Are teachers taking the p!ss?

Tipp Man

lily09 wrote: »

Tipp man it is impossible to debate anything rational with you, as an accountant you are obviously blinkered by the reality that life is not all about facts and figures. Teachers provide a service, it is not as simple as saying my tax pays for your wages so therefore I can determine your pay and conditions. My taxes help contribute to Ireland being able to sustain a very low corperation tax but I wouldnt demand that the CEOs of companies should only get paid what I want them too.

Now lets call a spade a spade here, accountants arent badly paid either, I wouldnt begrudge you one penny of that money you put the work in and are renumerated properly.

Well unless you are a shareholder in the company i work for then you have absolutely no right to question how I get paid as it has absolutely no effect on you whatsoever

The major difference is that as a public sector worker you (all PS not trying to make this personal) are paid directly from my taxes, the couple of thousand that I pay every month is paid to government on the 19th of every month and then a very large proportion of my couple of thousand is directly handed over to the PS as wages at the end of the month. Now as the country is broke I am going to have to pay more taxes to meet the salary committments of the government to the PS. SO seen as though I am already making a hefty contribution and will be making more in the future I certainly have every right to question how that is being spent and am i getting value for money from my taxes, thats the very least I, and everybody else, deserves.

Its the same when i spend my take home pay, I expect to get value for what I am spending and don't want to be ripped off, as I'm sure none of us do. So bearing that in mind I feel that we are being ripped off by the PS in general and teachers in specific so I am going to complain, after all if I am being ripped off by my barber for instance i go elsewhere, unfortunately as taxes are a statutory deduction i don't have the choice to go elsewhere but i do have the choice of whether i take it lying down or put up a fight to highlight how we are being ripped off by teachers - guess which choice i have made

Tipp Man

Fizzical wrote: »

Tipp Man, you obviously earn more than any teacher and, as obviously, think you're worth it. That's ok. As you wouldn't have my job, I wouldn't have yours.

But you seem to have issues with the concept of 'teacher' per se, in that in your opinion it's not a professional job worth a good salary. I think that's the crux of your argument? To you, teaching is a lower order service job and should be paid and organised accordingly. Hence your anger that unionisation has achieved a good salary and that tradition has preserved good conditions.

Lots of people don't agree with you that teaching is a lower order service job, including those people who have actually done the job. Don't be so angry about that!

But take heart - people of your opinion are increasingly vocal and increasingly being listened to. And teaching may return to what it was years ago - teachers being poorly paid and badly treated servants of the then management in schools with no security of tenure. That's where the unionisation came from, by the way.

(And the teacher in me can't resist - the word you're looking for is 'gall'!)

First off I have never said anywhere that teaching is a "lower order service job". The fact of the matter is we need teachers and they provide an essential service - I wouldn't try to deny that

However if you feel that teaching is on the same level as other professionals (and I believe it should be) then you need to be judged by the same standards as other professionals and that means putting in the long hard hours and effort to justify your salary and teachers are simply unwilling to do this. If you want to be judged on the same playing field as any other professional then teachers need to loose the 18 weeks holidays for starters, be open to taking on additional tasks without pay (such as yard duty), get rid of their unions which are stopping the cream of teachers from rising to the top whilst protecting the useless ones

Teachers want to be treated as professionals when it comes to pay (fair enough) but they remarkable forget the other side of being a professional - namely the hard work/long hours and the necessity to often give a little bit extra for no extra reward

Fizzical wrote: »

(And the teacher in me can't resist - the word you're looking for is 'gall'!)

Shouldn't that be in red:)

lily09

Where is the evidence that you have been ripped off? A service has been provided for you and a fee has been given. I totally agree with Fizzical you place no value on the role of teachers. Thats sad. I love my job and derive great pleasure from the valuable role I play in society. And guess what I pay tax too, there are things that this pays for that I dont like a metro north system that I will more than likely never use. However I see the value in it and thats where the fundamental difference lies.
You are demanding value for money....what is your definition of value for money, there is no value for Special Needs Assistants a portion of the children they work with will never pay tax but as a society this is what we do.
So teachers get paid well, what do you feel is an appropriate wage and conditions for a teacher?
If I spend a week doing a course, that I have paid for myself so I can go to a friends wedding in October at no cost to the taxpayer why does it bother you so much. Its not costing you anything or do you just want teachers to have a lower standards of pay and conditions so that you can justify that you are better than us.

Brendog

lily09 wrote: »

Accountants dont provide a public service, teachers do.

So do prostitutes but you don't see them asking for time off

they also stand in front of screaming ****s...

bigbadbear

Tipp Man wrote: »

You conveniently forget that Irish teachers are far and away the highest paid teachers in Europe and probably the world - are ye really teaching our kids that much better than everywhere else - the dumbing down of the state exams shouldn't make ye think that ye are suddenly experts at teaching

For instance the starting salary of an Irish teacher is more than double that of a French teacher - are ye twice as good as french teachers? I have my doubts

As regards my "vitriol" towards teachers well I feel that as a taxpayer I have every right to question where my hard earned money is going. Why should i be working my 50-60 hours a week to fund the lifestyle of teachers? What gives you (teachers in general not you personally) the right to live the life of Reilly with 18 weeks holidays a year and a super pension to boot while the rest of us are working our ass off to pay for it?

What makes teachers any better than the bloody politicans of this country, at least there are only a couple of hundred of them robbing us, there's nearly 60 thousand teachers at it

Envious

Tipp Man wrote: »

And also why am I being called bitter and vitriolic because i have the audacity to raise questions about a profession of nearly 60,000 people who are being paid huge amounts from taxpayers funds?

