join a union, then you would be able to claim Constitutional breach of rights or bring it up with the ECHR.

I'd be interested in seeing the wording.

ntlbell wrote: »

Well I don't work for the particular company anymore, but I'm fairly sure there's something to the same affect in my current one, I'll root them both out

Send them to me so, keep in mind if they are as you claim they sound highly illegal.

ntlbell wrote: »

Firing all of us wouldn't be a problem.
They wouldn't think twice.

Really?
Despite the cost of retraining/rehiring new individuals?

ntlbell wrote: »

That maybe so but it's not going to do me much good when I'm on the dole. Company's get rid of people they don't want every single day, they do it legally they're pretty clever.

It would be of much good when you can sue them for unfair dismissal/breach of constitutional rights/ go to the ECHR.

ntlbell wrote: »

Like I said one was in holland, unions tried to be brought in within weeks they were in ireland and everyone in holland lost thier job they didn't think twice

Depends on the company really. I'm not familiar with Dutch unions or law but a company which fired people purely for joining unions would have a dodgy time within the EU.

ntlbell wrote: »

Again, they don't recognize unions, there would be no discussions you would get your warnings and you'd be fired it's that simple

That depends on the company/union in question.
Please refer to what happened with Joanna Delaney.
The company refused to recognise her union and yet she was reinstated.

ntlbell wrote: »

because you have some very black/white idealistic views that I had and most have when they're young as they haven't seen enough to realise that laws/contracts/doing the right thing doesn't always bring the result you thought or expect

I've rocked enough boats to realise I usually just get flung out of them with no life jacket

Not really, the law is fairly unambvalent in the regards we are discussing.

Article 11 of the ECHR
Article 23 of the UN Declaration of Human Rights
Article 40.6.3 of the Constitution.
As well as the Unfair Dismissals Act I linked you to previously.

This isn't something easily wriggled out of; if the companies forced you to sign documents against the law, this is illegal.
If they fire someone without firing others purely for striking, this is also illegal.


It'd be extremely hard for the employer to wriggle out of those given how clear the laws/statutes are.

Nevyn

There are some old dino of teachers who lost the love of it years ago and should be moved on but other then that, they get at the start paid shít wages, it takes for ever to get a permanent job, and as for the stress levels there is no way you could pay me enough to be a teacher to a horde of spoilt celtic tiger off spring that don't under stand manners or respect.

Jelly2

On lecturers going abroad for six weeks: lecturers do not just lecture in the university, they also research THROUGH the student holiday period. As a lecturer, I often work outside my university office, in libraries, archives and at home. How do you know lecturers (although not the teachers, as they do not usually research, write and publish) are not working when they are away from their office??

ntlbell

kickoutthejams wrote: »

Really?
Despite the cost of retraining/rehiring new individuals?

It's what it symbolises, they won't be messed about they won't stand for it and if you fancy a go you'll be gone to, so yes, in a heartbeat.

kickoutthejams wrote: »

It would be of much good when you can sue them for unfair dismissal/breach of constitutional rights/ go to the ECHR.

heh.

kickoutthejams wrote: »

Depends on the company really. I'm not familiar with Dutch unions or law but a company which fired people purely for joining unions would have a dodgy time within the EU.

They didn't fire them for being in a union, your missing the point.

Attempt to bring in unions, company vanishes. see the difference?

kickoutthejams wrote: »

Not really, the law is fairly unambvalent in the regards we are discussing.

Article 11 of the ECHR
Article 23 of the UN Declaration of Human Rights
Article 40.6.3 of the Constitution.
As well as the Unfair Dismissals Act I linked you to previously.

This isn't something easily wriggled out of; if the companies forced you to sign documents against the law, this is illegal.
If they fire someone without firing others purely for striking, this is also illegal.


It'd be extremely hard for the employer to wriggle out of those given how clear the laws/statutes are.

You're basing this on the contract being ilegal, lets "pretend" the wording of it is not ilegal and i can join a union.

this is the problem you seem to be having

any company (private) can get rid of pretty much anyone at any time, they're not stupid, they're not going to come out and say "we're firing you for being in a union"

There's ways and means and it happens _every_ day.

do you not think it's odd that there's never any strikes in any large american IT company's in Ireland?

There might be people in unions in them and I don't know but after about 10 years or so I've never met one, it's futile.

