Schools to close on 24th November

corcaighcailin9

keane2097 wrote: »

If ye waited till ye're pay was at a less mind-bogglingly inflated level to say "enough" you'd probably have a better reaction from people.

I respect your right to be of the opinion that our wages are "mind-bogglingly inflated" but I beg to differ. Hence we didn't strike after the last pay cuts.

Podginho

I'm a teacher and am against the strike,, but not complaining as it falls on my birthday

corcaighcailin9

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Are you willing to disclose how much you earn?

I have nothing to hide - I earn €42K. After loans, pension, health insurance and all the other deducations, I come out with about €950 per fortnight. I live on every second pay cheque, the other being a mortgage contribution.

irish_bob

dodgyme wrote: »

I know, I understand what you mean,,... but when your having a debate it has to be around something concrete. No not ever teacher earns 60 but the average does so its a good place to start if looking at wages. Likewise lots of teachers earn alot more than 60k. We could also start there but why not start at the average. It has been very hard for the Public sector to deal with the issues in the last few months in these debates. Any time you mention wages they all seem to be earning less then the average (maybe the age profile on here doesnt help) but we still need to move forward in a thread and an average is surely a good place to start?

The PS seem as slippery as eels when it comes to wages. On VB the last night they were talking about gardai wages as 43k basic. Now I know a garda (office one) who earns over 60k a year, (bitta overtime etc), she told me. Her hubby is one also and earns say the same, thats 120k in one house, (well they have 3 houses but thats another debate.)

average garda salary is 1200 euro per week , they earn more than teachers do , average nurse salary is 50 k per year

ParkRunner

Kensington wrote: »

Oh for god's sake. A teacher does not do babysitting.
They teach the class - THAT IS YOUR JOB.
That is the role you signed up to in the beginning.

How you can honestly put forward the argument that you have a right to earn the wage you do, because you are "babysitting the class", just baffles me. It's pathetic.

Should a bus driver be paid chauffer rates?
And I guess we should be paying doorstaff bodyguard rates since they're protecting you on your night out?
And we should pay the postman personal assistant rates for delivering our post directly to our door.

Am I being ridiculous? I'd be inclined to agree with you if you think I am. But your argument is no less ridiculous than my above three.

Firstly Im not a teacher, but my basic point is that parents will be forced in many circumstances to stump up the cost of childcare due to the absence of the availability of teachers on the day of the strikes. It is a natural cause and effect.

I totally agree wages have to fall though..they have fallen and will continue to fall.

ParkRunner

MysticalRain wrote: »

Does it not dawn on you that high wages fuel inflation? How do you think the rest of the people who are paid much less than you are coping?

I presume you have assumed I am a highly paid teacher. Im not a teacher and Im not highly paid. I am making the point about the high cost of living.

irish_bob

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

To be honest I'm still shocked at those teacher's wages, I hadn't a clue they were so over paid.

If they were paid the average industrial wage, we could have 2 teachers for the price of 1.

These striking teachers would do well to remember that if one striking teacher paid 67k per year is laid off by the government, that'll cover the dole for them, mortgage relief and medical card for them and 2 other people.

When I was growing up, a teacher was an average job?
What the hell happened?

which is why the teachers crocodile tears about over croweded class sizes need to be knocked on the head , class sizes are high because the teachers are over paid , if every teacher in the country took a 10% pay cut , thier would be plenty of money to spend on reducing class sizes and improoving facilities , we hear alot of talk about how our education system and health service was underfunded this past decade , it was nothing of the sort , it was malfunded , all the money went on wages

irish_bob

herya wrote: »

Wow I'm speechless. So if my friend junior teacher is on ca 30k it means that there is another teacher somewhere near getting 90k? For 8 months work? Wow!

teachers start off on 36 k, your friend must be a temporary or on a contract

dresden8

Nead21 wrote: »

great for you!:rolleyes:

however teachers who are covering maternity leave, subbing or those very uncertain of their jobs are not inclined to go against the principals and "moral majority" of the school. they want to hang on to their jobs too just like everyone else.

You obviously haven't been reading public servant bashing threads very much.

Apparently those

covering maternity leave, subbing or those very uncertain of their jobs

are not permanent public servants and don't amount to much. It doesn't count if they lose their jobs.

That is view of the public service bashers here by the way, not the public servants.

Dannyboy83

corcaighcailin9 wrote: »

I have nothing to hide - I earn €42K. After loans, pension, health insurance and all the other deducations, I come out with about €950 per fortnight. I live on every second pay cheque, the other being a mortgage contribution.

42k gross or net?
I assume this includes the 10% pension levy.

For the record, you cannot take loans into account.
My GF received her jobseekers allowance application today and was refused on the grounds that I earn too much money (36k per annum/software engineer). They refused to take my car loan into account.

I do not have a pension.
I pay private health insurance for both of us.
None of these are taken into account.

Your means are calculated on your income.
Therefore, I would have to say you are not justified in striking.

keane2097

EF wrote: »

I presume you have assumed I am a highly paid teacher. Im not a teacher and Im not highly paid. I am making the point about the high cost of living.