Would i be called bitter and vitrolic if i questioned politicians or bankers or property developers?

The simple fact of the matter is that nobody in any post on this thread has come anyway near justifing the terms and conditions that teachers enjoy - you can't defend the indefensible - apart from with lies and crap

So considering the mess the country is in I have every right to ask teachers what makes them so special that they have a better lifestyle than royalty

Envious

Tipp Man wrote: »

Why don't we accept that Ivor Calley has huge expense claims and just get over it and move on

Are you prepared to let 60,000 people have better pay and conditions than anyone else in the country and just get over it and move on? If you are more fool you but then that typifies this country - no accountability or responsiblity and don't dare question how the public sector is spending 50bn of taxpayers money - money that we don't have

People are way to soft in this country and are the very reason that unions and running and ruining this country - no bloody backbone to stand up to them

Envious

Tipp Man wrote: »

And teachers (via their unions) have bullied and threatened and striked their way into getting their terms and conditions and no opposition was put up against it

Same bloody thing



Couldn't be more wrong there my friend my annual tax is paying a teachers salary so i want to see it earned not just given to them

Envious

Tipp Man wrote: »

great response - now i see why yer worth the money

Envious

Tipp Man wrote: »

Your clearly an . and the reason why the public sector has ran riot in this country for the last 10 years - typical of the Bertie school of economics, "here have some more money, will that keep you quite, no? have some more, we won't ask any questions expect any accountability or responsibility in return, I hope i haven't offended you oh beared great"

Its no wonder the country is in the mess it is when people who don't really give a damn get an equal vote as somebody who has the sheer gaul to question how taxpayers money is spent, is democracy all its cracked up to be I wonder

Envious

Tipp Man wrote: »

they have a better lifestyle than royalty

BBAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

Dermighty

Pace2008 wrote: »

Rabble rabble rabble.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JN99jshaQbY

Tipp Man

lily09 wrote: »

Where is the evidence that you have been ripped off? A service has been provided for you and a fee has been given. I totally agree with Fizzical you place no value on the role of teachers. Thats sad. I love my job and derive great pleasure from the valuable role I play in society. And guess what I pay tax too, there are things that this pays for that I dont like a metro north system that I will more than likely never use. However I see the value in it and thats where the fundamental difference lies.
You are demanding value for money....what is your definition of value for money, there is no value for Special Needs Assistants a portion of the children they work with will never pay tax but as a society this is what we do.
So teachers get paid well, what do you feel is an appropriate wage and conditions for a teacher?
If I spend a week doing a course, that I have paid for myself so I can go to a friends wedding in October at no cost to the taxpayer why does it bother you so much. Its not costing you anything or do you just want teachers to have a lower standards of pay and conditions so that you can justify that you are better than us.

What makes you think that you are worth 18 weeks holiday a year and a gold plated pension to go with that?

Can you tell me why a teacher earning 55k a year deserves to have 13-14 weeks MORE holidays than a private sector worker also earning 55k?? Baring in mind of course that a teacher only has 22 contract hours against the private sector worker who has 38 hours.

Can you tell me why the 55k a year teacher deserves to have such a fantastic pension over the 55k a year private sector worker??
Can you tell me why the 55k teacher deserves to get a guaranteed annual increment (regardless of performance) whereas his private sector counterpart on 55k doesn't?


Why are teachers so deserving of all of these perks baring in mind that there will be a huge amount of private sector workers nowhere near 55k by the time they are 35 but EVERY teacher will be on 55k at that age (guaranteed)

Don't forget perks come at a cost to somebody, in this case the taxpayer

Tipp Man

bigbadbear wrote: »

Envious


Envious


Envious


Envious


Envious


Envious

BBAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

That has been about the standard of arguement that you have put up in this thread

shore

Tipp Man wrote: »

What makes you think that you are worth 18 weeks holiday a year and a gold plated pension to go with that?

Can you tell me why a teacher earning 55k a year deserves to have 13-14 weeks MORE holidays than a private sector worker also earning 55k?? Baring in mind of course that a teacher only has 22 contract hours against the private sector worker who has 38 hours.

Can you tell me why the 55k a year teacher deserves to have such a fantastic pension over the 55k a year private sector worker??
Can you tell me why the 55k teacher deserves to get a guaranteed annual increment (regardless of performance) whereas his private sector counterpart on 55k doesn't?


Why are teachers so deserving of all of these perks baring in mind that there will be a huge amount of private sector workers nowhere near 55k by the time they are 35 but EVERY teacher will be on 55k at that age (guaranteed)

Don't forget perks come at a cost to somebody, in this case the taxpayer

Where are you getting this information from ? What a load of rubbish ! There are plenty of teachers on part time and pro rata contracts that are not going to earn 55k by the time they are 35.

Tipp Man

shore wrote: »

Where are you getting this information from ? What a load of rubbish ! There are plenty of teachers on part time and pro rata contracts that are not going to earn 55k by the time they are 35.

I thought it was pretty clear that I was talking about full time workers - both teachers and in the private sector

Fizzical

@ Tipp Man:

However if you feel that teaching is on the same level as other professionals (and I believe it should be) then you need to be judged by the same standards as other professionals and that means putting in the long hard hours and effort

We do put in the long hard hours and effort.

to justify your salary

Long hard hours and effort do not equate to a high salary - ask a binman and a dentist.