In fact I don't recall any strike ever in any IT firm irish or otherwise

Why do these not happen?

ntlbell

Thaedydal wrote: »

There are some old dino of teachers who lost the love of it years ago and should be moved on but other then that, they get at the start paid shít wages, it takes for ever to get a permanent job, and as for the stress levels there is no way you could pay me enough to be a teacher to a horde of spoilt celtic tiger off spring that don't under stand manners or respect.

day one your on avg ind wage with 0 expirience?

that doesn't sound too bad to me.

there's not many jobs you can walk in on day 1 and demand that

Dudess

Kickoutthejams, I know what age you are - you are very young but your maturity makes you seem YEARS older.

Teaching - god, even if the students wanted to be there and were interested in every little element... it's still a huge responsibility. So then, consider the reality that the majority DON'T want to be there and AREN'T interested in much of the curriculum, and the discipline problems, and the large numbers in the classroom, and the grief from parents, and pressure at exam time, and the frustration of correcting half-baked assignments and lousy tests by people who are capable of so much more, and the feeling of being under-appreciated (resulting in some no longer giving a sh1t - would you blame them?)... the money for an equivalent position in the private sector would be MILES more.

Their salaries are fine (approximately 30K at entry level to approximately 60K at senior level), they can live off them, and relatively comfortably too - and yes, those holidays. But they ain't gonna be rich, and to say they are overpaid is utter idiocy.

ntlbell

Dudess wrote: »

the money for an equivalent position in the private sector would be MILES more.
.

so would the hours, without the security, without the pension.

It all evens out

Dudess

Work doesn't end in the classroom though - not by a long shot.

ntlbell

Dudess wrote: »

Work doesn't end in the classroom though - not by a long shot.

So people keep saying.

Work rarely ends in the office.

It's not exclusive to teachers.

We've done this all ready.

Vince135792003

ntlbell wrote: »

Work rarely ends in the office.
.

It did in the ones I worked in.

ntlbell

ntlbell wrote: »

So people keep saying.

Work rarely ends in the office.

Does for me, and should remain that way

gurramok

Dudess wrote: »

Their salaries are fine (approximately 30K at entry level to approximately 60K at senior level), they can live off them, and relatively comfortably too - and yes, those holidays. But they ain't gonna be rich, and to say they are overpaid is utter idiocy.

Do you agree with the strike or not?

omahaid

Work doesnt end in the office for me, by a long shot, and if I don't keep myself up to date, at my own expense, then I lose out by not

1) Not getting payrises
2) Eventually getting the sack

As I said, on my own time. No point complaining, I signed up for the career, and to start whinging now (when I discover life is unfair) is bull****.

ntlbell

Vince135792003 wrote: »

It did in the ones I worked in.

And it doesn't in the ones i worked in?

mad isn't it?

ntlbell

bluewolf wrote: »

Does for me, and should remain that way

and for teachers I know work ends in the classroom.

hmm...

What I would like to see is if a teacher could answer

how many hours during the 4 months holidays do they spend working.

be nice to have some clarification

Vince135792003

ntlbell wrote: »

how many hours during the 4 months holidays do they spend working.

I will be working 5 out of my 8 weeks off this summer.

Just for the record as a primary teacher, I don't agree with strike action now over pay.

We should have gone on strike in October in hindsight over all the cut backs that really will have a negative effect on all children from September. It may have had more of an impact than the demonstrations.

omahaid

Vince135792003 wrote: »

I will be working 5 out of my 8 weeks off this summer. No summer pay due to my substitute status even though I've worked since the start of this school year.

Just for the record as a primary teacher, I don't agree with strike action now over pay.

We should have gone on strike in October in hindsight over all the cut backs. It may have had more of an impact than the demonstrations.

You're right, we should have all gone on strike then. But I suppose the country would have no money now if we did. But I get the impression the teachers and the CS dont understand how a country can run out of money. It can happen, and then what do we do teachers?

ntlbell

Vince135792003 wrote: »

I will be working 5 out of my 8 weeks off this summer. No summer pay due to my substitute status even though I've worked since the start of this school year.

Just for the record as a primary teacher, I don't agree with strike action now over pay.

We should have gone on strike in October in hindsight over all the cut backs. It may have had more of an impact than the demonstrations.

The question I'm looking to be answered is

how many hours will they be doing work out of the 4 months that's related to their full time job that they get paid for in the school they actually work for.

not extra hours getting a separate wage.

