Govt considering 'axing teachers pay for supervision'

sitstill

Link: http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/govt-considering-axing-teachers-pay-for-supervision-524168.html#idc-cover


How would you feel about this?

I know that after tax, pension, USC etc, we don't actually get very much. But how would you feel and what should the reaction of our unions be?

Lord TSC

Um....at the moment, the only work I get is substitution and supervision :S

Is this only going to apply to full time teachers who already have a steady wage? Or is it going to be an accross the board decision which further screws over young teachers enterting the profession?

sitstill

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

Um....at the moment, the only work I get is substitution and supervision :S

Is this only going to apply to full time teachers who already have a steady wage? Or is it going to be an accross the board decision which further screws over young teachers enterting the profession?

It relates to the S&S scheme that full-time teachers can opt in to.

TheDriver

only snag is that how will schools arrange supervision because there is no other provision for it. Even in croke park hours deal, those that opted out of the scheme cannot be asked to supervise

sitstill

TheDriver wrote: »

only snag is that how will schools arrange supervision because there is no other provision for it. Even in croke park hours deal, those that opted out of the scheme cannot be asked to supervise

They will probably expect us to do it for free.

mrboswell

I don't think you have to be full time to sign up for S and S.

iona_buss

Yeah I do S&S and I'm not full time.

TheDriver

maybe parents would like to come in and supervise their angels for free

flatbackfour

TheDriver wrote: »

maybe parents would like to come in and supervise their angels for free

Supervision of kids is a delicate art and a skill learned. Think of what you tactically ignore, where you stand, the looks you give etc. This we teachers take for granted. But its a skill and takes time to perfect.

A busy body parent who over reacts to every little incident-I promise you chaos would insue in minutes.

Lord TSC

In fairness, I presume that was kind of the point that TheDriver was trying to make; that it's not as easy as it sounds.

Anyway, thanks for the reply to my initial comment. Posted it on hearing the news without thinking and figured as much after a bit of though. :P

doc_17

If they axe it then surely we don't have to it. The media report listed above referred to it as a "perk". We have a 40 minute luch in our place. i do 3 lunch time supervisions a week - two 20 mins and one 15 mins. So if I'm not going to get paid for it then I don't see how they can make us do it for free.

But anyways - if you are on full hours (or in high tax bracket) you only get to keep 38 cent out of each euro. I don't do it for the money - I do it to help out the school as we are a smaller school and pretty much everybody does this or we wouldn't have the cover. But if the scheme is axed then that's that. I won't do it.

Plus - this income was pensionable - how does that affect people's pensions in years to come if it's axed?

rebel10

Union meeting on Tuesday, will try and find out as much as I can and post back.

Hootanany

doc_17 wrote: »

If they axe it then surely we don't have to it. The media report listed above referred to it as a "perk". We have a 40 minute luch in our place. i do 3 lunch time supervisions a week - two 20 mins and one 15 mins. So if I'm not going to get paid for it then I don't see how they can make us do it for free.

But anyways - if you are on full hours (or in high tax bracket) you only get to keep 38 cent out of each euro. I don't do it for the money - I do it to help out the school as we are a smaller school and pretty much everybody does this or we wouldn't have the cover. But if the scheme is axed then that's that. I won't do it.

Plus - this income was pensionable - how does that affect people's pensions in years to come if it's axed?

Thats a disgrace just do your job and be happy you have one.

rebel10

Hootanany wrote: »

Thats a disgrace just do your job and be happy you have one.

Can I just ask, what exactly is 'a disgrace'? So you agree that we should just do our jobs, what we are paid to do, and refuse voluntary supervision of children during our lunch breaks?

Lord TSC

Hootanany wrote: »

Thats a disgrace just do your job and be happy you have one.

I agree! You should totally be happy to be taken advantage of and do things which you won't get paid for! What do you think you have? Self-worth? Pah!

doc_17

Hootanany wrote: »

Thats a disgrace just do your job and be happy you have one.

