Schools to close on 24th November

Kensington

dresden8 wrote: »

Luckily indeed that the conditions you describe mean more of a necessity for government services.

Or do you advocate that an increase in unemployment should necessitate a decrease in the numbers in unemployment offices?

I'll give you fifteen minutes to work out the question, another fifteen to work out the answer.

Funny, huh?

While I would like to deviate from the topic at hand to tackle your slant, I'm afraid we are discussing the topic of teachers here (wow, I used big words, don't I feel high and mighty!)

Unless you are suggesting we pile a load of teachers into the dole office to give them a dig out there? Actually, you could be onto something come to think of it. Pay them the going rate, improve efficiency in frontline services AND make savings in the wage bill in one go... Genius!

dresden8

lmimmfn wrote: »

its no wonder the country is in a state with that work to rule nonsense.

Work to rule nonsense?

I work for you, you should pay me is nonsense?

Seriously, getting paid for work is nonsense?

In that case I suggest you reduce your payment rate per hour to zero and sacrifice yourself in "the national interest"

lmimmfn

dresden8 wrote: »

Work to rule nonsense?

I work for you, you should pay me is nonsense?

Seriously, getting paid for work is nonsense?

you work for me so i say you take a pay cut, live with it, tough $hit

dresden8

lmimmfn wrote: »

you work for me so i say you take a pay cut, live with it, tough $hit

The jax is a sh1thole, when are you going to fix it?

I am being harrassed by private sector know it alls.

How are you going to stop them **** or pissing in my tea? You owe me a duty of care.

I am depressed by the eternal attacks of jimmmy and Irish_bob. How will you protect me?

In your previous posts you have bullied me and other public sector workers. You owe me several grand.

And if you are my employer you owe me overtime for replying to your post on my own time. Double on a Sunday.

P_r1ck.

Dannyboy83

Matthew712 wrote:

Taking the cost of bailing the banks out, the total contribution of the private sector to the state last year is negative. Taking the social welfare payments into account (payments to unemployed private sector workers) for next year and the interest payments on the debts for bailing out the bank, the private sector will contribute nothing either next year. The private sector are not paying for the public sector.

Precisely.
€25 billion worth of borrowing per year is.

Hence why these pay reductions are so critical.

Kensington

dresden8 wrote: »

I work for you, you should pay me is nonsense?
Seriously, getting paid for work is nonsense?

I'm private sector.
Someone will work for me for slightly less than I'm paying you.
I hire them. Nonsense?

OR

Private sector business.
Business is struggling, making hefty losses.
Take pay cut now or run company into the inevitable situation of introducing job cut measures.
What's your choice? [Psst: One of them earns you a really nice piece of yellow A4, with the letter "P", the number "4" and also the number "5" printed on the top of it (in no particular order, mind)]

You might call it nonsense, others call it reality.

#15

desmurphy wrote: »

and when your pay is cut and your conditions of service have gone and you have the possibility of redundancy maybe then you might stand up for your profesion

I'm willing to take a pay cut. Its not about standing up for my profession, I'm trying to prevent it being dragged through the mud by idiotic union leaders.

Striking serves no purpose, and has only negative consequences.

dresden8

Kensington wrote: »

I'm private sector.
Someone will work for me for slightly less than I'm paying you.
I hire them. Nonsense?

OR

Private sector business.
Business is struggling, making hefty losses.
Take pay cut now or run company into the inevitable situation of introducing job cut measures.
What's your choice? [Psst: One of them earns you a really nice piece of yellow A4, with the letter "P", the number "4" and also the number "5" printed on the top of it (in no particular order, mind)]

You might call it nonsense, others call it reality.

Ok, ok you won the tender process. I'll pay you ten cents per hour to paint my house.

Screw that other greedy m'erf'er. Expecting more than ten cents per hour. Socialist scum.

I still want to see a CV. No scum need apply.

After all 10 cents per hour on a Saturday is much preferable than Nil.

Dannyboy83

dresden8 wrote: »

Ok, ok you won the tender process. I'll pay you ten cents per hour to paint my house.

Screw that other greedy m'erf'er. Expecting more than ten cents per hour. Socialist scum.

I still want to see a CV. No scum need apply.

After all 10 cents per hour on a Saturday is much preferable than Nil.

LOL, if you're going to pay him public sector rates, he needs to benchmarked up to €500 per hour. Minimum 200k per year.

Don't forget the 5 months holidays.

If he burns down your house, you must pay for it, and he reserves the right to strike if you try fire him

dresden8

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

LOL, if you're going to pay him public sector rates, he needs to benchmarked up to €500 per hour. Minimum 200k per year.

Don't forget the 5 months holidays.

We're paying private sector here now, where working for nothing is the norm.

In the interests of private sector griping I'll now let him paint my house if he pays me 50 cents per hour.

