Pay cuts threat to profession

Powerhouse

ntlbell wrote: »

1) So their bankrupt employers reduced salaries for new entrants. sounds like a sound decision no?

2) The cuts should and will continue to happen as long as the employer can't afford those wages. It's simple economics.

1) I never commented one way or t'other about whether the decision was sound or not. I simply pointed out who the maker of the decision was.

2) I think shows a lack of understanding of the term "economics" per se. Broader economic thinking would suggest that cutting public wages after a certain point solves little and that diminishing returns quickly kick in as the benefits are lost on the consumer side of the sheet (though the begrudgers wouldn't be thinking like this of course). But speciously attractive policies are often just that.

doc_17

ntlbell wrote: »

Generally teachers are not attacked for having a pension.

They're attacked when they state they "have to pay for it" now. Well join the club. so does everyone else and it generally costs a hell of a lot more in the private sector.

no one forced you into the public sector, no one forces you to stay there and no one forces you to continue to pay into the pension.

You're free at anytime to walk away. It's a great country we live in that gives us this right.

:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

Anyway folks, I've had a blast!

Powerhouse

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

1) Of course they don't pay teachers, but they do exert enormous powers when it comes to influencing the government on budgetary issues (i.e. what's off the table when it comes to cuts).


2) I'm not referring to people who've been in the job for 10/15 years. I'm referring to people who got their teaching numbers as little as 2 years ago who started on 6k higher salaries, got 10% more pension entitlements and get their various allowances all in comparison to today's starters.

1) The experience of recent years and indeed the current time would suggest that 'enormous powers' in a gross exaggeration given the paycuts that have happened and are continuing to happen (under the guise of allowances) even in the era of the CPA. The unions seem to me to be quite toothless right now but perhaps you'd elaborate on why you believe the case to be otherwise.

2) I'm not sure begrudging people in the job two years is really a viable reason for not entering teaching either. On the other hand, perhaps not bringing an enormous chip on your shoulder over what-might-have-been into a staff-room is quite a good thing. In all other jobs you'll presumably be on exactly the same money as all your colleagues were even during the boom so it's best to exploit that.

Powerhouse

ntlbell wrote: »

You're free at anytime to walk away. It's a great country we live in that gives us this right.

Sure that's what keeps us going to be honest with you. May the school gates never be locked. :P

I can almost hear the people on the dole queue singing 'power to the people' in delight that the constitution is not so authoritarian that it forces people to work.

wivy

ntlbell wrote: »

because you should be going on to do more a more challenging course/job.

Im horrified and angered reading your posts.
Teaching is a very challenging job/course and by god do you need to work hard to get through the B.Ed and to get a 1.1.
I got 565 points in my leaving cert... and I can one hundred percent say I was fully stimulated by the intensive four year teaching course I pursued and I thoroughly enjoyed it. I would not change my decision for the world.

ntlbell

Powerhouse wrote: »

1) I never commented one way or t'other about whether the decision was sound or not. I simply pointed out who the maker of the decision was.

2) I think shows a lack of understanding of the term "economics" per se. Broader economic thinking would suggest that cutting public wages after a certain point solves little and that diminishing returns quickly kick in as the benefits are lost on the consumer side of the sheet (though the begrudgers wouldn't be thinking like this of course). But speciously attractive policies are often just that.

The employer can no longer afford the levels of pay not just for teachers for ALL it's staff. The wage bill will have to be reduced. There's nothing else to it.

ntlbell

wivy wrote: »

Im horrified and angered reading your posts.
Teaching is a very challenging job/course and by god do you need to work hard to get through the B.Ed and to get a 1.1.
I got 565 points in my leaving cert... and I can one hundred percent say I was fully stimulated by the intensive four year teaching course I pursued and I thoroughly enjoyed it. I would not change my decision for the world.

You're horrified that the cream of the top of Irish students shouldn't consider MORE challenging roles than teaching? (please do not read teaching != challenging)

Powerhouse

ntlbell wrote: »

The employer can no longer afford the levels of pay not just for teachers for ALL it's staff. The wage bill will have to be reduced. There's nothing else to it.

The point I was making was a bit more subtle than this reply allows, but I suppose you'll keep banging the only drum you can bang.

vamos!

ntlbell wrote: »

We don't need top talent going into teaching we need them in much more challening jobs. .