You are cynically avoiding his point that high wages contribute hugely to the high cost of living.

Kensington

corcaighcailin9 wrote: »

I have to admit I haven't read all the replies here so I'm sorry if I'm repeating anything here.

It's important to remember we teachers are not just striking over our pay - we are trying to protect our pensions and working conditions as well. Financially, we have been seriously eroded in the last year / 18 months and we have come to a situation where we simply have to say enough. I'm not going to pedal the whole 'we didn't cause this recession' BS but I do feel that having given up 10% of my pay since the budget last year, I'm doing my bit. My mortgage hasn't come down in line with what I'm earning and, with my partner working in the private sector and having had a pay cut last year and reduced working week with reducancy a very real possibility, I genuinely fear that the day I can't afford the roof over my head is not very far away. I by no means live an extravagent lifestyle, I live in a modest house in a modest area. I made financial commitments on the strength of my earnings at the time and in the not-so-distant future as many other people did and boy was my mortgage provider happy to dole out the cash on the strength of same.

Unfortunately, this recession is hitting everyone hard. No-one's mortgage is coming down along with their pay rates. Lots of loans were taken out based on the highs of the celtic tiger. The only somewhat relief is lower interest rates. And it's all very fine saying enough is enough but the scary reality is, the money simply isn't there to keep paying you the wages you get. The government have no choice but to make expenditure cuts. This will either be in the form of a pay-cut which everyone bears the brunt of, or they will start laying people off. There is no other way, despite what unions may pump out!

corcaighcailin9 wrote: »

Money aside, the McCarthy report suggested serious changes to our contracts and we would be a spineless group if we didn't put up a fight. No matter what line of work you yourself are in, are you telling me that if radical changes were suggested to your job you'd simply lie down and accept your fate without doing your utmost to resist these changes? And say what you want about the INTO but they are after all a trade union and we pay our subs for them to act on our behalf.

What you guys in the public sector don't seem to realise is, the private sector don't have the luxury of being able to go out on strike yet know their jobs are safe. Mainly people in the private sector are and have taken cuts in pay, increased workloads, drops in conditions but what can they do? A lot of people know well to lie down and take it, else they'll be leaving the bosses office with their p45, fighting their way out of the building to get through the 100 other people waiting to take their place.

corcaighcailin9 wrote: »

Teachers have always contributed a heck of a lot more than delivering just the subjects on the curriculum and maybe our mistake was doing it quietly. Yes we have been well rewarded with the advance of benchmarking when times were good but why not?! And yes I acknowledge that our economy is in dire straights now, but pulling the financial rug from under us at this speed is not the answer. It is widely acknowledged internationally that we have a very highly educated and skilled workforce and none of us want this to change. Everyone wants a quality educational service but no-one wants to pay for it. Eroding our working conditions now and imposing the new contracts on teachers will make this a far less attractive profession to enter and the inevitable result will be a poorer quality of teachers.

Again, another shortsight of the teachers (and on a wider scale, the public sector). At this present moment in time, there is no shortage of teachers who are seeking work. They would gladly take your job, with lesser conditions, for maybe half the current average pay. To enter a profession where you effectively have a job for life - no amount of money could buy you that in other professions.

corcaighcailin9 wrote: »

I voted yes in the recent ballot but was conflicted in doing so - I can't afford to lose any pay and I don't honestly know what it will achieve. But saying no would have given the union no leverage at all. I know it will further deepen the public v private sector tensions and it will infuriate parents who will have to arrange childcare and for the latter, I am genuinely sorry. If there was another way around this, I'd gladly take it but there really is no other way to vent our fury at this government who continue to squander immoral amounts of money and ask the same people to cough up time after time.

I don't really see what it will achieve (at least in a positive light) for your profession either. I know what it will not achieve though, and that is the support of the public. It is going to cause a lot of inconvenience for those that do have jobs, but can't afford to take days off, arrange childcare on short notice etc.

corcaighcailin9

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

42k gross or net?
I assume this includes the 10% pension levy.

For the record, you cannot take loans into account.
My GF received her jobseekers allowance application today and was refused on the grounds that I earn too much money (36k per annum/software engineer). They refused to take my car loan into account.

I do not have a pension.
I pay private health insurance for both of us.
None of these are taken into account.

Your means are calculated on your income.
Therefore, I would have to say you are not justified in striking.

It's a gross figure. I merely mentioned some of my outgoings to answer the question.

My means and income were a lot healthier when I took out my mortgage. Anyways, I think I made it clear in my post that the yes vote is as much about a new contract as it is about money.

I'm not being smart here but why did your GF mention you at all if you are not married?

ParkRunner

keane2097 wrote: »

You are cynically avoiding his point that high wages contribute hugely to the high cost of living.