If you want to be judged on the same playing field as any other professional then teachers need to loose the 18 weeks holidays for starters,

Irrelevant

be open to taking on additional tasks without pay (such as yard duty)

This has always been part of a teacher's job, still is - read previous posts! Yard duty also was always part of the job. It only came into the equation when the govt decided to pay for it as a way of avoiding a general pay increase.

get rid of their unions

Ah! There's the rub!

(As for correcting in red, don't start me - you're giving me too much ammunition! )

Stark

Fizzical wrote: »

This has always been part of a teacher's job, still is - read previous posts! Yard duty also was always part of the job. It only came into the equation when the govt decided to pay for it as a way of avoiding a general pay increase.

Really, so teachers weren't getting general pay increases aside from yard duty?

Tipp Man

Fizzical wrote: »

@ Tipp Man:






Irrelevant

WTF, how can you honestly say that having 18 weeks holidays is irrelevant when comparing to other professions who have 4-5 weeks at most??

How can you honestly say its irrelevant??

ixoy

Tipp Man wrote: »

WTF, how can you honestly say that having 18 weeks holidays is irrelevant when comparing to other professions who have 4-5 weeks at most??

How can you honestly say its irrelevant??

You know what's coming don't you? The response that they're linked to the school year and the school year can't be too long so therefore their holidays are not relevant since it's not in their control. Sigh.

Fizzical

Stark wrote: »

Really, so teachers weren't getting general pay increases aside from yard duty?

Perhaps I shouldn't have used the word 'general'. It was a way out for the govt in a particular pay claim so they didn't have to touch the pay scale - maybe there were relativities to think of. So, a pay increase that didn't seem to be a pay increase.

It was a very poor decision on their part and took away from the previous situation where your salary covered everything you gave to the school. All of that was freely volunteered before and there was a lot of peer pressure to give your all.

And it's not just 'yard duty' by the way. It's also cover for any school business, including cover for colleagues absent due to illness, sport, retreats, meetings... It can interfere quite a lot with your working week.

Fizzical

Tipp Man wrote: »

WTF, how can you honestly say that having 18 weeks holidays is irrelevant when comparing to other professions who have 4-5 weeks at most??

How can you honestly say its irrelevant??

The pay is commensurate to the job as it exists.

Tipp Man

Fizzical wrote: »

The pay is commensurate to the job as it exists.

So anotherwords its the sense of entitlement that ye all seem to have in abundence even though you have completly avoided answering my question

dan_d

Everyone thinks they can be a teacher, and it's easy....because everyone's been to school.

Not so.

To be quite honest, if the chip on your shoulder is that big, go look up taking up teaching. It's the in thing to do among us unemployed degree holders these days...because it's so "easy". Or at least it is until you start actually doing it...

Fizzical

Tipp Man wrote: »

So anotherwords its the sense of entitlement that ye all seem to have in abundence even though you have completly avoided answering my question

In other words, it's the considered rate for the job as it exists - all warts and perks included.

And yes, I am entitled to the going rate for the work I do.

Tipp Man

Fizzical wrote: »

In other words, it's the considered rate for the job as it exists - all warts and perks included.

And yes, I am entitled to the going rate for the work I do.

You are completely missing the point - be that deliberate or not i don't know

how about you answer these 3 simple questions which everyone seems to have avoided

Can you tell me why a teacher earning 55k a year deserves to have 13-14 weeks MORE holidays than a private sector worker also earning 55k?? Baring in mind of course that a teacher only has 22 contract hours against the private sector worker who has 38 hours.

Can you tell me why the 55k a year teacher deserves to have such a fantastic pension over the 55k a year private sector worker??

Can you tell me why the 55k teacher deserves to get a guaranteed annual increment (regardless of performance) whereas his private sector counterpart on 55k doesn't?

Fizzical

Tipp Man wrote: »

You are completely missing the point - be that deliberate or not i don't know

how about you answer these 3 simple questions which everyone seems to have avoided

Can you tell me why a teacher earning 55k a year deserves to have 13-14 weeks MORE holidays than a private sector worker also earning 55k?? Baring in mind of course that a teacher only has 22 contract hours against the private sector worker who has 38 hours.

Can you tell me why the 55k a year teacher deserves to have such a fantastic pension over the 55k a year private sector worker??

Can you tell me why the 55k teacher deserves to get a guaranteed annual increment (regardless of performance) whereas his private sector counterpart on 55k doesn't?

But these questions have been answered. More specifically:

A private sector worker is paid according to his job - hours, holidays and all. A teacher is also paid according to his job - hours, holidays and all. They are different jobs. Btw, they are class contact hours, not contracted hours. The difference between class contact hours and worked hours has been well dealt with in this thread.

The pension is not so fantastic compared to other pensions except in it's cost. This cost was always factored in to pay levels - the reason the pay was relatively poor all along compared to other professionals, and the reason we were awarded no pay increase in the last Benchmarking exercise.

The increments allow for some pay increases in a job with almost no promotional prospects (these have mostly been removed now). Ours is, I think, the longest pay scale in the country. So even though the starting salary is good, the cumulative effect over 40 years amounts to a large loss in income compared to other professional scales.

Remember, teaching was long disparaged as a low paid job for any new graduate.

shore

Tipp Man wrote: »

You are completely missing the point - be that deliberate or not i don't know

how about you answer these 3 simple questions which everyone seems to have avoided

Can you tell me why a teacher earning 55k a year deserves to have 13-14 weeks MORE holidays than a private sector worker also earning 55k?? Baring in mind of course that a teacher only has 22 contract hours against the private sector worker who has 38 hours.

Can you tell me why the 55k a year teacher deserves to have such a fantastic pension over the 55k a year private sector worker??