What would you consider top talent? Somebody who achieved high LC points, a first class degree, MA and PGDE? Scholarships to study abroad? Awards at graduation ceremonies? Would it surprise you to know that these candidates decided to enter teaching for the challenges it offers? It certainly wasn't for the easy money and cushy number. I could be earning much more if I had followed my friends into their sectors. I had higher grades and probably would have been hired with them. I would be earning 50k instead of scraping by on 15k hoping for more hours next year. Yes, I, and those like me work very few hours but it is not by choice. I also happen to think that I am quite good at my job and I enjoy it. Should I quit now because my academic records suggest that I may be over-qualified?

Brussels Sprout

Powerhouse wrote: »

In all other jobs you'll presumably be on exactly the same money as all your colleagues were even during the boom so it's best to exploit that.

Yeah because that's exactly what I said :rolleyes:

Brussels Sprout

vamos! wrote: »

I could be earning much more if I had followed my friends into their sectors. I had higher grades and probably would have been hired with them. I would be earning 50k instead of scraping by on 15k hoping for more hours next year.

Not knocking you there but I'm just curious as to what sectors your friends are working in that they're earning 50k after only a few years?

mikemac1

The Examiner isn't a Tony O'Reilly paper afaik

At their annual union conferences this week, teachers will insist the Government meet its commitment under the Croke Park deal to protect teachers’ pay, including allowances.

Nothing strange there, unions doing what unions do

Figures obtained by the Irish Examiner show the averagely paid teacher earns €55,000-€60,000, with a higher proportion of second-level teachers in the higher pay brackets.

More than one-in-three primary teachers and 43% of those working at second level earn at least €61,000 a year.

Just over half of all teachers earn between €41,000 and €61,000 a year, through a combination of salary and various allowances.

I don't like when newspaper have "sources" but never state where. Sure you can report anything you want

However, I'm not saying those figures are correct or incorrect as I don't know.
But the thread is about pay and attracting new hires and they look pretty sweet to me

Such a huge gap between the new teacher scrapping for hours and the established teacher with their permanent jobs.

However, unions insist all allowances are an integral part of their members’ pay.

So the minister goes after the allowances.
And the union members should be asking why wasn't there a big push to put the allowances into core pay over the last few years.
Because it's separate now it's easy to get rid of.
Unions messed up here and even if they tried they have failed. Allowances will be cut

"ASTI members signed up to and are fully compliant with the Croke Park Agreement which protects their pay," he said.

"We will consider any reduction in their pay to be a breach of the agreement by the Government."

And the minister says grand, we won't touch your pay, we'll just hit the allowance

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/1500-teachers-earn-up-to-115k-a-year-189895.html

Sorry if this was already in the thread, I scanned the last four page and didn't see it

This article is the most read on the Examiner website.

Powerhouse

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

Yeah because that's exactly what I said :rolleyes:

Well, you did cite lack of equivalence in pay among teachers as a reason for not entering teaching. Presumably you do not see that as an issue in whatever other job you might consider. So it certainly is exactly what you implied.

ntlbell

Powerhouse wrote: »

The point I was making was a bit more subtle than this reply allows, but I suppose you'll keep banging the only drum you can bang.

I could try something I used to teach my daughter about how many apples she had and how many days in the week their was.

But I'm not sure it will help.

ntlbell

vamos! wrote: »

What would you consider top talent? Somebody who achieved high LC points, a first class degree, MA and PGDE? Scholarships to study abroad? Awards at graduation ceremonies? Would it surprise you to know that these candidates decided to enter teaching for the challenges it offers? It certainly wasn't for the easy money and cushy number. I could be earning much more if I had followed my friends into their sectors. I had higher grades and probably would have been hired with them. I would be earning 50k instead of scraping by on 15k hoping for more hours next year. Yes, I, and those like me work very few hours but it is not by choice. I also happen to think that I am quite good at my job and I enjoy it. Should I quit now because my academic records suggest that I may be over-qualified?

right now the way it's calculated is leaving cert points during CAO applications?

So I guess this? but I'm very open to changing all this if you have any ideas?

gaeilgebeo

Don't feed the troll! :rolleyes:

TheKat

ntlbell, I have to laugh, for me you're becoming a caricature of yourself with your constant nitpicking and generalisations!

I did well in my Leaving Cert but had no interest in a career such as accounting or finance, as I much prefer dealing with people than with numbers. I would much prefer hopping and singing and jumping around a classroom full of Junior Infants than working in the "business" world. Having said that I think people would want to be mad to teach at secondary level

Sure I may moan about my job as it can be increeeedibly frustrating at times but show me someone who doesn't moan every once in a while about having to go to work. Every one of us is grateful deep down for even having a job in the first place.

A lot of newly qualified teachers are emigrating because there is a lack of work in Ireland right now, not because they are chasing money in Estonia (way to turn that girl's point on its head by the way).