Very silly and ill-informed comment. If I just did my job I'd cut hours of my working week easy.

RealJohn

Hootanany wrote: »

Thats a disgrace just do your job and be happy you have one.

I presume you mean that it's a disgrace that we only get to keep 38% of the money we earn for it. You're quite right.

Trotter

Interesting..

Does this mean that if the supervision money ends, we'll be expected to be active in a supervision capacity for the full school day whether we like it or not?

Under the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997,

An employer shall not require an employee to work for a period of more than 4 hours and 30 minutes without allowing him or her a break of at least 15 minutes.

Now if you're in the staffroom and need to be available should a child need you for whatever reason, are you on a break or not?

I have no problem being available during my lunch time to any child that needs assistance or whatever, and I have and will continue to drop everything if Im needed to help whoever is out on supervision. If Im to be available like that all day, the €600 ish I get in the Summer for doing that during the rest of the year makes up for it (well attempts to anyway).

Its frustrating how the government continues to pick at the bones. I suppose they're only doing it because they know we'll make noise and then go back to normal.

J.R.

doc_17 wrote: »

But anyways - if you are on full hours (or in high tax bracket) you only get to keep 38 cent out of each euro.

Exactly - when the government state it costs €200 million they fail to point out that they get 62% of it back in P.R.S.I., U.S.C., Pension Levy & pension contributions.

Where are they going to get somebody available for supervision (who will be there on time each time required) for a full school year for €650?

Parents volunteering to supervise was mentioned - what happens if:

1. they don't arrive on time?

2. ring 5 minutes before that they can't make it?

3. Take sides with pupils they know / are neighbours etc?

4. walk around yard with large group of pupils...their own kids / neighbours kids / kids on their kids football team etc. .....following them in a large 'giddy' group?

5. Don't realise that there is more to it that just standing in a yard....must keep an eye on all.....spot the pupil who is being left out / unusually quiet / upset......ensure games are supervised.....pintpoint bullying in early stages....spot ring leaders....spot pupils with difficulty interacting in games.....keep an eye on pupils dexterity and skills......equipment is distributed fairly....pupils line up at bell....etc.

6. Who picks up the pieces if supervision not up to scratch.....lots of 'bickering', arguments over decisions made on yard, pupils feeling bullied....does the teacher spend 15 / 20 minutes after each yard investigating incidents that should have been sorted / nipped in the bud by the person supervising.

7. Although a small break is only 10 minutes & lunch 20 minutes it can be a long, mentally draining time when supervising yard.....I could see the novelty wearing off very quickly for volunteering parents.

8. What happens where no parents volunteer....who supervises then?

9. If supervision is not adequate then it's the principal who will be receiving the complaints from parents ( not the parent volunteer) & the school will be liable for any accidents where supervision is not adequate.

10. What happens if parents come to the school objecting to a certain parent supervising?

It sounds a great idea on paper but when thrashed out carefully it can be a recipe for disaster it not running 100% efficent.

Lord TSC

Here's a question...

I vaugely remember back when I was in school there being something happening where special yard supervisors being brought in for lunch times. I can't remember what happened. It was when I was only 14 or 15 (Maybe about 10 years ago ish) so wasn't paying attention to news. But what happened then that non-teachers were brought in to supervise and how did that work?

noodler

Most people work 9-5.

They don't expect extra money for the other jobs they do during the course of a working day.

whiteandlight

They are also legally entitled to breaks. If this is made compulsory then we are losing our breaks.

From a practical perspective who would be forced to do it? I'm not permanent, only on 16hrs so would I be expected to Do it or would it just be permanent staff? And is there enough permanent staff?

rainbowtrout

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

Here's a question...

I vaugely remember back when I was in school there being something happening where special yard supervisors being brought in for lunch times. I can't remember what happened. It was when I was only 14 or 15 (Maybe about 10 years ago ish) so wasn't paying attention to news. But what happened then that non-teachers were brought in to supervise and how did that work?