Can you tell me why the 55k teacher deserves to get a guaranteed annual increment (regardless of performance) whereas his private sector counterpart on 55k doesn't?

no, the questions have not been avoided , you just don't agree with the answers and opinions that have been given .

lily09

Tipp Man wrote: »

You are completely missing the point - be that deliberate or not i don't know

how about you answer these 3 simple questions which everyone seems to have avoided

Can you tell me why a teacher earning 55k a year deserves to have 13-14 weeks MORE holidays than a private sector worker also earning 55k?? Baring in mind of course that a teacher only has 22 contract hours against the private sector worker who has 38 hours.

Can you tell me why the 55k a year teacher deserves to have such a fantastic pension over the 55k a year private sector worker??

Can you tell me why the 55k teacher deserves to get a guaranteed annual increment (regardless of performance) whereas his private sector counterpart on 55k doesn't?

As L'Oreal says because we are worth it..

Teachers working the same hours as you is not going to make the job better it will just make you feel better about your job, thats the crux of all this.

Tipp Man

Fizzical wrote: »

But these questions have been answered. More specifically:

A private sector worker is paid according to his job - hours, holidays and all. A teacher is also paid according to his job - hours, holidays and all. They are different jobs. Btw, they are class contact hours, not contracted hours. The difference between class contact hours and worked hours has been well dealt with in this thread.

The pension is not so fantastic compared to other pensions except in it's cost. This cost was always factored in to pay levels - the reason the pay was relatively poor all along compared to other professionals, and the reason we were awarded no pay increase in the last Benchmarking exercise.

The increments allow for some pay increases in a job with almost no promotional prospects (these have mostly been removed now). Ours is, I think, the longest pay scale in the country. So even though the starting salary is good, the cumulative effect over 40 years amounts to a large loss in income compared to other professional scales.

Remember, teaching was long disparaged as a low paid job for any new graduate.

shore wrote: »

no, the questions have not been avoided , you just don't agree with the answers and opinions that have been given .

No the questions have not been answered at all

1. I know they are both paid according to the job - what i want to know is how can a teacher, who is on the same pay as an accountant or a solicitor for example, can justify having 13-14 weeks more holiday, how is that justifable?? What makes teachers so special that they warrent this amount of time off over any other profession in the country - especially over people who are earning the same money or less than them

2. The pension is fantastic whichever way you look at it and until the pension levy hits about 50% of your salary then it will continue to be fantastic, not only in what it returns to you but also in the level of security it provides. Its a GUARANTEED income on your retirement. How many teachers pensions were wiped out by the stock market crash??

3. I have no problem with increments, in fact I think they are vital. However I do have a problem with increments being given out to anybody and everybody without any assessment of performance. That is completly wrong and offers no incentive for teachers to improve or put a bit of extra effort in

So i say again answer the questions that were asked

Tipp Man

lily09 wrote: »

As L'Oreal says because we are worth it...

Yet when asked to prove how ye are worth it ye can't. Its an interesting perception you have though of your own self importance to this country

lily09 wrote: »

Teachers working the same hours as you is not going to make the job better it will just make you feel better about your job, thats the crux of all this.

Can you answer the questions or not?

MagicSean

No the questions have not been answered at all

Tipp Man wrote: »

1. I know they are both paid according to the job - what i want to know is how can a teacher, who is on the same pay as an accountant or a solicitor for example, can justify having 13-14 weeks more holiday, how is that justifable?? What makes teachers so special that they warrent this amount of time off over any other profession in the country - especially over people who are earning the same money or less than them

Whats there to justify? The schools are closed. You think they should teach empty classrooms? What makes them so special is that they are doing a more important job which contributes much more to society than most other professions.

Tipp Man wrote: »

2. The pension is fantastic whichever way you look at it and until the pension levy hits about 50% of your salary then it will continue to be fantastic, not only in what it returns to you but also in the level of security it provides. Its a GUARANTEED income on your retirement. How many teachers pensions were wiped out by the stock market crash??

Its a better pension because its a more important job which needs to attract a higher standard of employee and the pension is one way of doing this.

Tipp Man wrote: »

3. I have no problem with increments, in fact I think they are vital. However I do have a problem with increments being given out to anybody and everybody without any assessment of performance. That is completly wrong and offers no incentive for teachers to improve or put a bit of extra effort in

I think it was already mentioned that, unlike in the private sector, the chances of promotion from being a teacher are slim to none. In addition, you cannot look to work for another company with better pay. There is only the one. So the increments make up for the fact that no amount of personal or professional performance will allow you to find a job with better pay.

Out of interest, how exactly do you think teachers performance should be measured? Maybe an IQ test at the start and end of every year for students? How do you measure the knowledge gained by the students?

Your posts basically read like "it's not fair, they get more than me". The reason is because what teachers do is more important a job than almost any other in this country. Definitely more important than any job in the private sector. Thats just the way it is.

lily09

Tipp Man wrote: »

Yet when asked to prove how ye are worth it ye can't. Its an interesting perception you have though of your own self importance to this country

It was a joke.. God and they say the stereotypes about accountants arent true (again joke...)

Can you answer the questions or not?

Ok look Ill try but I want you to consider what Im saying and not dismiss it out of hand straight away.