That's how tough things are in the private sector.

They're paying to get jobs now.

Public sector scum, expecting to be paid for work.

mikemac

dresden8 wrote: »

Ok, ok you won the tender process. I'll pay you ten cents per hour to paint my house.

You can't just hire one worker.
Have you ever seen your council out fixing footpaths and potholes (usually in November & December when the budget needs to be spent )

You need two workers for every task, one to do the work and one to stand idely by and watch with their hands in their pockets.
If two council staff are working, again you need two staff to watch them.
Oh, and regular tea breaks too, as employer will you be providing tea making facilities?

lmimmfn

Kensington wrote: »

I'm private sector.
Someone will work for me for slightly less than I'm paying you.
I hire them. Nonsense?

OR

Private sector business.
Business is struggling, making hefty losses.
Take pay cut now or run company into the inevitable situation of introducing job cut measures.
What's your choice? [Psst: One of them earns you a really nice piece of yellow A4, with the letter "P", the number "4" and also the number "5" printed on the top of it (in no particular order, mind)]

You might call it nonsense, others call it reality.

I really think he's working on improving union/PS PR lol

#15 wrote: »

I'm willing to take a pay cut. Its not about standing up for my profession, I'm trying to prevent it being dragged through the mud by idiotic union leaders.

Striking serves no purpose, and has only negative consequences.

Personally i applaud your attitude and i wish there were more like yourself, cuts to min wage, welfare, PS wages/salaries and eventual;y private sector salaries will reduce the cost of living and services here. We have to get competitive to get out of this recession.
At the end of the day if 10% is wiped off everything/everyone across the board it doesnt affect anyone except when you go on holiday. IT will affect homeowners with negative equity but thats another argument and rent is always available for everyone.

Dannyboy83

dresden8 wrote: »

We're paying private sector here now, where working for nothing is the norm.

In the interests of private sector griping I'll now let him paint my house if he pays me 50 cents per hour.

That's how tough things are in the private sector.

They're paying to get jobs now.

Public sector scum, expecting to be paid for work.

LOL, now can you understand how frustrating it is to break your back paying for the teachers when they do half your work and have 3X your entitlements?

They don't have to work for free.
We just want some equality.
Think of it as the Bastille PtII, down with the oligarchs

herya

#15 wrote: »

I'm willing to take a pay cut. Its not about standing up for my profession, I'm trying to prevent it being dragged through the mud by idiotic union leaders.

Striking serves no purpose, and has only negative consequences.

Honestly thank you for your attitude. The sad thing is that it should not be the likes of you taking pay cuts.

I think I'm still shocked reading about all those people over 60k cut off who still push for strikes "just in case". I happen to know a thing or two about teaching having worked as a teacher for a while so it's not like I don't appreciate good teachers. But it's just so much out of proportion and I'm sorry to see that it's you young teachers who'll be shafted in all this as under the circumstances you will never reach the dizzying heights of current old guard benefits.

Kensington

dresden8 wrote: »

Ok, ok you won the tender process. I'll pay you ten cents per hour to paint my house.

Screw that other greedy m'erf'er. Expecting more than ten cents per hour. Socialist scum.

I still want to see a CV. No scum need apply.

After all 10 cents per hour on a Saturday is much preferable than Nil.

K, great. So you're public service, yeah? Excellent. Guess since I'm working for a public servant, I'm one too!

So, as per agreed, I'll charge you 10c per hour to do it!
(not including tea break, lunch, mileage, petrol, opening of the cans of paint, cleaning of the paint brushes - all rates agreed are subject to further review by means of "appropriate wage benchmarks". Furthermore I expect a contract whereby you will pay me regardless of my performance in said painting of your house, my contract cannot be nullified - except upon my sole request - I also expect full contributions to my pension plan at no cost to myself. In the event of a disagreement involving pay and conditions between ourselves, I expect to be able to go on strike of my own free will and to be paid in full regardless of any non-performance. Should I be required to pay into my own pension plan by means of a "pension levy", strike action may also result).

So, tell me, when do I start???


[/childish posting]

Dannyboy83

^
Game, Set, Match.:)

dresden8

Kensington wrote: »

K, great. So you're public service, yeah? Excellent. Guess since I'm working for a public servant, I'm one too!

So, as per agreed, I'll charge you 10c per hour to do it!
(not including tea break, lunch, mileage, petrol, opening of the cans of paint, cleaning of the paint brushes - all rates agreed are subject to further review by means of "appropriate wage benchmarks". Furthermore I expect a contract whereby you will pay me regardless of my performance in said painting of your house, my contract cannot be nullified - except upon my sole request - I also expect full contributions to my pension plan at no cost to myself. In the event of a disagreement involving pay and conditions between ourselves, I expect to be able to go on strike of my own free will and to be paid in full regardless of any non-performance. Should I be required to pay into my own pension plan by means of a "pension levy", strike action may also result).