So go on, I'm looking forward to see what you pick up on in this - what little point of mine will you take as a generalisation for every single teacher in Ireland

ntlbell

TheKat wrote: »

ntlbell, I have to laugh, for me you're becoming a caricature of yourself with your constant nitpicking and generalisations!

I did well in my Leaving Cert but had no interest in a career such as accounting or finance, as I much prefer dealing with people than with numbers. I would much prefer hopping and singing and jumping around a classroom full of Junior Infants than working in the "business" world. Having said that I think people would want to be mad to teach at secondary level

Sure I may moan about my job as it can be increeeedibly frustrating at times but show me someone who doesn't moan every once in a while about having to go to work. Every one of us is grateful deep down for even having a job in the first place.

A lot of newly qualified teachers are emigrating because there is a lack of work in Ireland right now, not because they are chasing money in Estonia (way to turn that girl's point on its head by the way).

So go on, I'm looking forward to see what you pick up on in this - what little point of mine will you take as a generalisation for every single teacher in Ireland

I would love to continue this discussion with you.

But you didn't really make a point. You went to school you did well became a teacher. ok....Anything in relation to what we're discussing or?

TheKat

Not word for word but I wasn't far off in my guess!

marienbad

TheKat wrote: »

Not word for word but I wasn't far off in my guess!

But the only points that you made are that you love your job and loads of teachers are emigrating. So what ? That applies to virtually every job, profession, trade in Ireland !

Feeona

I heard some of the INTO conference in Killarney. Quinn made a speech beseeching the members of the teaching profession to help him make his cuts. The response from the audience wasn't favourable as you could guess. He has some neck asking for help when just last week he circulated a press release about teachers 'allowances and perks', giving begrudgers more to moan about as if they needed an excuse!

Feeona

marienbad wrote: »

But the only points that you made are that you love your job and loads of teachers are emigrating. So what ? That applies to virtually every job, profession, trade in Ireland !

I think the problem is that this thread was opened for people to discuss their worries about pay cuts etc.

Unfortunately it has been taken over by people who believe that public sector workers should never be worried if their pay is cut. Only private sector workers have that privilege apparently.

marienbad

Feeona wrote: »

I think the problem is that this thread was opened for people to discuss their worries about pay cuts etc.

Unfortunately it has been taken over by people who believe that public sector workers should never be worried if their pay is cut. Only private sector workers have that privilege apparently.

Not so, all those issues raised are inter-related and if the teachers unions were really worried about the the pay and conditions of new entrants they would'nt have pursued the protective polices that they have for the last 50 years.

Let me ask you a few questions - how many many teachers were fired last year ? In the last 10 years ? in the last 20?

That is an incredible amount of dead wood to be carrying decade after decade and rising throught the pay grades as they go. They are often the highest paid and do the least work and complain the most.

Until the ''good'' teachers stop the all for one and one for all attitude of their unions and accept a system of proper reward and remuneration based on merit and performance the cuts will be made elsewhere. Unfortunately they will fall of those most recently qualified and that have least union protection.

Feeona

marienbad wrote: »

Not so,

I believe so becaue I have experience of it. My friend was talking about getting a pay cut, she works in a factory, she got sympathy and rightly so. I in the meantime (working as a substitute meaning no regular hours) am told 'sure you only work half a day' etc.

I don't know anybody who would respond well to being told 'just shut up and take it' when they're worried about something. Do you by any chance?

marienbad

Feeona wrote: »

I believe so becaue I have experience of it. My friend was talking about getting a pay cut, she works in a factory, she got sympathy and rightly so. I in the meantime (working as a substitute meaning no regular hours) am told 'sure you only work half a day' etc.

I don't know anybody who would respond well to being told 'just shut up and take it' when they're worried about something. Do you by any chance?

But what exactly is your issue ? People are losing their jobs and on short time left right and centre, why do you think teachers are immune ?

Can you imagine the opportunities for you if the unions stopped protecting
''the dead wood'' I referred to earlier ? What is your opinion on that ?

ntlbell

Feeona wrote: »

I believe so becaue I have experience of it. My friend was talking about getting a pay cut, she works in a factory, she got sympathy and rightly so. I in the meantime (working as a substitute meaning no regular hours) am told 'sure you only work half a day' etc.

I don't know anybody who would respond well to being told 'just shut up and take it' when they're worried about something. Do you by any chance?

Your personal experience and hear say are not really relevant here. If you take time out to have a chat with the 400k that line the streets each week to sign on for their dole, what would they have thought about a wage cut or their current circumstances?

Teachers currently and for a long time have been over paid based on the amount of hours they work. They're the highest paid teachers ON AVERAGE in the OECD.