Ideally from full time permanent teachers.

Vince135792003

ntlbell wrote: »

The question I'm looking to be answered is

how many hours will they be doing work out of the 4 months that's related to their full time job that they get paid for in the school they actually work for.

not extra hours getting a separate wage.

Ideally from full time permanent teachers.

You don't ask for much. :rolleyes:

To repeat myself once more just in case it gets lost in all the word play, I think going on strike over pay isn't the right thing to do given what's happening to others in the country right now.

LivingDeadGirl

Sorry if I'm utterly misinformed or whatever but weren't they striking(along with all other civil servants) about the money being taken off them as opposed to looking for more money?

ntlbell

LivingDeadGirl wrote: »

Sorry if I'm utterly misinformed or whatever but weren't they striking(along with all other civil servants) about the money being taken off them as opposed to looking for more money?

Correct.

ntlbell

Vince135792003 wrote: »

You don't ask for much. :rolleyes:

Well if people want to rattle out how much work they do outside the classroom, i think it's a valid question to ask how much work they do when they're paid to do nada?

no?

gaeilgegrinds

I work during the holidays, notes of a high standard do not get written during the year. Then again my results speak for themselves, those jealous of the holidays should try becoming teachers. There is absolutely nothing stopping them, only the lack of jobs and job-security! Never ceases to amaze me how everyone assumes teachers are permanent! Since when?!

ntlbell

gaeilgegrinds wrote: »

I work during the holidays, notes of a high standard do not get written during the year. Then again my results speak for themselves, those jealous of the holidays should try becoming teachers. There is absolutely nothing stopping them, only the lack of jobs and job-security! Never ceases to amaze me how everyone assumes teachers are permanent! Since when?!

no one's jealous but people keep saying if you were in the private sector you would get XY and Z that's fine if you want to be treated like private sector workers then take the same conditions?

it's not some outrageous concept, it's a counter argument to people keep comparing to the private sector, if people didn't keep bringing up the private sector i wouldn't mention the holidays.

I have no inclination to be a teacher, I don't want 4 months holidays (it would be nice don't get me wrong) I want my daughter not to be punished because teachers want to everyone else to take financial pain but not them

am i asking for too much?

ntlbell

gaeilgegrinds wrote: »

Never ceases to amaze me how everyone assumes teachers are permanent! Since when?!

what's the ratio of permanent to contract?

out of interest

gaeilgegrinds

Just from experience in my school, slightly over a third have absolutely no job security from one year to another. Most of the permanent staff are there a LONG time. I can't speak for other schools but this would appear to be fairly standard.
Regarding your child's education, I was in teaching the first week of the Easter. Got paid nothing for this, there were twelve teachers in then. It's amazing how some of the most vocal students neither turned up for extra tuition, nor did they seem slightly interested in it. Most teachers I know offer extra help, most rarely taken up on it. Genuinely I doubt one day will make a dramatic difference in the scheme of things for your child. Perhaps you think it will but I doubt it,most students miss a few days a year anyway and when the last strikes were on I know parents who took the children (Prim level) for class and in secondary quite a few were studying together. If that is your primary source of concern I really think you should investigate class sizes and provision for students with difficulties, this will leave you reeling compared to other countries.
And if you wonder what has me up so late, essays, my students e-mailed them through today. We have adopted a new e-learning strategy which enables me to now work all the hours I can. That said I love what I do and the results make it all worth while.

ntlbell

gaeilgegrinds wrote: »

Just from experience in my school, slightly over a third have absolutely no job security from one year to another. Most of the permanent staff are there a LONG time. I can't speak for other schools but this would appear to be fairly standard.
Regarding your child's education, I was in teaching the first week of the Easter. Got paid nothing for this, there were twelve teachers in then. It's amazing how some of the most vocal students neither turned up for extra tuition, nor did they seem slightly interested in it. Most teachers I know offer extra help, most rarely taken up on it. Genuinely I doubt one day will make a dramatic difference in the scheme of things for your child. Perhaps you think it will but I doubt it,most students miss a few days a year anyway and when the last strikes were on I know parents who took the children (Prim level) for class and in secondary quite a few were studying together. If that is your primary source of concern I really think you should investigate class sizes and provision for students with difficulties, this will leave you reeling compared to other countries.
And if you wonder what has me up so late, essays, my students e-mailed them through today. We have adopted a new e-learning strategy which enables me to now work all the hours I can. That said I love what I do and the results make it all worth while.

so 1 in 3 or there about's is contract? wow.