It's a vicious circle alright. Unfortunately adjustment takes time in relation to wages or we will go into an uncontrollable deflationary spiral. The floor has fallen out of the private sector jobs market and the public sector expenditure can only catch up so fast without the whole economy spiralling out of control. I am not avoiding in any way the point about cost of living and wages.

irish_bob

EF wrote: »

How so? I think it is just another example of how much more expensive things are in this country compared to the rest of Europe, which necessitates higher wages.

the gaping hole in the cost of living line which is always trotted out by the public sector is that the cost of living is the same for those in the private sector , beit those who have lost their jobs or those who still have jobs but earn on average 30% less than those in the public sector

Dannyboy83

corcaighcailin9 wrote: »

It's a gross figure. I merely mentioned some of my outgoings to answer the question.

I'm not being smart here but why did your GF mention you at all if you are not married?

Because we are honest.

Edit: To clarify, other people out there have less than us and genuinely need the money. I would feel like a dirty thief, no better than Cowen or Fitzpatrick themselves.

murphaph

corcaighcailin9 wrote: »

I have nothing to hide - I earn €42K. After loans, pension, health insurance and all the other deducations, I come out with about €950 per fortnight. I live on every second pay cheque, the other being a mortgage contribution.

You earn well above the average industrial wage. Why do you feel obliged to point out that you have debts, insurance and a pension to pay, when just about every adult is in the same situation?? Do you not see how lucky you are to have stable employment? There are hundreds of thousands of folks out there with bigger commitments than you and on far less money. Show them a little solidarity will you. :mad:

Think about it. Think about what the average industrial wage is and remember those on it are paying tax and funding YOUR pay packet. The country is in dire straits and needs everyone to take a cut in living standards.

gerry28

I'm not a teacher but i'm a public servant and we have voted to strike aswell.

I don't accept this notion that all public servants can be lumped together and told take a 7% paycut in the next budget (in addition to the great unmentionable pension levy).

I'm on 28K a year and am in my early 30's... why should I be put in the same bracket as a senior civil servant on 200K a year, or a consultant on 250K, or any other 50/60K plus earning public or civil servant.

I should be compared to any other irish citizen on similar wages who is still in employment, be they public or private shouldn't matter a damn.

Not everyone in the private sector has taken paycuts - prob 20% or less of those still in employment have taken cuts the rest haven't.

I'm striking on the principle that if the big fish of this country won't contribute then why on earth should I roll over and give give give.

Bono come back and pay your taxes, cowan reduce your salary well below brown, merkel and sarkozy, Irish billionaires and millionaires pay your taxes here and stop siphoning away your money through tax avoidance schemes.
Put a higher rate of tax on anyone earning over 150K - then come back to me and I will take a fair paycut but not before - not first.

irish_bob

corcaighcailin9 wrote: »

I have nothing to hide - I earn €42K. After loans, pension, health insurance and all the other deducations, I come out with about €950 per fortnight. I live on every second pay cheque, the other being a mortgage contribution.

back up the truck , sounds like your quoting net pay , their was a guard in after hours claiming he earned 250 quid a week the other night , turned out he was deducting his mortgage repayments and even his godamm car insurance

its GROSS or nothing

Dannyboy83

gerry28 wrote: »

I'm not a teacher but i'm a public servant and we have voted to strike aswell.

I don't accept this notion that all public servants can be lumped together and told take a 7% paycut in the next budget (in addition to the great unmentionable pension levy).

I'm on 28K a year and am in my early 30's... why should I be put in the same bracket as a senior civil servant on 200K a year, or a consultant on 250K, or any other 50/60K plus earning public or civil servant.

Now YOU are justified in striking and I would fully support you in doing so.

Why did you not tackle this issue with your union!!??

Kensington

EF wrote: »

I presume you have assumed I am a highly paid teacher. Im not a teacher and Im not highly paid. I am making the point about the high cost of living.

I will admit I assumed you were, for which I apologise. But the argument that you were putting forward is just illogical and no justification whatsoever for the role of teachers or the level of pay they deserve. Their role is to teach, it cannot be classified as babysitting also.

corcaighcailin9

Kensington wrote: »

Unfortunately, this recession is hitting everyone hard. No-one's mortgage is coming down along with their pay rates. Lots of loans were taken out based on the highs of the celtic tiger. The only somewhat relief is lower interest rates. And it's all very fine saying enough is enough but the scary reality is, the money simply isn't there to keep paying you the wages you get. The government have no choice but to make expenditure cuts. This will either be in the form of a pay-cut which everyone bears the brunt of, or they will start laying people off. There is no other way, despite what unions may pump out!

Because our government stupidly pumped our hard earned cash into a banking sytem where people are still losing their jobs in spite of the financial injection. When ministerial expenses are cut and I see sensible spending I'll believe the money is almost gone.

Kensington wrote: »

What you guys in the public sector don't seem to realise is, the private sector don't have the luxury of being able to go out on strike yet know their jobs are safe. Mainly people in the private sector are and have taken cuts in pay, increased workloads, drops in conditions but what can they do? A lot of people know well to lie down and take it, else they'll be leaving the bosses office with their p45, fighting their way out of the building to get through the 100 other people waiting to take their place.

Well I do have the option of strike and I'm sorry but I'm taking it

Kensington wrote: »

Again, another shortsight of the teachers (and on a wider scale, the public sector). At this present moment in time, there is no shortage of teachers who are seeking work. They would gladly take your job, with lesser conditions, for maybe half the current average pay. To enter a profession where you effectively have a job for life - no amount of money could buy you that in other professions.