Their employer is BANKRUPT. <-- no money, up to their eyes in debt.

Their employer can no longer afford to pay them their current wages.

now in the private sector this means you take the cut or you take a hike. Teachers are fortunate enough (at least the permanent ones that make up the majority) are in a very unique situation were they're almost guaranteed to _never_ lose their job regardless of their performance.

Why this has to be repeated endlessly is beyond me.

Powerhouse

marienbad wrote: »

1) Let me ask you a few questions - how many many teachers were fired last year ? In the last 10 years ? in the last 20? That is an incredible amount of dead wood to be carrying decade after decade and rising throught the pay grades as they go. They are often the highest paid and do the least work and complain the most.

2) Until the ''good'' teachers stop the all for one and one for all attitude of their unions and accept a system of proper reward and remuneration based on merit and performance the cuts will be made elsewhere. Unfortunately they will fall of those most recently qualified and that have least union protection.

1) Hang on a moment. Can you quantify this "incredible amount of dead wood"? It seems a rather fantastic term to use without being more specific, and you ask the questions rhetorically as if we are all privy to these figures already. Or is it just a giant cliched assumption?

2) Accept? I didn't know there was an offer out there. Can you give is details of what has been offered? What sort of money differential is involved? How is performance to be measured under these proposals?
And finally, in an over-subscribed business, what incentive is there for the government to start paying more to people who do a job "well". What happened to "There...Is...No...Money."?

Powerhouse

ntlbell wrote: »

Why this has to be repeated endlessly is beyond me.

Because you can't think of anything new or original to say?

Feeona

marienbad wrote: »

But what exactly is your issue ?

I think there is plenty to worry about if I can't pay my bills. This is my issue and I don't understand why you can't see that not being able to pay my bills is an issue for me, or anyone who has had a threat of pay cuts. Why do you feel the need to draw my opinion on other matters when I simply said I'm worried about pay cuts?

Feeona

ntlbell wrote: »

Your personal experience are not really relevant here.

Yes it is.

ntlbell

Powerhouse wrote: »

Because you can't think of anything new or original to say?

#
or a section of the most apparently highly educated people in the country who we in trust our family to be thought with can't grasp a very basic economic fact.

You're right, very worrying.

Feeona

Powerhouse wrote: »

Because you can't think of anything new or original to say?

I think you've hit the nail on the head.

Powerhouse

marienbad wrote: »

People are losing their jobs and on short time left right and centre, why do you think teachers are immune ?

The real question is why do you think they are immune? Most others here probably know teachers who have lost or are about to lose their jobs. Big numbers have lost their jobs in recent years - you just don't have a big dramatic announcement when it happens as you would have with the local factory. Funny that. These are the silent unemployed. In the same way the guy who'll be interviewed at some foreign employment fair will be a 'brickie' or a 'sparkie', not the teacher who has to emigrate.

And that's not even getting to the teachers who cannot get jobs in the first place. The whole situation wouldn't quite be my idea of immunity to unemployment. But that's the fundamental problem with this discussion - the misunderstanding and misrepresentation of reality.

ntlbell

Feeona wrote: »

Yes it is.

Then so is mine

One of my friends is a secondary school teacher.

She claims to have one of the handiest numbers going, while she's been paid by the state she states she's in spain teaching english getting paid by another school. a large number of other teachers join her for 3 months of the summer.

These particular group pay no tax.

Surely this is a small minority group who do this and it's not all teachers?

which would lead my personal experience and hear say to have no baring on this thread?

right?

Powerhouse

ntlbell wrote: »

#
or a section of the most apparently highly educated people in the country who we in trust our family to be thought with can't grasp a very basic economic fact.

You're right, very worrying.

Never mind your "apparently" - I've never felt more highly educated than I do reading the above!

ntlbell

Powerhouse wrote: »

Never mind your "apparently" - I've never felt more highly educated than I do reading the above!

I'm not sure what you're trying to suggest here?

That my English teacher failed me? or ?

Can you address the points made and stop making personal insults towards me?

Cheers

marienbad

Powerhouse wrote: »

1) Hang on a moment. Can you quantify this "incredible amount of dead wood"? It seems a rather fantastic term to use without being more specific, and you ask the questions rhetorically as if we are all privy to these figures already. Or is it just a giant cliched assumption?

2) Accept? I didn't know there was an offer out there. Can you give is details of what has been offered? What sort of money differential is involved? How is performance to be measured under these proposals?
And finally, in an over-subscribed business, what incentive is there for the government to start paying more to people who do a job "well". What happened to "There...Is...No...Money."?