I'm not overly concerned about one day, I'm concerned about the word "rolling" this does scare me, the main reason being IMO This is only the start of the cuts and they're going to get worse and worse and my fear is if they're up in arms now what will they be like Feb/10 if things get really bad?

AckwelFoley

Parents rented apartments for years. They would rent to anyone with 2 exceptions.. Known knackers or school teachers.

knackers wrecked the flat. School teachers would wreck their patience apparently

gaeilgegrinds

I don't know what your personal circumstance is and where your child is at but I'd really be worried about cutbacks for that reason alone, the children WILL suffer. We cannot take more cutbacks, I mean in the schools now. I teach in a disadvantaged school and it is shocking how much of my own money I've had to pump into resources this year. It was only when I realised after the cuts that I can't do that anymore I realised I had a problem.
Maybe your child does not need additional special needs help but other services have been hit. We had extra classes for highly advanced students, no more. Not because of money but because the school can't afford the heating after school! We offered to do these for free!

Genuinely I'd be very worried as a parent right now. I'm not in the privileged position to be one right now but I've met enough of worried parents since these cutbacks started to know it will not work. Students will suffer but that is not our fault, we can not take further financial cutbacks to our budget and that is final. If any of you feel we should take all these cutbacks I really suggest looking at the school budget which if discussed at B.O.M. meetings and cringing when you realise how little your child's education is now worth.

Bualadh bos don Rialtais, praiseach déanta do chuile rud.

gaeilgegrinds

Snyper...good job I'm not looking to rent so!

Vince135792003

ntlbell wrote: »

so 1 in 3 or there about's is contract? wow.

I'm not overly concerned about one day, I'm concerned about the word "rolling" this does scare me, the main reason being IMO This is only the start of the cuts and they're going to get worse and worse and my fear is if they're up in arms now what will they be like Feb/10 if things get really bad?

Maybe channel some of your concern and outrage into things that without a shadow of a doubt are coming in September e.g. only 2 language teachers in each school now which will effect all classes with international pupils, class sizes up to 28 to 1, the 7.5 million take off DEIS schools as a grant for books (and there's plenty more).

Did you go to any of the protests in October after these were announced?

themont85

Dudess wrote: »

Kickoutthejams, I know what age you are - you are very young but your maturity makes you seem YEARS older.

Teaching - god, even if the students wanted to be there and were interested in every little element... it's still a huge responsibility. So then, consider the reality that the majority DON'T want to be there and AREN'T interested in much of the curriculum, and the discipline problems, and the large numbers in the classroom, and the grief from parents, and pressure at exam time, and the frustration of correcting half-baked assignments and lousy tests by people who are capable of so much more, and the feeling of being under-appreciated (resulting in some no longer giving a sh1t - would you blame them?)... the money for an equivalent position in the private sector would be MILES more.

Their salaries are fine (approximately 30K at entry level to approximately 60K at senior level), they can live off them, and relatively comfortably too - and yes, those holidays. But they ain't gonna be rich, and to say they are overpaid is utter idiocy.

How is it idiocy? Compare their rates to their counterparts accross the world(who don't get near the same holidays).

If the teaching proffession was open to market forces i would love to see the actual rate they would get. Their are plenty of people out their looking for teaching jobs who are qualified and those who won't be kept on this summer, with market forces their wage would certaintly fall, the oligopoly of the ASTI, TUI and INTO ensure that will never happen though.

**** teachers complain about poor discipline,sorry that is the truth, i'm not denying their is misbehaviour but a good teacher can sort it out quick enough and the instances of it happening in their class our far lower then their counterparts. We all had teachers in schools who couldn't control the class and those who could, their stress is self imposed due to them being incompentant at their job. Their stresses are minute in comparision to a nurse or doctors(other members of the public service take note this isn't anti PS).

themont85

gaeilgegrinds wrote: »

I work during the holidays, notes of a high standard do not get written during the year. Then again my results speak for themselves, those jealous of the holidays should try becoming teachers. There is absolutely nothing stopping them, only the lack of jobs and job-security! Never ceases to amaze me how everyone assumes teachers are permanent! Since when?!