The issue of new contracts affects me as much as my colleagues, present and future. That's as big a part of our campaign as anything to do with money.

Kensington wrote: »

I don't really see what it will achieve (at least in a positive light) for your profession either. I know what it will not achieve though, and that is the support of the public. It is going to cause a lot of inconvenience for those that do have jobs, but can't afford to take days off, arrange childcare on short notice etc.

Agreed.

SwanV

I'm a teacher. I take home 30k a year. I am embarrased to be striking.
After four years of college and five years of work.

Dannyboy83

corcaighcailin9 wrote: »

Well I do have the option of strike and I'm sorry but I'm taking it

Look, I don't want to attack you, you are being honest and fair play to you for discussing it openly.

But that sounds like nothing more than plain old ugly greed.

Do you honestly believe anyone else will think otherwise?
How will people support you?
You are now giving the government a mandate to slaughter you, with public support

Mister Man

Yay!!!! day off!!
nice long sleep then

corcaighcailin9

murphaph wrote: »

You earn well above the average industrial wage. Why do you feel obliged to point out that you have debts, insurance and a pension to pay, when just about every adult is in the same situation?? Do you not see how lucky you are to have stable employment? There are hundreds of thousands of folks out there with bigger commitments than you and on far less money. Show them a little solidarity will you. :mad:

Jesus, I'm sorry I answered the question now! I should have said the amount I earn gross and left it at that.


I am well aware that I am not the only person with financial commitments and I'm sorry for us all but mostly for myself

murphaph wrote: »

Think about it. Think about what the average industrial wage is and remember those on it are paying tax and funding YOUR pay packet. The country is in dire straits and needs everyone to take a cut in living standards.

I have taken a cut in living standards, I've cut back on the usual things like everyone else - the nights out, take aways, trips to the cinema, clothes, breaks away. Just can't cut down my mortgage and other commitments unfortunately.

corcaighcailin9

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Look, I don't want to attack you, you are being honest and fair play to you for discussing it openly.

But that sounds like nothing more than plain old ugly greed.

Sorry if my tone is coming across as greedy, I only meant that as a member of my trade union the option is there for me and I feel there is no other way but to strike. I'm not militant by nature.

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Do you honestly believe anyone else will think otherwise?

In a word - no

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

How will people support you?

I don't expect them to. Honestly. I'll apologise to the parents of the kids I'm letting down but hope in their hearts they know by now how dedicated I am to my job every second I have their kids in my care and that this decision has nothing to do with that.

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

You are now giving the government a mandate to slaughter you, with public support

Oh I know

Kensington

corcaighcailin9 wrote: »

Because our government stupidly pumped our hard earned cash into a banking sytem where people are still losing their jobs in spite of the financial injection. When ministerial expenses are cut and I see sensible spending I'll believe the money is almost gone.

The government had no choice but to pump money into the banking system. If they left it as is, the banks would have folded and this country would have gone to the wall by now. It won't create jobs, but it will prevent complete economic ruin of this country.

Will you though? It's all very fine saying you'd take a pay cut if the ministers, but if they came out tomorrow and announced all ministerial pay capped at €100,000, for example. Would you take a cut then? Honestly?

corcaighcailin9 wrote: »

Well I do have the option of strike and I'm sorry but I'm taking it

No-one is denying you your right to strike. I just hope it does not pave way for serious repurcusions on teachers. Job cuts are not what are needed right now - both for those that will be affected and for the nation as a whole.

corcaighcailin9 wrote: »

The issue of new contracts affects me as much as my colleagues, present and future. That's as big a part of our campaign as anything to do with money.

Have you seen these new conditions set in stone?
What do they entail?
What if you don't sign the new contract, will you be sacked?

Mister Man

I must say reading over this tread, you trachers are as greedy as people get!!! You make 50+ per hour, Amazing holidays, breaks, short days, yet you are still moaning about money !!! You teachers need to clim out of your own arse's and start to understand that its not just you who are taking a wage drop! My father lost his job for a month a while back, went from a decent wage to now 1/4 of what it was.... My mother works insane hours and every single penny of her money pays for the house and car.... We are pretty normal i terms of a family.... Teachers are bringing in great money, you need to cop on and stop taking the piss

(i do know not all teachers are like this, but the ones who are need a good kick up the arse!!!)

Im a student btw, and i only know one teacher who wants to strike in a school with 30+ teachers....

Dannyboy83

corcaighcailin9 wrote: »

Because our government stupidly pumped our hard earned cash into a banking sytem where people are still losing their jobs in spite of the financial injection. When ministerial expenses are cut and I see sensible spending I'll believe the money is almost gone.

Just to clarify this point, the funds required for NAMA and the bank bailout are a separate issue.

The public sector wage is €19.8 Billion per annum and the Social Welfare bill is €21 billion per annum (and growing).
This is verifiable on page 14 of the McCarthy report

These cuts are required to reduce current spending and reduced our defecit of €20 odd billion per annum.50% of the 4billion cuts to be achieved, will be wasted simply on cover the interest payments for our debt.