Teachers just are'nt fired, you know that. Then you have a remuneration package unrelated to performance. This causes an issues where people who hate or dislike their jobs and underperform cannot be fired . This building up year after year will destroy morale within the profession more than anything and is at a huge cost.

Any teacher will tell you that privately ,particularly the younger teachers, but it is the elephant in the room in these type of discussions.

There is no offer out there - there is no more money to make any offers, just more cuts I am afraid. There were many opportunities for a proper system of reward and remuneration down through the years but the unions never looked at or cared for the bigger picture , so we are where we are

marienbad

Powerhouse wrote: »

The real question is why do you think they are immune? Most others here probably know teachers who have lost or are about to lose their jobs. Big numbers have lost their jobs in recent years - you just don't have a big dramatic announcement when it happens as you would have with the local factory. Funny that. These are the silent unemployed. In the same way the guy who'll be interviewed at some foreign employment fair will be a 'brickie' or a 'sparkie', not the teacher who has to emigrate.

And that's not even getting to the teachers who cannot get jobs in the first place. The whole situation wouldn't quite be my idea of immunity to unemployment. But that's the fundamental problem with this discussion - the misunderstanding and misrepresentation of reality.

Where did I say teachers are immune- do you read people's posts ?

marienbad

Powerhouse wrote: »

Never mind your "apparently" - I've never felt more highly educated than I do reading the above!

I would'nt be so smug if I were you, chances are he was educated by some of your colleagues.

Reminds me of a comment I saw elsewhere that when you start commenting on the spelling and grammer you have lost the argument.

chippers

doc_17 wrote: »

As for the younger teachers getting screwed? Well, I was at a union meeting a month ago and there wasn't one member there under 30. And it wasn't the unions who cut their pay. It was the government.

A huge amount of young teachers have had to emigrate, including myself. I'm sorry if I couldn't attend the Union meeting to voice my opinion.

Feeona

Powerhouse wrote: »

Never mind your "apparently" - I've never felt more highly educated than I do reading the above!

I needed that laugh good on you!

yosser hughes

Feeona wrote: »

I heard some of the INTO conference in Killarney. Quinn made a speech beseeching the members of the teaching profession to help him make his cuts. The response from the audience wasn't favourable as you could guess. He has some neck asking for help when just last week he circulated a press release about teachers 'allowances and perks', giving begrudgers more to moan about as if they needed an excuse!

Feeona wrote: »

I needed that laugh good on you!

Minister Quinn is the one signing the cheques Feeona. This country is borrowing money to pay for public services, included in that are salaries for teachers.

Nice attiude by a teacher laughing at a person's poor spelling.

It's your union you should be complaining about Feeona. They are protecting their established members at YOUR and the taxpayers expense.

marienbad

Feeona wrote: »

I needed that laugh good on you!

a case of brothers in arms was it ?

Feeona

yosser hughes wrote: »

Nice attiude by a teacher laughing at a person's poor spelling.

Ah lighten up

EDIT : Same to you marienbad

marienbad

Feeona wrote: »

Ah lighten up

EDIT : Same to you marienbad

Yeah right, why answer a point when ye can enjoy a sneer, while I am lightening up you might try growing up .

Feeona

marienbad wrote: »

Yeah right, why answer a point when ye can enjoy a sneer, while I am lightening up you might try growing up .

I think it's good to laugh in these times, not sneering at all

ntlbell

Feeona wrote: »

I think it's good to laugh in these times, not sneering at all

Absoloutley, as the cuts continue to be imposed and the reality of the situation we find ourselves in more and more teachers will hopefully laugh and see the funny side to it.

Feeona

ntlbell wrote: »

Absoloutley, as the cuts continue to be imposed and the reality of the situation we find ourselves in more and more teachers will hopefully laugh and see the funny side to it.

See I knew we'd get to the crux of why you're contributing to this thread. You're delighted teachers are getting pay cuts. You might save yourself a lot of hassle the next time if you just say that at the beginning.

About time you came clean :pac:

ntlbell

Feeona wrote: »

See I knew we'd get to the crux of why you're contributing to this thread. You're delighted teachers are getting pay cuts. You might save yourself a lot of hassle the next time if you just say that at the beginning.

About time you came clean :pac:

I don't think I ever stated any other stance than they're vastly overpaid for the hours they do? I made that very clear.

But I feel a lot better about it now it seems some of them have a sense of humor about it.

Feeona

ntlbell wrote: »

But I feel a lot better about it now it seems some of them have a sense of humor about it.

:eek: You've said something positive about teachers :eek::eek:.

This post should be stickied stat!!