So, tell me, when do I start???


[/childish posting]

Your conditions are unacceptable, you will not progress to the second round.

Your post is extremely childish, agreed.

Dannyboy83

dresden8 wrote: »

Your post is extremely childish, agreed.

But those are public sector terms he offering you

Are you saying the public sector are childish?:D

implausible

The utter bile being spouted here is shocking! I mean, I'm used of the odd kid not liking me but this:rolleyes:.....

Reality check: people are spouting averages here. An average is a mathematical formula, not really showing day-to-day figures. It takes 25 years to get to the top of the payscale. There is a ban on promotions and even when there isn't, they're largely decided by seniority (though this is due to change), so people like me who work hard for our schools and students will be a long time reaching this 67k figure.

The length of our holidays is hardly our fault. This is the Irish system. Any teacher who goes into the profession purely for the holidays is deluded and usually doesn't last. 8 months of abuse in a job you hate is not worth the time off. If it was, everyone would be at it.

We have taken a paycut and are willing to take a bit more, but not a total of 20%. Principals on 100k may be able to afford this, but teachers in the job less than 10 years certainly can't.

The strike day is a public service strike day. Teachers are one type of public servant, yet there seems to be a particular brand of vitriol reserved for our job. People seem to take their school experience as solid evidence, think 'cushy number' and then proceed teacher-bashing.

We all need to take some hits in this economy, but why teachers are singled out as being greedy, lazy and particularly deserving of paycuts is beyond me. We are members of a public service union and are taking part in a strike day which we voted for, the same as other public servants. The media coverage makes it sound like teachers are the only ones striking. Everyone will be inconvenienced, that's the point of a strike! Teachers are living in the real world, they have school-going children too you know, and are taking this action as a pre-emptive strike against further paycuts and erosion of our profession.

dresden8

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

But those are public sector terms he offering you

Are you saying the public sector are childish?:D

No they were the terms he thought were on offer. As so many childish posts on this board, he was wrong.

Dannyboy83

deemark wrote: »

The utter bile being spouted here is shocking! I mean, I'm used of the odd kid not liking me but this:rolleyes:.....

Reality check:
<snip>

Reality check:
We are borrowing €25 billion to pay the public sector.
We can't afford end.
Paycuts incoming.

The end.

lmimmfn

deemark wrote: »

The strike day is a public service strike day. Teachers are one type of public servant, yet there seems to be a particular brand of vitriol reserved for our job. People seem to take their school experience as solid evidence, think 'cushy number' and then proceed teacher-bashing.

We all need to take some hits in this economy, but why teachers are singled out as being greedy, lazy and particularly deserving of paycuts is beyond me. We are members of a public service union and are taking part in a strike day which we voted for, the same as other public servants. The media coverage makes it sound like teachers are the only ones striking. Everyone will be inconvenienced, that's the point of a strike! Teachers are living in the real world, they have school-going children too you know, and are taking this action as a pre-emptive strike against further paycuts and erosion of our profession.

The problem is public sector strikes are directly affecting the productivity of the private sector, especially the teachers strike which requires that someone take the day off, you're taking the economy with you and holding the country to ransom.

On top of making things worse in the current climate youre also affecting the future productivity of the country taking the kids out of school, yes 1 day is minor, but with the future cost reductions planned over the next few years, we can expect you guys to be out in force on a regular basis.

dresden8

lmimmfn wrote: »

The problem is public sector strikes are directly affecting the productivity of the private sector, you're taking the economy with you and holding the country to ransom.

I thought the public sector added nothing to the economy and were a drain on the productive sector.

You obviously haven't been on boards much recently.

Dannyboy83

deemark wrote: »

people are spouting averages here. An average is a mathematical formula, not really showing day-to-day figures.

Ok, so in the interests of fairness, what is your gross & net salary?

#15

herya wrote: »

Honestly thank you for your attitude. The sad thing is that it should not be the likes of you taking pay cuts.

I think I'm still shocked reading about all those people over 60k cut off who still push for strikes "just in case". I happen to know a thing or two about teaching having worked as a teacher for a while so it's not like I don't appreciate good teachers. But it's just so much out of proportion and I'm sorry to see that it's you young teachers who'll be shafted in all this as under the circumstances you will never reach the dizzying heights of current old guard benefits.

Thanks. I'm at the bottom of the scale, and this strike is partly about protecting the guys at the top of the scale.

Some of the sheep-like attitudes towards the union bosses is really surprising. And to think we're supposed to be trying to teach kids to think critically and independently.

implausible

Kensington wrote: »

Should I be required to pay into my own pension plan by means of a "pension levy", strike action may also result.