However, I fully support you with regard to your comment about Ministerial expenses, and this is the thing your union should be fighting for, the reform of Ministerial wages and expenses!

rebel10

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Now YOU are justified in striking and I would fully support you in doing so.

Why did you not tackle this issue with your union!!??

Oh my God you are ridiculous!:eek: Now you have decided who can strike and who cannot? Well can i just remind you as said earlier, there are thousands of public sec. workers in this situation. So now we can rely on you to tell us who can and who can't strike. As far as i am concerned, every person in the public sec. without a perm. contract should not be facing these cuts, but then in reality that is ridiculous due to the fact that so many people in the pub. & priv. sectors are losing their jobs.
Now, would love to see you trying to convince your union you are the only teacher who should not be obliged to take these cuts. :rolleyes:

corcaighcailin9

Kensington wrote: »

The government had no choice but to pump money into the banking system. If they left it as is, the banks would have folded and this country would have gone to the wall by now. It won't create jobs, but it will prevent complete economic ruin of this country.

Will you though? It's all very fine saying you'd take a pay cut if the ministers, but if they came out tomorrow and announced all ministerial pay capped at €100,000, for example. Would you take a cut then? Honestly?

If there was leadership and solidarity from the top down, then yes. Honestly.

Kensington wrote: »

No-one is denying you your right to strike. I just hope it does not pave way for serious repurcusions on teachers. Job cuts are not what are needed right now - both for those that will be affected and for the nation as a whole.


Have you seen these new conditions set in stone?
What do they entail?
What if you don't sign the new contract, will you be sacked?

There are a whole host of changes proposed to our contracts - far too many to try and recall on a Friday night I'm afraid but I'll try Basically morning and afternoon supervision of children; a longer working day to include staff and parent teacher meetings as well as planning and taking on duties previously held by post-holders (one of the few opportunities for promotion).

I honestly don't know if they enforce these contracts legally. I would think it's not as simple as just making us sign. Now if they were fair and for example contained real measures to get rid of underperforming dossers who milk the system, I'd be all in favour of a little give and take. However, the feeling I get from the recommendations is that we aren't trusted to do as much work as the powers that be would like. I do a heck of amount of planning and corrections but prefer the comfort of my own house rather than my freezing cold, mouse infested classroom - does that make me a waste of money because I leave just a half an hour after my day officially ends?!

Dannyboy83

rebel10 wrote: »

Oh my God you are ridiculous!:eek: Now you have decided who can strike and who cannot? Well can i just remind you as said earlier, there are thousands of public sec. workers in this situation. So now we can rely on you to tell us who can and who can't strike. As far as i am concerned, every person in the public sec. without a perm. contract should not be facing these cuts, but then in reality that is ridiculous due to the fact that so many people in the pub. & priv. sectors are losing their jobs.
Now, would love to see you trying to convince your union you are the only teacher who should not be obliged to take these cuts. :rolleyes:

His original quote - QFT

I'm not a teacher but i'm a public servant and we have voted to strike aswell.
I don't accept this notion that all public servants can be lumped together and told take a 7% paycut in the next budget (in addition to the great unmentionable pension levy).

I'm on 28K a year and am in my early 30's... why should I be put in the same bracket as a senior civil servant on 200K a year, or a consultant on 250K, or any other 50/60K plus earning public or civil servant.

The poster is on 28k per year (nor a teacher).
This is in line with private rates of pay.
A flat 7% tax will have a disproportionally heavy impact on him compared to a teacher earning in excess of 3 times his pay.
His point is entirely defensible and I stand by my original comment.

tvnutz

Mister Man wrote: »

I must say reading over this tread, you trachers are as greedy as people get!!! You make 50+ per hour, Amazing holidays, breaks, short days, yet you are still moaning about money !!!

Clearly you havn't read the thread because there have only been about 4 teachers on posting about the strike,and 3 said they were against it.

GoldenEarring

Hi All,
I'm a primary teacher with thirty years experience. It makes me sad to see the vitriol directed against teachers in particular. When I started out teaching, the parents were supportive and the children did as they were told. Now the parents are incredibly fussy, send in notes about the most trivial, petty and ridiculous issues, think their own children are SO bright, take their child's word over the teacher's every time and expect you to deal with other people's children (who are always the ones in the wrong). The children are , in my opinion, over-confident..they think they know better than the teacher..."No, this is the way you do the sum...actually I think my writing is very neat !!! Unbelievable!
Our lunch break is an effective 25 minutes...and you're not allowed to leave the premises as you're ultimately responsible at all times for your pupils. 9 till threeish seems short in the context of an office job, but stuck in a room with up to 30 children the time seems like an eternity and you have to keep avoiding contact with the ones walking with headlice or who've just had a finger up their nose!!
My take home weekly pay is 650....after 30 years and the other half is taken at source in tax/deductions. I don't think it's excessive. We have no choice when it comes to tax..unlike the people in the black economy during the tiger years.
Teaching is really not as easy as it looks. Honestly. I think this whole public v private war is propaganda dreamt up by the mandarins and spin-doctors to deflect blame from the real culprits....themselves. Don't fall for it!

rebel10

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

His original quote - QFT


The poster is on 28k per year (nor a teacher).
This is in line with private rates of pay.
A flat 7% tax will have a disproportionally heavy impact on him compared to a teacher earning in excess of 3 times his pay.
His point is entirely defensible and I stand by my original comment.