1.I have already stated my own perception of the legnth of the holidays I teach 5-7 year olds they are physically not able for a longer day, I have had a couple dropping off in the afternoon. The month of June is hellish as the children are just drained its tough for them. Also the prescribed course is completed by then so we would be simply babysitting.
Can I justify the extra holidays I dont think it is a case of justifying it thats the way it is.How come I just paid a solicitor 2,200 to handle a house purchase, I didnt feel he justified that money but thats what I had to pay.
Is that you want us to work the same hours as other professions, junior doctors work longer hours than accountants, does that mean accountants and solicitors should work longer.
2.The teachers pension is fantastic, as is all public servants. I dont know really what to say to that except we are very lucky.Its been given to us by the government, we would be fools not too accept it.
3. Shock horror, I actually agree with you there. Increments should be based on some form of a system of measuring performance. Please God this is the way things will go.

Tipp Man

k_mac wrote: »

No the questions have not been answered at all



Whats there to justify? The schools are closed. You think they should teach empty classrooms? What makes them so special is that they are doing a more important job which contributes much more to society than most other professions.



Its a better pension because its a more important job which needs to attract a higher standard of employee and the pension is one way of doing this.



I think it was already mentioned that, unlike in the private sector, the chances of promotion from being a teacher are slim to none. In addition, you cannot look to work for another company with better pay. There is only the one. So the increments make up for the fact that no amount of personal or professional performance will allow you to find a job with better pay.

Out of interest, how exactly do you think teachers performance should be measured? Maybe an IQ test at the start and end of every year for students? How do you measure the knowledge gained by the students?

Your posts basically read like "it's not fair, they get more than me". The reason is because what teachers do is more important a job than almost any other in this country. Definitely more important than any job in the private sector. Thats just the way it is.

Why bother wasting your time posting crap?? Although teachers do have a lot of free time all year so maybe you don't mind wasting a bit of it

Fizzical

Tipp Man wrote: »

No the questions have not been answered at all

1. I know they are both paid according to the job - what i want to know is how can a teacher, who is on the same pay as an accountant or a solicitor for example, can justify having 13-14 weeks more holiday, how is that justifable?? What makes teachers so special that they warrent this amount of time off over any other profession in the country - especially over people who are earning the same money or less than them

2. The pension is fantastic whichever way you look at it and until the pension levy hits about 50% of your salary then it will continue to be fantastic, not only in what it returns to you but also in the level of security it provides. Its a GUARANTEED income on your retirement. How many teachers pensions were wiped out by the stock market crash??

3. I have no problem with increments, in fact I think they are vital. However I do have a problem with increments being given out to anybody and everybody without any assessment of performance. That is completly wrong and offers no incentive for teachers to improve or put a bit of extra effort in

So i say again answer the questions that were asked

This is the kind of homework I hate to deal with - where the student ignores the answer because he finds it too much trouble to consider the content. :P

Q1 - same answer, please re-read.

Q2 - same answer, please re-read.

Q3 - If your problem is with increments being automatic, that's a different matter. There are arguments for and against but really it arose from the recognition of the worth of experience. Also to encourage the value of collegiality rather than competition in the development of school communities. It's strange that now that many parts of the business world are disparaging the top-down management approach, the govt are encouraging it in schools and I see competition for increments and posts of responsibility as more of the same.

shore

Tipp Man wrote: »

Why bother wasting your time posting crap?? Although teachers do have a lot of free time all year so maybe you don't mind wasting a bit of it

pot calling the kettle black ...

Fizzical

Tipp Man wrote: »

Why bother wasting your time posting crap?? Although teachers do have a lot of free time all year so maybe you don't mind wasting a bit of it

Lol again! A well-reasoned argument!

Anyway, have you been doing any different all day?

MagicSean

Tipp Man wrote: »

Why bother wasting your time posting crap?? Although teachers do have a lot of free time all year so maybe you don't mind wasting a bit of it

Im not a teacher. I just understand how much more important their jobs are than yours.

Tipp Man

lily09 wrote: »

Ok look Ill try but I want you to consider what Im saying and not dismiss it out of hand straight away.


1.I have already stated my own perception of the legnth of the holidays I teach 5-7 year olds they are physically not able for a longer day, I have had a couple dropping off in the afternoon. The month of June is hellish as the children are just drained its tough for them. Also the prescribed course is completed by then so we would be simply babysitting.
Can I justify the extra holidays I dont think it is a case of justifying it thats the way it is.How come I just paid a solicitor 2,200 to handle a house purchase, I didnt feel he justified that money but thats what I had to pay.
Is that you want us to work the same hours as other professions, junior doctors work longer hours than accountants, does that mean accountants and solicitors should work longer.
2.The teachers pension is fantastic, as is all public servants. I dont know really what to say to that except we are very lucky.Its been given to us by the government, we would be fools not too accept it.
3. Shock horror, I actually agree with you there. Increments should be based on some form of a system of measuring performance. Please God this is the way things will go.

Finally somebody has taken the time to give some decent thoughful answers

1. An interesting point re the kids getting tired, but how does that tie in with as they get older they get more holidays? Surely once they get to the age of 12-13 they should be going to school for longer not shorter per annum? Maybe we should give the primary schools another mid term in June and have the school year run till first of August. for secondary schools i see no reason why they aren't running until the end of july

You also mention the perscribed course being finished - well it should be finished seen as though it is based on a 33 week year or whatever it is. the course could easily be set up so that it last 40 or 45 weeks a year with more content and teaching required.