I think that was 2002-2003. I'm in an amalgamated school and it was the first year we opened and that's when we had the outside supervisors. S&S hadn't been ironed out fully so schools could hire outsiders to supervise break, lunch and classes that had no teacher.

It was chaos in my school when the non teachers were on duty. Students didn't pass any heed of them because they weren't teachers. They didn't view them as authority figures and many times I had to go into the classroom next door (and I wasn't long out of college myself) to calm things down because it sounded like the students were killing each other. I wouldn't welcome that set up back again. Students don't pay any heed to outsiders because they feel that there's no repercussions, those people aren't going to give them punishment work, put them on detention or keep them back after class. They don't have a relationship with them and aren't taught by them.

Don't think it existed back then, but there would probably be Garda vetting issues now as well.

rebel10

noodler wrote: »

Most people work 9-5.

They don't expect extra money for the other jobs they do during the course of a working day.

When I worked in another sector, I was entitled to a 15 minute coffee break and then an hour lunch for a 9-5 day. A teacher is legally entitled to have a break every 4.5 hours too, like any worker.

Musicmental85 wrote: »

From a practical perspective who would be forced to do it? I'm not permanent, only on 16hrs so would I be expected to Do it or would it just be permanent staff? And is there enough permanent staff?

I would imagine if you are contracted to work as a teacher in a school in a given year, you are expected to work these breaks, permanent or not.

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

Here's a question...

I vaugely remember back when I was in school there being something happening where special yard supervisors being brought in for lunch times. I can't remember what happened. It was when I was only 14 or 15 (Maybe about 10 years ago ish) so wasn't paying attention to news. But what happened then that non-teachers were brought in to supervise and how did that work?

That was in 2001. Basically, teachers were not paid for supervision at lunch times and covering classes. They held a number of strikes to highlight the issue and pulled themselves out of volunteering themselves for supervision. Parents volunteered themselves to supervise afaik.

Can I just ask, in this day and age, surely if someone from outside is brought in to supervise breaks, they will need Garda clearance? Messy situation I would imagine.

E.T.

noodler wrote: »

Most people work 9-5.

They don't expect extra money for the other jobs they do during the course of a working day.

Do most other people have a duty of care to clients/customers during every minute of the day?
Do they have to do first aid while trying to eat their lunch?
Do they have to supervise children who are too sick to go out to the yard (but not too sick to be sent to school?:mad:)?
Do they have to sort out client/customers who are having disagreements during their lunchbreak?

I'd love to have an actual break at lunchtime but it never, ever happens. I'm in school regularly til 5 without any proper break.

amen

Parents volunteering to supervise was mentioned

and I assume all volunteers will need vetting..

trebormurf

Most people work 9-5. Christ I'd love to finish at 5 every day noodler but you seem to be ill-informed as every teacher I know brings work home EVERY day, most work late into the evening correcting/prep work. Ignore the ignorant!!

noodler

trebormurf wrote: »

Most people work 9-5. Christ I'd love to finish at 5 every day noodler but you seem to be ill-informed as every teacher I know brings work home EVERY day, most work late into the evening correcting/prep work. Ignore the ignorant!!

I know plenty of teachers who finish at 3:30 and usually have a free class or two during the day.

So a free class - lets say one (40 mins) and then the extra 1H 30 mins from 3:30 to 5pm. Thats 2hrs 10mins to do extra work.

Or you know the three months off in the summer as compensation.

Don't ignore what you don't like to hear, simply defend against it with a better argument.

doc_17

Make A better arguement? Why don't you stick to the current discussion? Which is about why should people be made to work during their lunch for nothing?

I know this happens all the time in the wonderful world of the non PS. But guess what? Take a straw poll of the next 100 teachers you meet and ask them how long they got for lunch today.

sitstill

noodler wrote: »

I know plenty of teachers who finish at 3:30 and usually have a free class or two during the day.

So a free class - lets say one (40 mins) and then the extra 1H 30 mins from 3:30 to 5pm. Thats 2hrs 10mins to do extra work.

Or you know the three months off in the summer as compensation.