Ok firstly, stop assuming every teacher is earning the same wage that a teacher who has been teaching for 25 yrs is earning. We are not. Have you even be bothered to look at the payscale? Please don't assume we are all on 60k. Most of the teachers on this thread are non perm. this means that we are earning, in many cases, much less than 28k a yr. I am so sick of having to say this. People are looking at the top earners in the profession and then going along with that figure. I have taken a 7% cut already this yr, to take another one is going to also cripple me. personal circumstances don't come into these cuts.

Kensington

corcaighcailin9 wrote: »

If there was leadership and solidarity from the top down, then yes. Honestly.

Fair enough, point taken.

corcaighcailin9 wrote: »

There are a whole host of changes proposed to our contracts - far too many to try and recall on a Friday night I'm afraid but I'll try Basically morning and afternoon supervision of children; a longer working day to include staff and parent teacher meetings as well as planning and taking on duties previously held by post-holders (one of the few opportunities for promotion).

Was there not a recent agreement whereby P&T meetings and staff meetings would be held outside of school hours? One that was agreed upon by all sides?

I don't know what morning and afternoon supervision involves so I can't comment.

corcaighcailin9 wrote: »

Now if they were fair and for example contained real measures to get rid of underperforming dossers who milk the system, I'd be all in favour of a little give and take. However, the feeling I get from the recommendations is that we aren't trusted to do as much work as the powers that be would like. I do a heck of amount of planning and corrections but prefer the comfort of my own house rather than my freezing cold, mouse infested classroom - does that make me a waste of money because I leave just a half an hour after my day officially ends?!

If you do put the work in then fair play to you, genuinely. But I knew quite a few teachers where their day began at the opening bell and ended at the final bell. No work whatsoever was done outside of hours. And it showed in their classes and their year-on-year class average grades. Yet nothing was done.

It is unfair on the likes of you who put the work in. But this is something you should be fighting for, that there is fairness. Not fighting inevitable pay and condition cuts as one - how can you expect the public to support such demands? From what they can see, it's a 9-4 (sometimes even 9-3) day, with 4 months holidays. 4 months to work externally and earn every more money. And for many teachers, that is very true.

Dannyboy83

rebel10 wrote: »

Ok firstly, stop assuming every teacher is earning the same wage that a teacher who has been teaching for 25 yrs is earning. We are not. Have you even be bothered to look at the payscale? Please don't assume we are all on 60k. Most of the teachers on this thread are non perm. this means that we are earning, in many cases, much less than 28k a yr. I am so sick of having to say this. People are looking at the top earners in the profession and then going along with that figure. I have taken a 7% cut already this yr, to take another one is going to also cripple me. personal circumstances don't come into these cuts.

We already established earlier that the average wage for teachers is 60k.
The average industrial wage is 35k, anyone earning over that really doesn't have much moral ground in striking

I can't understand your second point.
You are telling me that you don't earn very much, I'm saying I don't support people on low wages taking equal cuts to a teachers (or indeed ministers) far in excess of your current wage, and you're telling me to disregard it

This is WillieO'Deanomics
Imo, The biggest problem with the public sector is not just the disparity between public and private pay, but the disparity between lower and higher public servants.

irish_bob

corcaighcailin9 wrote: »

Because our government stupidly pumped our hard earned cash into a banking sytem where people are still losing their jobs in spite of the financial injection. When ministerial expenses are cut and I see sensible spending I'll believe the money is almost gone.



Well I do have the option of strike and I'm sorry but I'm taking it




The issue of new contracts affects me as much as my colleagues, present and future. That's as big a part of our campaign as anything to do with money.



Agreed.

the banking crisis has only compouned the countrys problems , the public sector and wellfare bill was always going to become a huge issue as the source of revenue ( property boom ) which funded both to thier gargantuan cost level was never going to last indefinatley , it was not income tax which funded the highest paid public sector in the eu and it wont be income tax that funds it in its present form now so their has to be cuts

irish_bob

GoldenEarring wrote: »

Hi All,
I'm a primary teacher with thirty years experience. It makes me sad to see the vitriol directed against teachers in particular. When I started out teaching, the parents were supportive and the children did as they were told. Now the parents are incredibly fussy, send in notes about the most trivial, petty and ridiculous issues, think their own children are SO bright, take their child's word over the teacher's every time and expect you to deal with other people's children (who are always the ones in the wrong). The children are , in my opinion, over-confident..they think they know better than the teacher..."No, this is the way you do the sum...actually I think my writing is very neat !!! Unbelievable!
Our lunch break is an effective 25 minutes...and you're not allowed to leave the premises as you're ultimately responsible at all times for your pupils. 9 till threeish seems short in the context of an office job, but stuck in a room with up to 30 children the time seems like an eternity and you have to keep avoiding contact with the ones walking with headlice or who've just had a finger up their nose!!
My take home weekly pay is 650....after 30 years and the other half is taken at source in tax/deductions. I don't think it's excessive. We have no choice when it comes to tax..unlike the people in the black economy during the tiger years.
Teaching is really not as easy as it looks. Honestly. I think this whole public v private war is propaganda dreamt up by the mandarins and spin-doctors to deflect blame from the real culprits....themselves. Don't fall for it!