You also mention in your first point about things are because thats the way they are, and you are correct but my point in this whole arguement is that I am questioning why things are the way they are why can't we change them to get better value for the taxpayers money. Just because something has always been that way doesn't mean thats its right and we shouldn't change it

2. Of course you as a teacher can't change the pension and I don't blame you for that - however it is particularly annoying when teachers (and all PS for that matter) won't even acknowledge just how good it is or how much it is costing the country/taxpayer. My solution is to abolish the defined benifit pension completly and have the government run a pension scheme similar to most company scheme's

3. My opinion is that better teachers should be financially rewarded - maybe even more than they currently are (shock horror) but for that to happen we need to break this idea that what 1 gets everybody gets because that is simply not on and whilst teachers remain such a union orientated profession this will never happen, and to be brutally honest I feel sorry for the better teachers who want to improve as they are being held back by the unions and the unions complete refusal for change

stripysocks85

Tipp Man wrote: »

You are completely missing the point - be that deliberate or not i don't know

how about you answer these 3 simple questions which everyone seems to have avoided

Can you tell me why a teacher earning 55k a year deserves to have 13-14 weeks MORE holidays than a private sector worker also earning 55k?? Baring in mind of course that a teacher only has 22 contract hours against the private sector worker who has 38 hours.

Can you tell me why the 55k a year teacher deserves to have such a fantastic pension over the 55k a year private sector worker??

Can you tell me why the 55k teacher deserves to get a guaranteed annual increment (regardless of performance) whereas his private sector counterpart on 55k doesn't?

Ah yes, the infamous & never ending 'battle' of public v private sector. Done to death at this stage. Get over it. Or at least check out the primary teaching post grad - it might be of use to you!!

lily09

Tipp Man wrote: »

Finally somebody has taken the time to give some decent thoughful answers
Thanks!

1. An interesting point re the kids getting tired, but how does that tie in with as they get older they get more holidays? Surely once they get to the age of 12-13 they should be going to school for longer not shorter per annum? Maybe we should give the primary schools another mid term in June and have the school year run till first of August. for secondary schools i see no reason why they aren't running until the end of july

You also mention the perscribed course being finished - well it should be finished seen as though it is based on a 33 week year or whatever it is. the course could easily be set up so that it last 40 or 45 weeks a year with more content and teaching required.

You also mention in your first point about things are because thats the way they are, and you are correct but my point in this whole arguement is that I am questioning why things are the way they are why can't we change them to get better value for the taxpayers money. Just because something has always been that way doesn't mean thats its right and we shouldn't change it

For us to legnthen the school year I really think it should be justified. We already have a broad curriculum,for eg we were the first country to introduce drama to the curriculum. I will only speak from my own perspective but I really do think there are better things for children to be doing than staying in school longer
For secondary schools would an idea like in America of Summer schools be more justifiable ie those who have not completed the year satisfactorally be brought in for a time to catch up rather than the whole class having a longer school year. The only way I suppose all this would benefit the tax payer is that parents may not be paying as much for childcare.
If on the other hand your issue is that the teachers should complete non contact time work, i will agree to disagree. Most teachers have enough self discipline to do the work required for their class without having to clock in

2. Of course you as a teacher can't change the pension and I don't blame you for that - however it is particularly annoying when teachers (and all PS for that matter) won't even acknowledge just how good it is or how much it is costing the country/taxpayer. My solution is to abolish the defined benifit pension completly and have the government run a pension scheme similar to most company scheme's
Would be there be implications for changing peoples pensions that they have paid into for 20 years. Sorry pensions are not my area of expertise. As a naive 23 yr old I rang the dept to ask could I cancel my pension because I was broke!!Got a grt response!!

3. My opinion is that better teachers should be financially rewarded - maybe even more than they currently are (shock horror) but for that to happen we need to break this idea that what 1 gets everybody gets because that is simply not on and whilst teachers remain such a union orientated profession this will never happen, and to be brutally honest I feel sorry for the better teachers who want to improve as they are being held back by the unions and the unions complete refusal for change

I have said time and time again that there does need to be change as regards a system for checks...its a complicated issue that would need to be sources against worldwide best practices for teacher evaluation.

shore

Tipp Man wrote: »

Finally somebody has taken the time to give some decent thoughful answers

1. An interesting point re the kids getting tired, but how does that tie in with as they get older they get more holidays? Surely once they get to the age of 12-13 they should be going to school for longer not shorter per annum? Maybe we should give the primary schools another mid term in June and have the school year run till first of August. for secondary schools i see no reason why they aren't running until the end of july

You also mention the perscribed course being finished - well it should be finished seen as though it is based on a 33 week year or whatever it is. the course could easily be set up so that it last 40 or 45 weeks a year with more content and teaching required.

You also mention in your first point about things are because thats the way they are, and you are correct but my point in this whole arguement is that I am questioning why things are the way they are why can't we change them to get better value for the taxpayers money. Just because something has always been that way doesn't mean thats its right and we shouldn't change it

2. Of course you as a teacher can't change the pension and I don't blame you for that - however it is particularly annoying when teachers (and all PS for that matter) won't even acknowledge just how good it is or how much it is costing the country/taxpayer. My solution is to abolish the defined benifit pension completly and have the government run a pension scheme similar to most company scheme's

3. My opinion is that better teachers should be financially rewarded - maybe even more than they currently are (shock horror) but for that to happen we need to break this idea that what 1 gets everybody gets because that is simply not on and whilst teachers remain such a union orientated profession this will never happen, and to be brutally honest I feel sorry for the better teachers who want to improve as they are being held back by the unions and the unions complete refusal for change

I have to agree with you on point three . It is frustrating when atrocious teachers are in permanent positions and decent teachers can't get a position and in some cases are forced to emigrate to find a job .