Don't ignore what you don't like to hear, simply defend against it with a better argument.

I would generally have either one or two free classes a day and yes, while I might shock! horror! sit down and have a cuppa during that time, I'd generally be photocopying for my later classes, dealing with issues of students in my tutor class etc - and still I'd have to take home work when 4 o'clock comes.

I love to see the jealousy of people towards the three months off in summer we have. Why don't you all become teachers for the holodays then and see how much you actually earn them.

touts

This is a problem. Teachers like everyone else should be allowed a break without the need to work within that time. However outside of breaktime and in a normal 9-5 5 day week they should be flexible to do whatever is required so long as it is safe, lawful and reasonable. They should also not be expected to work after 5pm and weekends correcting copies, preparing lesson plans, training teams etc. It should all be 9-5 5 days a week BUT the more militant teachers like being able to have the odd half day and free periods

Unfortunately you have a government with it's head up its arse and Unions with their head in the sand so they will never see the merits in the other's position. Strikes by Easter!

noodler

touts wrote: »

This is a problem. Teachers like everyone else should be allowed a break without the need to work within that time. However outside of breaktime and in a normal 9-5 5 day week they should be flexible to do whatever is required so long as it is safe, lawful and reasonable. They should also not be expected to work after 5pm and weekends correcting copies, preparing lesson plans, training teams etc. It should all be 9-5 5 days a week BUT the more militant teachers like being able to have the odd half day and free periods

Unfortunately you have a government with it's head up its arse and Unions with their head in the sand so they will never see the merits in the other's position. Strikes by Easter!

Difficult one.

If a teacher cannot get his/her extra work done in two free classes and being off earlier than everyone else then one has to ask is it unreasonable to work an extra hour a few times a week for the privilege of having the summer off.

Surely it is?

TheDriver

don't you love non-teachers having lots of advice when they haven't worked a day in a school ever but rather gather their experience from public mis-conception.

I'm over to the banking forum to give out about all those hard working/lazy bank people............

noodler

TheDriver wrote: »

don't you love non-teachers having lots of advice when they haven't worked a day in a school ever but rather gather their experience from public mis-conception.

I'm over to the banking forum to give out about all those hard working/lazy bank people............

Outstanding attitude.

That will forward the debate.

raytray

noodler wrote: »

Difficult one.

If a teacher cannot get his/her extra work done in two free classes and being off earlier than everyone else then one has to ask is it unreasonable to work an extra hour a few times a week for the privilege of having the summer off.

Surely it is?

No one is complaining about the work that they have to do before and after school and at weekends. Teachers take this sort of work as a given when they enter the profession. I start work at 7:45 and leave at 5:00 and do another 1-2 hours at night. I am not complaining about that. What people are annoyed about is that they will have to work through their lunch which by law they are entitled to have and when you are working well into the evening you do need food. when you are standing up and talking all morning and dealing with people it gets draining and you need a lunch. I am in my 20's and find it tiring.
Plus primary school teachers don't get free classes. When are they supposed to go to the toilet if their lunch is taken away?

noodler

raytray wrote: »

No one is complaining about the work that they have to do before and after school and at weekends. Teachers take this sort of work as a given when they enter the profession. I start work at 7:45 and leave at 5:00 and do another 1-2 hours at night. I am not complaining about that. What people are annoyed about is that they will have to work through their lunch which by law they are entitled to have and when you are working well into the evening you do need food. when you are standing up and talking all morning and dealing with people it gets draining and you need a lunch. I am in my 20's and find it tiring.
Plus primary school teachers don't get free classes. When are they supposed to go to the toilet if their lunch is taken away?

Nothing I disgaree with there.

Classes/rotas should be worked in such a way so that a teacher has a free class if he/she worked through lunch.

vamos!

noodler wrote: »

Nothing I disgaree with there.

Classes/rotas should be worked in such a way so that a teacher has a free class if he/she worked through lunch.