Can I ask a question? Im guessing you teach Irish because of the username,does the Irish course require brand new notes every single year which will take months to write? I doubt it does. Changing poets ect come on stream each year but after a few years of work its all repition-Máire hMac an Tsaoi ect come up nearly every year. Maybe a few changes in the curriculum every 3-4 years which are hardly earth shattering. And fair play with the e-learning-but that is a new tool which makes it even easier now for teachers to change notes quickly ect.

tallaght01

Terry wrote: »

As for striking during the Summer holidays?
That's the most retarded thing I have ever read in AH, and that's saying a lot.
Actually, the first person who suggested that is having their post linked to in my sig so that others will see the most retarded post I have ever read.

.

LOL

Love it :pac::pac::pac:

bobbbb

themont85 wrote: »

Can I ask a question? Im guessing you teach Irish because of the username,does the Irish course require brand new notes every single year which will take months to write? I doubt it does. Changing poets ect come on stream each year but after a few years of work its all repition-Máire hMac an Tsaoi ect come up nearly every year. Maybe a few changes in the curriculum every 3-4 years which are hardly earth shattering. And fair play with the e-learning-but that is a new tool which makes it even easier now for teachers to change notes quickly ect.

I was under the impression that in school each individual child requires ongoing assessment and notes on their progress and plans for future progress etc.

I asked a primary teacher how many hours she worked in school a couple of weeks ago.

Start 8:30am
not 9:00 as i thought because the kids need to be settled and ready to go by 9:00am. This requires an earlier start for the teacher.

Lunch 30 mins max - when they are not supervising at lunch (then its 5 mins for lunch).

Finish not before 3:00 to 3:30 most days. Later other days when after school activities are on or meetings or chatting with parents collecting kids.

Homework, plans etc 1 - 2 hrs a day at home

Average of about 8+ hours a day. I do 7 hours a day in my job.

Easter. She was in school for about a week over easter to get her room ready (prefab that was leaking. Her husband repaired it) and set up materials for the next term. She paid for these materials herself, and the repairs to the prefab.

This happens before the beginning of each term.

During the summer more repairs are required. Also a 1 week training course (for which she gets 3 elective days off in return.)

Back to school the week before the kids start for preparation work for the following years class. During the first 2 weeks of a new year she spends about 4 -5 extra hours a day writing initial reports on each childs educational position and their needs for the coming term.

During the year there are Communions at weekends, other weekends when work has to be done in the classroom and trips abroad or away for the weekends for sports and activities etc. Looking after school teams in various sports and organizing transport and matches. The list went on.
Also board of management meetings and preparation work.

None of this extra wok is done during class time (9 - 2:30 (i think)). It cant be. 100% of class time is dedicated to teaching. All of the support work goes on outside class work.

All in all i had no appreciation for what these people do before. I reckon they work more than i do, they have a harder job and get paid a hell of a lot less than i get paid do for what i do.

And yet everyone is on their backs. Begrudgery and ignorance methinks.

mikemac

bobbbb wrote: »

Easter. She was in school for about a week over easter to get her room ready (prefab that was leaking. Her husband repaired it) and set up materials for the next term. She paid for these materials herself, and the repairs to the prefab.

Madness, where was the Department of Eduction for this? Not one maintenance worker in the school?
Is her husband a tradesman and insured for this work? As if that roof collapses it's obvious who will be held liable.

bobbbb

ntlbell wrote: »

do you not think it's odd that there's never any strikes in any large american IT company's in Ireland?

There might be people in unions in them and I don't know but after about 10 years or so I've never met one, it's futile.

In fact I don't recall any strike ever in any IT firm irish or otherwise

Why do these not happen?

Im in IT. We dont strike because we get paid well and are in demand enough to get some respect from our employers, so are not subject to abuse the way other sectors are. I also have a clause in my contract about unions. I dont even read it anymore. Basically it says "No unions". I dont need a union anyway.

And when we want to get rid of someone there are ways and means. Everyone always has an email they would rather resign over than be fired over Ask 700 HP staff about their emails, who were let go (read fired intstead of made redundant) when i was there back during the .com bust.

bobbbb

mikemac wrote: »

Madness, where was the Department of Eduction for this? Not one maintenance worker in the school?
Is her husband a tradesman and insured for this work? As if that roof collapses it's obvious who well be held liable.

