Croke Park hours

ethical

Just wondering what people think of this! One day next week we are expected to stay behind for 3 hours after school,yes THREE hours from 4 'til 7,we have a full teaching day before and the same the day after after.Some people think this is excessive as we usually do 1 or two hours except when we have a parent teacher meeting which can go on for 3 hrs or 3 hrs+.The meeting next week is a sort of workshop to sort out jobs for posts......there may be a 'blue flu' the following day!!!!

evolving_doors

ethical wrote: »

Just wondering what people think of this! One day next week we are expected to stay behind for 3 hours after school,yes THREE hours from 4 'til 7,we have a full teaching day before and the same the day after after.Some people think this is excessive as we usually do 1 or two hours except when we have a parent teacher meeting which can go on for 3 hrs or 3 hrs+.The meeting next week is a sort of workshop to sort out jobs for posts......there may be a 'blue flu' the following day!!!!

Ya tis a sham alright, I'm sure the country will save loads of money from it... I wonder could croke park be done by means of logging on to a discussion forum for the 3 hours!!

Actually ye must have all agreed to this going by the guidelines on the ASTI website Here

"Q. In relation to 'an agreement of school management and a consensus amongst the staff' on the use of the 33 hours outside the 167 days, how will a 'consensus' or 'general agreement' or 'general support' among staff be determined?

A. School management must consult with staff about the use of the 33 hours. It is envisaged that a meeting of all teachers and the school management would meet to discuss the calendar prior to the commencement of the new school year (for example in May of the previous school year). This planning meeting could also be used to determine whether or not there was consensus to use any of these hours in blocks of more than two hours or outside the 167 days.

Q. Could school management alone decide to schedule the additional hours outside the 167 days?

A. No."

As a matter of interest, check out how many of the teachers not on full hours are 'expected' to turn up also...

mikemac1

ethical wrote: »

Just wondering what people think of this! One day next week we are expected to stay behind for 3 hours after school,yes THREE hours from 4 'til 7,we have a full teaching day before and the same the day after after.

A full three hours?
Shocking, your union let you down


You will have a heart attack when you learn most workers get under 25 days annual leave per year

Pick your battles OP, 3 hours is not worth a blu flu, the media will hammer you for it

Powerhouse

ethical wrote: »

Just wondering what people think of this! One day next week we are expected to stay behind for 3 hours after school,yes THREE hours from 4 'til 7,we have a full teaching day before and the same the day after after.Some people think this is excessive as we usually do 1 or two hours except when we have a parent teacher meeting which can go on for 3 hrs or 3 hrs+.The meeting next week is a sort of workshop to sort out jobs for posts......there may be a 'blue flu' the following day!!!!

Personally, I'd be happier with this than three meaningless one-hour get-togethers after school on different days. At least it's helping to the get those nonsensical hours out of the way.

whiteandlight

They drive me absolutely nuts. What beurocratic idiot insisted that all staff must participate in the same hour? I teach 5th year music every Thursday voluntarily outside school hours. Along with the other maths teachers I help at maths club every Tuesday evening. I'm already teaching two extra hours a week but oh no, these don't count for Croke park because it doesn't involve all staff? Instead I have to cancel music or maths club gets called off every time there is a clash with one of these hours. And I'm told it is expressly forbidden to use these hours for teaching or interacting with students? Why the hell not? Maybe if you really want us doing more admin make it half and half but why exactly did we need 33 extra hours of full staff meeting/training?!


Edit: Deep breath. Rant over-my apologies!

Miss Lockhart

As was said, staff are supposed to discuss and agree to how the hours are used. If your staff agreed to this then you should just get on with it. Talking about "blue flu" just comes across as petty and unprofessional. I think a workshop on post duties seems worthile.

If your staff didn't get to discuss and agree to how the hours are used then you should get on to the union and sort it out.

whiteandlight

I will point out of course that despite my rant I in no way advocate a blue flu-that's ridiculous! We are professionals after all and should act like it.

rainbowtrout

ethical wrote: »

Just wondering what people think of this! One day next week we are expected to stay behind for 3 hours after school,yes THREE hours from 4 'til 7,we have a full teaching day before and the same the day after after.Some people think this is excessive as we usually do 1 or two hours except when we have a parent teacher meeting which can go on for 3 hrs or 3 hrs+.The meeting next week is a sort of workshop to sort out jobs for posts......there may be a 'blue flu' the following day!!!!

Did your staff agree to this or not? If you did you have no cause for complaint.

We did two 3 hour sessions for two days after school on the first week back to school just to get them out of the way.

Inspector Coptoor

Build a bridge OP.

Just get on with it.

If you think that's bad, wait til Croke Park 2, or even Budget 2015, there's a lot more hardship coming than three hours.

Powerhouse

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

If you think that's bad, wait til Croke Park 2, or even Budget 2015, there's a lot more hardship coming than three hours.

Anyone who comments critically on remarks like these always leaves themselves open to the old 'do you not realise the mess we're in' ripostes, but in fairness it's easy to say that the budget after the next one will be worse than ever as you'll never be called to account on it if it turns out differently.

We had people on this forum confidently telling us during 2010 and again in 2011 that we could have paycuts before the end of that year, (as if they personally had a hot-line to the one who knows) never mind the end of the CP agreement. They never did come back and withdraw or acknowledge the inaccuracy of their predictions.

Let's wait and see what the future brings rather than jumping ahead and embracing it and creating a self-fulfilling prophecy. Croke Park hours being extended to 66 hours rather than 33 will achieve nothing positive - won't save a penny, and will eat into valuable time when teachers could be doing stuff that genuinely needs to be done rather than having meetings for meetings' sake. Let us be wary of encouraging the current fetish for "change" i.e. been seen to be doing something/anything in a given situation notwithstanding the pointlessness of it all.

