Schools to close on 24th November

ParkRunner

The teachers might be on decent wages in this country but in comparison to the cost of childcare in this country, which effectively the teacher provides, I think the majority of them do deserve what they get.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/ec-chief-shocked-at-cost-of-irish-childcare-1772662.html

Kensington

EF wrote: »

The teachers might be on decent wages in this country but in comparison to the cost of childcare in this country, which effectively the teacher provides, I think the majority of them do deserve what they get.

Your post is a prime example of the delusional beliefs of the teaching profession in justifying their over-inflated paypackets.

corcaighcailin9

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.

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.

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.

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.

ParkRunner

Kensington wrote: »

Your post is a prime example of the delusional beliefs of the teaching profession in justifying their over-inflated paypackets.

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.

rebel10

dresden8 wrote: »

I'm a public servant. I passed a picket line earlier this year.

Grow a pair.

Good for you. Meanwhile the rest of us who are obviously in a completely different situation to you, can't afford to risk crossing it. The implications outlined on the ASTI strike campaign posters are all too real. Suppose you did not receive any backlash from your stance, but i know certainly in my staffroom, you would have many enemies including the principal, which i cannot afford to have, particularly this year.

Dannyboy83

EF wrote: »

The teachers might be on decent wages in this country but in comparison to the cost of childcare in this country, which effectively the teacher provides, I think the majority of them do deserve what they get.

LOL, I worked as a doorman for 7 years, through college and then after due to the cost of living.
Using your logic there, I should be a millionaire by now.

MysticalRain

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.

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?

keane2097

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Kensington

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.

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.

Dannyboy83

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.

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.

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.

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.

Are you willing to disclose how much you earn?

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!!??