No tradesman. A caretaker who is 60 years old and gets paid minimum wage.
Her husband is a truck driver. He is not insured for that work at all.


For those who have been asleep the last 20 years.
Our kids are taught in prefabs, with rats and leaks. Mould, no heat. Conditions of our schools are appalling. Go into a school prefab and have a look. I walk past a school on the way to work every days. You can see the holes in the prefabs. Its disgusting. Until 2 years ago that school had an outdoor toilet in a shed.

That teacher told me that when 3 teachers in different prefabs turn on electric heaters (which thy had to buy themselves) that the trip switch trips and no electricity then. They have to take turns using the heaters. They phone someone up to turn of theirs before they turn on their own one.

They are trying to organize a parent who is an electrician to fix it for free because the dept of education are doing nothing.

Another reason we are thinking of emigrating before the young one starts school.


I was reading somewhere about someone who overheard an american on the phone in their office one day. Someone must have asked them about schools in Ireland. They replied. "they dont have schools here, they have huts".

To be honest you couldnt pay me enough to work as a teacher.



http://www.herald.ie/national-news/crumbling-the-dublin-primary-school-in-such-a-shocking-state-of-disrepair-it-faces-being-condemned-1490919.html

http://www.politics.ie/education-science/31607-prefab-schools-celtic-tiger-era.html

http://www.labour.ie/joannatuffy/news/1228767894269188.html

http://www.schooldays.ie/education-news-item/Prefab-school-looks-like-refugee-camp-19080511

http://www.independent.ie/education/latest-news/anger-at--schools-10year--wait-for-repairs-1485876.html

http://www.echo.ie/lucan/Emma-Bradley-takes-matters-into.4728283.jp

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/health/2009/0317/1224242941901.html

Lockstep

ntlbell wrote: »

It's what it symbolises, they won't be messed about they won't stand for it and if you fancy a go you'll be gone to, so yes, in a heartbeat.

Funny, I always thought businesses were out to make a profit, not stick to idealistic principles.
Last job I was in, one of the staff was going to be sacked for using their holiday entitlement at a time which the management disliked. We all threatened a walk out.
This was as sales assistants and there were around 3 CVs being handed in by prospective employees every day; there was no shortage of applicants and yet it was cheaper for them to simply form an agreement with the staff member rather than fire us all and have to deal with retraining a completely new staff.

I'm not trying to be condescending but you don't seem too well up on the law and every statute/Constitutional article or Convention which proves your legal protection you respond to with "THEY'D FIRE ME IN A HEARTBEAT"

There are 833,486 members of the ICTU trade unions.
Why havn't all these workers been fired if what you claim is true?

ntlbell wrote: »

heh.

You think sueing is pointless?
Lol

ntlbell wrote: »

They didn't fire them for being in a union, your missing the point.

Attempt to bring in unions, company vanishes. see the difference?

You're right.
833, 486 union members don't exist then.

ntlbell wrote: »

You're basing this on the contract being ilegal, lets "pretend" the wording of it is not ilegal and i can join a union.

this is the problem you seem to be having

How would the wording not be illegal?
If it stops you from joining a union, then it is illegal.
Sorry.

ntlbell wrote: »

any company (private) can get rid of pretty much anyone at any time, they're not stupid, they're not going to come out and say "we're firing you for being in a union"

They cannot get rid of anyone at any time. Read the Unfair Dismissals Act.

Yes and if you can prove it, suddenly they're facing a legal suit.
Even if you prove it the unions provide a lot of support and can get you you're job back; Joanna Delaney for example.

ntlbell wrote: »

do you not think it's odd that there's never any strikes in any large american IT company's in Ireland?

There might be people in unions in them and I don't know but after about 10 years or so I've never met one, it's futile.

In fact I don't recall any strike ever in any IT firm irish or otherwise
Why do these not happen?[/QUOTE]
Havn;t a clue as I'm no expert on IT firms, however, the lack of strikes doesn't mean what you claim. You just ascribe it that to fit you're meaning.



So far,I've given you articles of domestic law, international law and statutes disproving what you say.
You're response; they'd still fire you/ companies don't get involved with unions.
Please back up what you claim or else bring out a new argument as those old ones have been disproved.
Next.

Lockstep

Also, lol at the idea of a completely privatised education system.

Pepsi presents Arithmetic