How do you propose this or picture this at primary level? Also, what about the growing number of secondary teachers who aren't on full hours. Should we work half lunch breaks or a third?

noodler

vamos! wrote: »

How do you propose this or picture this at primary level? Also, what about the growing number of secondary teachers who aren't on full hours. Should we work half lunch breaks or a third?

At primary where teachers finish at 2:30pm, I don't think it should be as big an issue to be perfectly honest. Cold as that may sound, however, people obviously still need breaks but in the (relatively poor) school I was in there was still a teacher or two who didn't have designated classes and these were the ones who took yard duty.


Regarding secondary, you mean a sub who is getting paid per hour? Well they can obviously take the option of supervision if they want, no? For extra cash?
In these situations, would the teacher who isn't have full hours have plenty of other opportunities during the day to take a break? And so missing lunch (and getting paid for it) shouldn't be as big a problem?

vamos!

noodler wrote: »

At primary where teachers finish at 2:30pm, I don't think it should be as big an issue to be perfectly honest. Cold as that may sound, however, people obviously still need breaks but in the (relatively poor) school I was in there was still a teacher or two who didn't have designated classes and these were the ones who took yard duty.


Regarding secondary, you mean a sub who is getting paid per hour? Well they can obviously take the option of supervision if they want, no? For extra cash?
In these situations, would the teacher who isn't have full hours have plenty of other opportunities during the day to take a break? And so missing lunch (and getting paid for it) shouldn't be as big a problem?

There are more categories than sub and permanent. What about the people on 5 and 8 hours and the likes. Do they get out the calculator and work 22.5 minutes of lunch and half a free class?. This is about stopping payment for S&S isnt it, so part-timers couldnt be paid? And cold to work until 230 without a break. What about toilet breaks? Non-teachers dont seem to get that you CANT leave a class under any circumstances. What happens if a students injure themselves or WW3 breaks out when the teacher has gone to the bathroom. Do you propose hiring extra staff to cover toilet breaks? Having had a 'real' job before I worked in teaching, I can totally understand how non-teachers think its no big deal to take away the break but it really is a big deal which wont save the Government much at all but will create a plethora of problems.

rebel10

noodler wrote: »

At primary where teachers finish at 2:30pm, I don't think it should be as big an issue to be perfectly honest. Cold as that may sound, however, people obviously still need breaks but in the (relatively poor) school I was in there was still a teacher or two who didn't have designated classes and these were the ones who took yard duty.


Regarding secondary, you mean a sub who is getting paid per hour? Well they can obviously take the option of supervision if they want, no? For extra cash?
In these situations, would the teacher who isn't have full hours have plenty of other opportunities during the day to take a break? And so missing lunch (and getting paid for it) shouldn't be as big a problem?

Just goes to show how little you know about the working conditions of thousands of teachers in the country. At this moment, there are 34 members of staff in my school. 22 are permanent or have CID contracts. The other 12 have temporary contracts, which are completely individual to the teacher, some have TWT, Pro-Rata contracts, Non-Casual contracts, Casual-Part time contracts, etc. A teacher in my school is paid to teach 4 hours a week. So, are you suggesting she makes herself available for supervision though she won't be paid for it because she doesn't have a full timetable or what? They won't be paid extra, this is what this whole thread is discussing, the fact that teachers are expected to do these hours voluntarily. Unless a teacher provides a doctors cert, these classes are not paid for by the dept. and are covered by teachers availing of the S&S scheme. They make themselves available to cover these classes and supervision of lunches or detention. They are paid at the moment on average about 600eur p/a for this service. Do you believe this should be taken from teachers who have very little hours to begin with? How would you go about implementing a new system?