Inspector Coptoor

Powerhouse wrote: »

Anyone who comments critically on remarks like these always leaves themselves open to the old 'do you not realise the mess we're in' ripostes, but in fairness it's easy to say that the budget after the next one will be worse than ever as you'll never be called to account on it if it turns out differently.

We had people on this forum confidently telling us during 2010 and again in 2011 that we could have paycuts before the end of that year, (as if they personally had a hot-line to the one who knows) never mind the end of the CP agreement. They never did come back and withdraw or acknowledge the inaccuracy of their predictions.

Let's wait and see what the future brings rather than jumping ahead and embracing it and creating a self-fulfilling prophecy. Croke Park hours being extended to 66 hours rather than 33 will achieve nothing positive - won't save a penny, and will eat into valuable time when teachers could be doing stuff that genuinely needs to be done rather than having meetings for meetings' sake. Let us be wary of encouraging the current fetish for "change" i.e. been seen to be doing something/anything in a given situation notwithstanding the pointlessness of it all.

I agree with your points but I'm not naive enough to think that things aren't going to change.

We are not in charge of our destiny in terms of conditions and or pay & the unions pander to the pre 2004 brigade.

bdoo

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

I agree with your points but I'm not naive enough to think that things aren't going to change.

We are not in charge of our destiny in terms of conditions and or pay & the unions pander to the pre 2004 brigade.

Pre 2004? You mean pre 2011?

Pander? Hardly. Go to some branch meetings with a group of new teachers and start setting the agenda for the union rather than whining about it here.

chippers

Here we go again....

Side Show Bob

ethical wrote: »

Just wondering what people think of this! One day next week we are expected to stay behind for 3 hours after school,yes THREE hours from 4 'til 7,we have a full teaching day before and the same the day after after.Some people think this is excessive as we usually do 1 or two hours except when we have a parent teacher meeting which can go on for 3 hrs or 3 hrs+.The meeting next week is a sort of workshop to sort out jobs for posts......there may be a 'blue flu' the following day!!!!

Dead right, high time the Croke Park agreement is abandoned!!!

seavill

Lets not go down the old v new teachers debate all over again.

As people have said CP hours are supposed to be done in consultation with the staff. Were the division of these hours discussed at the last staff meeting last year. Were they discussed this year at all.

If no is the answer to both then your union rep needs to approach the principal if he has the consensus of the staff to do so.

If it is only a small minority of the staff that has an issue things could get more complicated however this is clearly an internal matter.

As you said yourself we end up doing over 3 hours with parent teacher meetings so what's the difference here its still only 3 hours. Yes its not pleasant after a full day with another full day the next day but if it was a PT meeting you would do it.

Calling in sick the next day is certainly not an option.

Your staff need to come together figure out what was decided originally if anything. If nothing was decided in consultation then union rep needs to do their job. If it was agreed you don't have to like it but you do have to do it.

ethical

Thanks for all your interesting replies.Personally I've not had a day off (personal,illness or any other sort of leave) in the last 5 years and I was playing devils advocate regarding the 'blue flu',but as some posters say the Croke Park hours annoy me as I have to rearrange extra curricular activities on a regular basis.....and who looses out? The children do, which is not fair.

rainbowtrout

ethical wrote: »

Thanks for all your interesting replies.Personally I've not had a day off (personal,illness or any other sort of leave) in the last 5 years and I was playing devils advocate regarding the 'blue flu',but as some posters say the Croke Park hours annoy me as I have to rearrange extra curricular activities on a regular basis.....and who looses out? The children do, which is not fair.

Actually that's not very fair. You led people to believe here that members of your staff were going to call in sick to avoid doing Croke Park hours when in reality you're just making it up. Don't expect posters to be so sympathetic the next time you post about a problem in your staff room. People will just think you're crying wolf again.

It's this kind of crap that gives teachers a bad name, all one person (non teacher, non public service) has to do is read your initial post and they're off to After Hours saying 'There's a teacher saying that his whole staff is gonna call in sick tomorrow because they don't want to do the hours they've agreed to do under Croke Park. Teachers and all other PS workers make me sick, they don't know how good they've got it on their 60k a year permanent pensionable jobs'.


Your post has really pissed me off.


On your other point: of course it disrupts extra curricular activities, you do have an alternative, do them before school. Get everyone to come at 7 am and do two hours before school. I'm sure they'd love you for that.

Inspector Coptoor

bdoo wrote: »

Pre 2004? You mean pre 2011?

Pander? Hardly. Go to some branch meetings with a group of new teachers and start setting the agenda for the union rather than whining about it here.

No, I mean pre 2004.
There are three distinct types of teacher out there right now.

Pre 2004
2004-2011
Post 2011

Pre 2004 have far and away the best pay & conditions, with post 2011 bringing up the rear.

Most teachers who started pre 2004 have the good pension, full hours & are (for the most part) impossible to fire

All that is beside the original point.

I agree with rainbow trout, the OP misled us on purpose.

solerina

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

No, I mean pre 2004.
There are three distinct types of teacher out there right now.

Pre 2004
2004-2011
Post 2011

Pre 2004 have far and away the best pay & conditions, with post 2011 bringing up the rear.

Most teachers who started pre 2004 have the good pension, full hours & are (for the most part) impossible to fire

All that is beside the original point.

I agree with rainbow trout, the OP misled us on purpose.

Just out of interest isnt there a 4th group...Pre 1995 which are way better off again !!!