Another media-myth! Teachers have always from day one, whether intending to stay in the profession or not, paid into their pensions. It has been repeatedly shown that the 'pension levy' is no such thing; it is a tax, a tax that is also applied to non-pensionable work. The word 'tax' wouldn't have been as effective in perpetuating the public-private divide.

dg647

Idbatterim wrote: »

another strike by the teachers! €3 out of every €4 spent by the gov on education goes to teachers pay! The selfishness and self interest here is disgusting! especially by those that proclaim to be champions of the people! let them strike! these are the same people that should be examples to the kids and look at them! pathetic!

This point just goes to prove that our education system is grossly underfunded! We are near the bottom of the OECD table for spending on education as a % of GDP.

Here's my two cents. There are many teachers who can afford to take a pay cut, they should be taking one. The temporary teachers who are away below the average of 60K should not have to take one.

There are also many people in the private and public sector who could afford increases taxes, they should be paying them.

The Government are delighted with this situation, everyone is accusing and blaming each other and forgetting about the people who got us into this mess. I wonder what are people's reasons for focusing their anger more towards teachers rather than other sectors of the public service?

Dannyboy83

deemark wrote: »

Another media-myth! Teachers have always from day one, whether intending to stay in the profession or not, paid into their pensions. It has been repeatedly shown that the 'pension levy' is no such thing; it is a tax, a tax that is also applied to non-pensionable work. The word 'tax' wouldn't have been as effective in perpetuating the public-private divide.

I don't dispute that.
You are receiving 10% less pay for the same terms.

But c'mon man, its 10% of 60k!, thats only 6k!

Dannyboy83

dg647 wrote: »

This point just goes to prove that our education system is grossly underfunded! We are near the bottom of the OECD table for spending on education as a % of GDP.

Here's my two cents. There are many teachers who can afford to take a pay cut, they should be taking one. The temporary teachers who are away below the average of 60K should not have to take one.

There are also many people in the private and public sector who could afford increases taxes, they should be paying them.

Those are exactly my feelings too!

The Government are delighted with this situation, everyone is accusing and blaming each other and forgetting about the people who got us into this mess.

Nobody is forgetting about the government.
The issue is that teachers get 60k per annum, twice the average industrial wage and they refusing to take a cut.

I wonder what are people's reasons for focusing their anger more towards teachers rather than other sectors of the public service?

the strike I guess?

Kensington

deemark wrote: »

The utter bile being spouted here is shocking! I mean, I'm used of the odd kid not liking me but this:rolleyes:.....

Reality check: people are spouting averages here. An average is a mathematical formula, not really showing day-to-day figures. It takes 25 years to get to the top of the payscale. There is a ban on promotions and even when there isn't, they're largely decided by seniority (though this is due to change), so people like me who work hard for our schools and students will be a long time reaching this 67k figure.

The length of our holidays is hardly our fault. This is the Irish system. Any teacher who goes into the profession purely for the holidays is deluded and usually doesn't last. 8 months of abuse in a job you hate is not worth the time off. If it was, everyone would be at it.

We have taken a paycut and are willing to take a bit more, but not a total of 20%. Principals on 100k may be able to afford this, but teachers in the job less than 10 years certainly can't.

The strike day is a public service strike day. Teachers are one type of public servant, yet there seems to be a particular brand of vitriol reserved for our job. People seem to take their school experience as solid evidence, think 'cushy number' and then proceed teacher-bashing.

We all need to take some hits in this economy, but why teachers are singled out as being greedy, lazy and particularly deserving of paycuts is beyond me. We are members of a public service union and are taking part in a strike day which we voted for, the same as other public servants. The media coverage makes it sound like teachers are the only ones striking. Everyone will be inconvenienced, that's the point of a strike! Teachers are living in the real world, they have school-going children too you know, and are taking this action as a pre-emptive strike against further paycuts and erosion of our profession.

Teachers are being singled out in this case as it is the teachers who have announced definite strike action on the 24th. In previous years, teachers have also been involved in regular demands for wage increases. Also, other public servants may be joining teachers - nothing is confirmed fully yet though, just the teachers unions.

Yes, averages do distort real figures. But:
- if as many teachers are on low income scales as it would appear, there are equally as many teachers on the upper end of the spectrum to bring the average up
- when you break wages down into hourly rates, teachers come out way above any other profession
- I suspect many of the incomes quoted here are basic rates, non-inclusive of extras such as state examination corrections, supervision etc.

Finally - no amount of strike action will rid the country of the fact that a lot of money is being borrowed every week just to pay wages. Wage cuts OR job cuts (or both) are coming. We cannot, as a nation, continue to borrow to pay wages, it just doesn't make sense. And I have a strong feeling, that you won't be alone in bearing the pain. I have a feeling there are many private sector companies out there who are using the public sector struggle to gauge the reaction of government policy changes over the next 6-8 weeks and will quickly follow suit in the new year - more pay cuts, more job losses.