Today, I got into school at 8:40, met with the student council until 9, then had classes til 10:55.
Had a coffee break til 11:05.
Had class until 11:40.
Had a class off. Met with a parent of a child who has a physical disability for 20 minute meeting. Ate my lunch. Prepared for my next class.
12:20, next class.
1:05 Lunch time supervision.
1:40 next class.
3:45 finish school.
4:30 home. Have a break for a few hours. Then at about 7 start working on preparing mid-term tests and correct copies. Finish realistically tonight at 9:30.
What I am asking you is am I to now agree to work through my coffee break too?
Where can supervision hours be found from this typical day?
When are teachers supposed to meet parents?
When are teachers supposed to deal with students who are experiencing personal problems, neglect, abuse, bullying, etc?

trebormurf

Regarding secondary, you mean a sub who is getting paid per hour? Well they can obviously take the option of supervision if they want, no? For extra cash?
In these situations, would the teacher who isn't have full hours have plenty of other opportunities during the day to take a break? And so missing lunch (and getting paid for it) shouldn't be as big a problem?

Lots of questions there from someone who thinks they have all the answers.

rebel10

trebormurf wrote: »

Regarding secondary, you mean a sub who is getting paid per hour? Well they can obviously take the option of supervision if they want, no? For extra cash?
In these situations, would the teacher who isn't have full hours have plenty of other opportunities during the day to take a break? And so missing lunch (and getting paid for it) shouldn't be as big a problem?

Lots of questions there from someone who thinks they have all the answers.

A sub in secondary is paid if a teacher is out and has a doctors cert. This does not apply to teachers who are out with students for matches, plays, career days, school tours, etc. As it stands in my school, if these teachers are out, the teacher who is down for supervision does it. Now, if they do away with this scheme, teachers will have to volunteer their time to supervise. Sub teachers/ part time teachers are not paid to cover these classes. If a teacher doesn't have full time hours, they don't have a full pay either, what they are suggesting is they work voluntarily.
Can I ask what you meant from your last comment?

who the fug

Sorry for mine ignorance but are lunchtimes supervised at 2nd level now

rebel10

who the fug wrote: »

Sorry for mine ignorance but are lunchtimes supervised at 2nd level now

They have always been supervised. Up until 2001, this was done voluntarily by the teachers, they now are paid on average 600eur p/a to make themselves available to supervise two class periods and one hour lunch time supervision p/w.

Inspector Coptoor

noodler wrote: »

Or you know the three months off in the summer as compensation.

Ah, this old chestnut.

Would it surprise you to learn that we teachers dont really have the summer off as such.
We work 9 months of the year and get 9 months pay which is then divided into 26 fortnightly pay packets if you happen to be on a one year contract or permanent.

if you are working as a sub teacher, you get paid for the same 9 months, but you get paid per hour, which is a quite high figure per hour, €60 plus for a qualified teacher with a few years experience.
The problem in that is you end up paying a shed load of tax at 41% and then when the summer "holidays" come and you are essentially forced to be unemployed for the summer, you have no money coming in, and its very hard to budget for 12 weeks with no money coming in let me tell you.

Also, another reason teachers dont work in the summer is so kids can have a childhood and so that works can be carried out on the school itself.

doc_17

In our school the us silly old teachers gave voluntary cover for colleagues who take sports teams away. Most people show goodwill but if supervision payment is cut then so will all sports activities. There's only so many times youcan go to the well

trebormurf

Rebel10,
That was a response to noodler's earlier ill-informed comments!!

who the fug

rebel10 wrote: »

They have always been supervised. Up until 2001, this was done voluntarily by the teachers, they now are paid on average 600eur p/a to make themselves available to supervise two class periods and one hour lunch time supervision p/w.

1980 till 1985 they were not, that I noticed

rebel10

who the fug wrote: »

1980 till 1985 they were not, that I noticed

Honestly don't know about then, just know about the years that I have been involved in education. Depended on management I suppose. Anyone involved in education in those years want to enlighten us?

rebel10

trebormurf wrote: »

Rebel10,
That was a response to noodler's earlier ill-informed comments!!

Oh right:o Thought you were referring to mine.:o

who the fug

rebel10 wrote: »

Honestly don't know about then, just know about the years that I have been involved in education. Depended on management I suppose. Anyone involved in education in those years want to enlighten us?

School I was in, a race to the gates between staff and pupils