Fizzical

Tipp Man wrote: »

Finally somebody has taken the time to give some decent thoughful answers

1. An interesting point re the kids getting tired, but how does that tie in with as they get older they get more holidays? Surely once they get to the age of 12-13 they should be going to school for longer not shorter per annum? Maybe we should give the primary schools another mid term in June and have the school year run till first of August. for secondary schools i see no reason why they aren't running until the end of july

You also mention the perscribed course being finished - well it should be finished seen as though it is based on a 33 week year or whatever it is. the course could easily be set up so that it last 40 or 45 weeks a year with more content and teaching required.

You also mention in your first point about things are because thats the way they are, and you are correct but my point in this whole arguement is that I am questioning why things are the way they are why can't we change them to get better value for the taxpayers money. Just because something has always been that way doesn't mean thats its right and we shouldn't change it

2. Of course you as a teacher can't change the pension and I don't blame you for that - however it is particularly annoying when teachers (and all PS for that matter) won't even acknowledge just how good it is or how much it is costing the country/taxpayer. My solution is to abolish the defined benifit pension completly and have the government run a pension scheme similar to most company scheme's

3. My opinion is that better teachers should be financially rewarded - maybe even more than they currently are (shock horror) but for that to happen we need to break this idea that what 1 gets everybody gets because that is simply not on and whilst teachers remain such a union orientated profession this will never happen, and to be brutally honest I feel sorry for the better teachers who want to improve as they are being held back by the unions and the unions complete refusal for change

So answers are only decent and thoughtful if they're more sympathetic to your way of thinking? :cool:

The length and arrangement of the school year is an interesting debate, I agree. It's something I would be very interested in changing myself. But sorry, it ain't got nothin' to do with my current salary which relates to my current job.

And thanks for not blaming me for my pension! Really, makes my day!

As for teachers who want to improve being held back by the unions - are you for real??? Gosh, will the union be on my back if I do extra work tonight???

Fighting Irish

I knew how well teachers got paid and how many hols they had, but at the time carpenters were getting paid better so i decided to do carpentry. Now i've lost my job and i hate teachers

Fizzical

shore wrote: »

I have to agree with you on point three . It is frustrating when atrocious teachers are in permanent positions and decent teachers can't get a position and in some cases are forced to emigrate to find a job .

That's not actually what he said. He wants financial incentives for teachers to improve. Not sure how he'd measure the improvement though.

Anyway, your point I can sympathise with to a certain extent. But if that teacher was made perform better, the job still wouldn't be there for the other teacher - unless the first had to leave, of course. But your focussing on the wrong issue. The reason new teachers can't get a job is because the jobs aren't there. And with all the retirements, many full-time jobs are being replaced with several part-time jobs with no security. It's tough.

Tipp Man

Fizzical wrote: »

This is the kind of homework I hate to deal with - where the student ignores the answer because he finds it too much trouble to consider the content. :P

Q1 - same answer, please re-read.

Q2 - same answer, please re-read.

Q3 - If your problem is with increments being automatic, that's a different matter. There are arguments for and against but really it arose from the recognition of the worth of experience. Also to encourage the value of collegiality rather than competition in the development of school communities. It's strange that now that many parts of the business world are disparaging the top-down management approach, the govt are encouraging it in schools and I see competition for increments and posts of responsibility as more of the same.

I really hope for your sake that you prepare your students better for exams because if they answer exam questions the way you have answered mine then they are in big trouble. When i asked

Tipp Man wrote: »

Can you tell me why a teacher earning 55k a year deserves to have 13-14 weeks MORE holidays than a private sector worker also earning 55k?? .

you replied

Fizzical wrote: »

A private sector worker is paid according to his job - hours, holidays and all. A teacher is also paid according to his job - hours, holidays and all.

Now the question wasn't how is a teacher or private sector worker paid, the question was why a teacher earning the same money as a private sector worker deserved to have 4-5 times more holidays then them per year, which you didn't answer.


Once again with question 2

Tipp Man wrote: »

Can you tell me why the 55k a year teacher deserves to have such a fantastic pension over the 55k a year private sector worker??

again you sidestepped the acutal question by answering

Fizzical wrote: »

The pension is not so fantastic compared to other pensions except in it's cost. This cost was always factored in to pay levels - the reason the pay was relatively poor all along compared to other professionals, and the reason we were awarded no pay increase in the last Benchmarking exercise.

First off the pension is fantastic, even the beared warriors of the unions would agree to that. Secondly you didn't answer the actual question why a teacher on same salary as a private sector worker is deserving of a much much better penion

And finally in question 3 you initially completly missed the point in your first answer, but judging by your answer in the above post it seems that you are perfectly happy for people to get pay increases regardless of performance

Mal-Adjusted

Tipp man, your questions are being answered accuratley. you just don't like them because they don't fit into your pre-determined view.

Tipp Man

Fighting Irish wrote: »

I knew how well teachers got paid and how many hols they had, but at the time carpenters were getting paid better so i decided to do carpentry. Now i've lost my job and i hate teachers

You can go back to college and become 1 if you wish, 360 points would get you an Arts course in UCC or UCD

MagicSean

Tipp Man wrote: »

I really hope for your sake that you prepare your students better for exams because if they answer exam questions the way you have answered mine then they are in big trouble. When i asked



you replied



Now the question wasn't how is a teacher or private sector worker paid, the question was why a teacher earning the same money as a private sector worker deserved to have 4-5 times more holidays then them per year, which you didn't answer.


Once again with question 2



again you sidestepped the acutal question by answering



First off the pension is fantastic, even the beared warriors of the unions would agree to that. Secondly you didn't answer the actual question why a teacher on same salary as a private sector worker is deserving of a much much better penion

And finally in question 3 you initially completly missed the point in your first answer, but judging by your answer in the above post it seems that you are perfectly happy for people to get pay increases regardless of performance

I answered question 1 and 2 for you. They have a more important job.