yeah , everyone who criticises the public sector or believes they are over paid is a glove puppett of either the goverment or the media

time for the unions to come up with new slogans

herya

rebel10 wrote: »

Ok firstly, stop assuming every teacher is earning the same wage that a teacher who has been teaching for 25 yrs is earning. We are not. Have you even be bothered to look at the payscale? Please don't assume we are all on 60k.

So how come that the average teacher's pay (data supplied by INTO) is 60k, as linked up thread? I am not attacking you, I am genuinely curious. If there so and so many teachers on 30k as witnessed in this thread there must be just as many on 90k to balance it out. Who are they? Where are they?

SwanV

Teacher's in the job 30 years +
???????????????????????

rebel10

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

We already established earlier that the average wage for teachers is 60k.
The average industrial wage is 35k, anyone earning over that really doesn't have much moral ground in striking

I can't understand your second point.
You are telling me that you don't earn very much, I'm saying I don't support people on low wages taking equal cuts to a teachers (or indeed ministers) far in excess of your current wage, and you're telling me to disregard it

My second point was again that there are thousands of us earning under the industrial wage, but, again its not like you can rule out teachers like me taking a pay cut, just because we earn less than the average wage. From experience, the unions are not interested in us because we are not permanent, so may not be paying into their wallets next year. Its all public sector workers who are being hit regardless of take home pay. those that are only teaching for four hours a week will also be taking the cuts. I appreciate your concerns for us teachers who are not earning big money and am not giving you a hard time, but what is going to be hard on tues 24th is the people confronting us and claiming that we are greedy, when we all know this is far from the truth.
Thanks for the willie o' d words of wisdom, never thought id say it bout a f.f.er but never a truer word.:)

Katiex

Mr.Micro wrote: »

The teachers in Ireland do not know how well off they are. 3 months hols in the summer, 2 weeks Christmas and Easter, and 2 half terms thrown in. Do not have to have parent teacher meeting for every class every term after school like other countries but manage one per year and usually during school hours, while it is after school everywhere else. No school league tables etc. Hell they do as they want and are paid well for it in real terms. Maybe they are complaining because they get too much?

My Mam is a primary school teacher and I have to say it's horrible to read the things people are posting here. Last week my Mam's school had an overall evaluation and for over a month every single night she wrote note after note, she even spent her entire mid-term writing them, and stayed after school every day for about 3 hours. Now, You say they can do as they please? The evaluation is over now, my Mam is still in school for an extra hour and a half doing corrections. You give out about the holidays? You think the kids should be in school longer? My family's income has been cut severely by the new budget, just like any other's, and my Dad is now unemployed. You all may think teaching is a doss job, that they have all the time in the world to relax and do as they please, and get paid soooo much money for it, but what about when parents use the teacher as a babysitter, and leave their child in the classroom for up to an hour, every day? What about when every evening the teachers can't relax as they have so many corrections to do and lessons to plan. My Mam loves her job, but works extremely hard for it. You all should be ashamed of yourselves for saying such rubbish about teachers. Ignorance, that's all it is.

rebel10

herya wrote: »

So how come that the average teacher's pay (data supplied by INTO) is 60k, as linked up thread? I am not attacking you, I am genuinely curious. If there so and so many teachers on 30k as witnessed in this thread there must be just as many on 90k to balance it out. Who are they? Where are they?

Ok, not an economics teacher, but will try and figure this out. After 25 years of service a teacher is entitled to earn 60k p.a. Then, these teachers can take on posts of responsibility, i.e. year heads, media spokesperson, home/school liason officer, first aid officer, chaplaincy, list goes on. Generally in most schools, the teachers who are there longest will be favoured when applying for these posts. Now, these posts vary in their pay but it is avaliable on the asti website under "payscale". I am assuming, and God as i said, i am not an expert, these posts would possibly make up the extra figures. Also before i forget, teachers with a masters or any further qualifications also earn more than someone with an honours degree and H dip. alone. Then you also have your principals & deputy principals, who are obviously on a much higher wage. Not sure if that clears up some of the mystery, i myself find it a bit of a mystery.:)

dodgyme

murphaph wrote: »

Why do you feel obliged to point out that you have debts, insurance and a pension to pay, when just about every adult is in the same situation?? Do you.

I am in the PS (I am not but lets pretend)

PERSON: ok Mr PS who much do you earn?