Tipp Man

lily09 wrote: »

I have said time and time again that there does need to be change as regards a system for checks...its a complicated issue that would need to be sources against worldwide best practices for teacher evaluation.

I can't quote your answers for some reason

For primary schools I can see why you would want jusification and question the need for it, however to use my own parish as an example our primary school runs an Irish school for 6 weeks over the summer, loads of children go to the Gaeltacht as well, so in fact a lot of the kids are actually doing further school oreinted work during their summer holidays - often at a lot of expense to their parents

For secondary school your idea of Summer school is a very good one and gives the students incentives to work harder during the year, otherwise spend the summer in school. In reality it will never happen or if it does then we will end up paying the teachers twice

With regards to the pensions then somebody who has paid into it for 20 years woud get 20 years worth of defined benifit and then 20 years (or whatever) defined contribution

Tipp Man

Fizzical wrote: »

That's not actually what he said. He wants financial incentives for teachers to improve. Not sure how he'd measure the improvement though.

How do you measure anybody's performance in their job though?? A lot of people in the private sector with the most random of jobs are regularly assessed, There is always a way to measure performance, if you are doing work it can be measured

lily09

Tipp Man wrote: »

I can't quote your answers for some reason

For primary schools I can see why you would want jusification and question the need for it, however to use my own parish as an example our primary school runs an Irish school for 6 weeks over the summer, loads of children go to the Gaeltacht as well, so in fact a lot of the kids are actually doing further school oreinted work during their summer holidays - often at a lot of expense to their parents
This is at the heart of the matter regarding Summers, childcare and camps are so expensive.I dont think children really need to be doing more school work during the Summer, your only young once! Its a massive issue for parents and not one I think that the school can solve alone. But it is something that can be put out there perhaps this and the one below could be something that could be part of teacher education programs in college.As you must understand it would be very hard to change teachers whole job to work for the Summer, realistically and honestly I would not be prepared to lose m holidays for the same pay.
For secondary school your idea of Summer school is a very good one and gives the students incentives to work harder during the year, otherwise spend the summer in school. In reality it will never happen or if it does then we will end up paying the teachers twice

With regards to the pensions then somebody who has paid into it for 20 years woud get 20 years worth of defined benifit and then 20 years (or whatever) defined contribution

ok I think this is the issue that any union will fight more on than an idea of evaluation. The truth is the INTO is comprised of a lot of members that are older and this is a bigger issue for them.
New members to the public service are not getting a pension with the same level of benefits as existing members.

Fizzical

Tipp Man,

Q1 again. I said that my pay is for my job as it is - hours and holidays included. That's not how I'm being paid, that's what I'm being paid for. In other words, I'm being paid for 9 months work but the pay is spread out over 12 months. That's the job! If someone in the private sector is being paid the same amount for 12 months work, it's because the work is not comparable.

Q2 again. My pension, when I hopefully get it, is better than some pensions but worse than others in the private sector. Again, it was designed as part of the remuneration package as a suitable pension considering all the factors relating to the job - basically to make a difficult and in many respects an unattractive job a little more appealing to prospective candidates. There are many people out there for whom it wasn't attractive enough, including you!

Q3 again. I would allow some arguments for promotional posts being competitive, but I would take some persuading about increments. As I said, I would be a firm supporter of the collegial model of school management.

astra2000

lily09 wrote: »

Exactly and you all had plenty to say about that didnt you.....

I really do not understand your point, am I not entitled to comment if my view is different from yours or anyone elses?

Strata

k_mac wrote: »

No the questions have not been answered at all



Whats there to justify? The schools are closed. You think they should teach empty classrooms? What makes them so special is that they are doing a more important job which contributes much more to society than most other professions.

Self important much? That's a very subjective statement!

Its a better pension because its a more important job which needs to attract a higher standard of employee and the pension is one way of doing this.

Not true - it's a fantastic defined benefits pension provided to all civil servants. It's not just offered to teachers because they are "the chosen few" as you seem to think!


I think it was already mentioned that, unlike in the private sector, the chances of promotion from being a teacher are slim to none. In addition, you cannot look to work for another company with better pay. There is only the one. So the increments make up for the fact that no amount of personal or professional performance will allow you to find a job with better pay.

Out of interest, how exactly do you think teachers performance should be measured? Maybe an IQ test at the start and end of every year for students? How do you measure the knowledge gained by the students?

Your posts basically read like "it's not fair, they get more than me". The reason is because what teachers do is more important a job than almost any other in this country. Definitely more important than any job in the private sector. Thats just the way it is.

Again with the subjectivity! Jeez do you think teachers are sent from above or something?!

Strata

Fizzical wrote: »

Tipp Man,

Q1 again. I said that my pay is for my job as it is - hours and holidays included. That's not how I'm being paid, that's what I'm being paid for. In other words, I'm being paid for 9 months work but the pay is spread out over 12 months. That's the job! If someone in the private sector is being paid the same amount for 12 months work, it's because the work is not comparable.

Why is the work not comparable?

Q2 again. My pension, when I hopefully get it, is better than some pensions but worse than others in the private sector. Again, it was designed as part of the remuneration package as a suitable pension considering all the factors relating to the job - basically to make a difficult and in many respects an unattractive job a little more appealing to prospective candidates. There are many people out there for whom it wasn't attractive enough, including you!

That is rubbish! Most private sector workers fund their own pension and are dependent on the fluctuating stock market. Public Sector workers never have to worry about the value of their pensions. Name me one pension in the private sector that is better than that offered to civil servants?