After tax I earn very little. I pay tax and a pension you know, I pay a contribution towards my childrens pension fund for when I get married and meet a man
I earn 750 per every 2 weeks apart from once a month each leap year where I get 65 after tax per week. I have to pay for my car washing up liquid and washing up liquid for my car and gelotine. Not every PS earns that kind of money, the average is distorted with the sum of the people in making it and hence is not right and I earn that much per sq metre

Dannyboy83

rebel10 wrote: »

My second point was again that there are thousands of us earning under the industrial wage, but, again its not like you can rule out teachers like me taking a pay cut, just because we earn less than the average wage.

OK, but why is that?
Why did you not tackle it with your union!!??

From experience, the unions are not interested in us because we are not permanent, so may not be paying into their wallets next year.

So if the unions are not representing your interests, why are you prepared to strike, or why don't you join a union who does support you?

Otherwise, it looks like you are quite pleased to take the same cuts proportionately as the greedy teachers in front of you.

Its all public sector workers who are being hit regardless of take home pay. those that are only teaching for four hours a week will also be taking the cuts. I appreciate your concerns for us teachers who are not earning big money and am not giving you a hard time,

Thank you

but what is going to be hard on tues 24th is the people confronting us and claiming that we are greedy, when we all know this is far from the truth.

But can you not see my point?
You are not representing under paid workers (yourselves), you are representing grossly overpaid workers.
Its like black people in favour of apartheid, I just don't get it

Thanks for the willie o' d words of wisdom, never thought id say it bout a f.f.er but never a truer word.:)

LOL, those were my words.:D
IMO= in my opinion.

Willieodenomics just means an argument which defies all logic.

Matthew712

The state and the corrupt union heads want this one day strike. As an ASTI member who lost 9 days pay fighting against benchmarking, I remembered all those who said we were wrong! The best thing to do is to be sick from Monady 23rd to Wednesday 25th. This way you don't lose a days pay and it costs the state 3 days pay, and you create employment for unemployed sub teachers.
Now thats a protest!!!!:p

Head The Wall

segaBOY wrote: »

Even look at the ASTI's poster-basically making up your mind for you by using scaremongering.

http://www.asti.ie/fileadmin/user_upload/Documents/Vote_Yes_Poster.pdf

A YES VOTE
• HELPS TO PROTECT YOUR CONDITIONS OF SERVICE
• HELPS TO PROTECT YOUR SALARY
• HELPS TO PROTECT YOUR PENSION

From the above flyer - They have now voted yes and come budget day they will realise what voting yes will have achieved. Cut in Salary and pension

Katiex wrote: »

My Mam is a primary school teacher and I have to say it's horrible to read the things people are posting here. Last week my Mam's school had an overall evaluation and for over a month every single night she wrote note after note, she even spent her entire mid-term writing them, and stayed after school every day for about 3 hours. Now, You say they can do as they please? The evaluation is over now, my Mam is still in school for an extra hour and a half doing corrections. You give out about the holidays? You think the kids should be in school longer? My family's income has been cut severely by the new budget, just like any other's, and my Dad is now unemployed. You all may think teaching is a doss job, that they have all the time in the world to relax and do as they please, and get paid soooo much money for it, but what about when parents use the teacher as a babysitter, and leave their child in the classroom for up to an hour, every day? What about when every evening the teachers can't relax as they have so many corrections to do and lessons to plan. My Mam loves her job, but works extremely hard for it. You all should be ashamed of yourselves for saying such rubbish about teachers. Ignorance, that's all it is.

You're naive KatieX, do you think it is fair that your mother puts in all this work and gets paid the same as a useless good for nothing teacher. No it's not and it's this type of reform that is needed.

You hear all the teachers complaining about how hard and stressful the job is but how many change career and give up the job if thats the case, probably very few because of the remuneration available. They have an option, they don't have to stay teachers if it is so awful

Dannyboy83

Katiex wrote: »

My Mam is a primary school teacher and I have to say it's horrible to read the things people are posting here. Last week my Mam's school had an overall evaluation and for over a month every single night she wrote note after note, she even spent her entire mid-term writing them, and stayed after school every day for about 3 hours.

Now, You say they can do as they please? The evaluation is over now, my Mam is still in school for an extra hour and a half doing corrections. You give out about the holidays? You think the kids should be in school longer?

Your mam has to leave work at 4.30 the odd day.
I leave at 6.30pm everyday and before a release, I mightn't leave until 10pm and work Saturdays for free.
If I screw up the release, my ass is on the street.
And I get 22days holidays per year.

My family's income has been cut severely by the new budget, just like any other's, and my Dad is now unemployed.

Many of our partners are unemployed and we are receiving substantially less money on our wage to begin with.

You all may think teaching is a doss job, that they have all the time in the world to relax and do as they please, and get paid soooo much money for it, but what about when parents use the teacher as a babysitter, and leave their child in the classroom for up to an hour, every day? What about when every evening the teachers can't relax as they have so many corrections to do and lessons to plan.

Studying after work and doing industrial courses is a given, lifelong requirement in IT.

My Mam loves her job, but works extremely hard for it.

As do I.
I don't believe I am entitled to x,y,z for it tho.

You all should be ashamed of yourselves for saying such rubbish about teachers. Ignorance, that's all it is.

To me, your argument appears entirely irrational.
Could you please elaborate as to why its ignorance?