Teachers booing and heckling like children?

limnam

I fully understand temperatures are running a little high and there's a lot of anger out there but it's not the first time that the media has shown teachers shouting,heckling and booing at a minister.

Considering that at these talks they will almost always be played on the radio and news do you think teachers etc should have more respect to speakers at talks instead of shouting out and interrupting people while as they speak and often acting like the very kids they teach. what do they hope to gain by booing a speaker? should they be showing a better example to our kids?

Moody_mona

I wouldn't heckle. I find that disrespectful. But if I was leading by an example and had a choice between standing up for myself by shouting or sitting back and taking some cutting your pay and conditions, I would stand up every time.

mathepac

limnam wrote: »

... should they be showing a better example to our kids?

I dunno. I didn't send any of my children to school primarily to learn social skills, manners and decorum, we instlled those at home by practice and social intercourse. Evidently the teachers on the telly didn't have parents like us.

evolving_doors

Well aside from the rightness or wrongness of it, it was the first piece of commentary on the teacher conferences in most of the news bullitins...

From time to time our school invites in speakers that students might not be endeared to... God help them if they bood or heckled...

Teachers can get their say at polling booths, union votes or organised demonstration. Heckling just distracts from the issues, and makes teachers look silly. Same story in the Dail, rory quinn is orobably rubbing his hands with glee at the opening news statements.

sitstill

I have to agree with what people here are saying. We would never accept such behaviour from kids in our classrooms.

lily09

i attended the into conference in cork and can honestly say the heckling was not as bad as the media reported. the crowd listened in silence for 80-90% of the speech and what noise was there was only shock at some of the contents of the speech. at one point someone sitting near be began slow clapping and everyone turned around and told them to cut it out.
now this was my first meeting and honestly was dreading the speech as i do not agree with any heckling or shouting. i think its disrespectful and only deflects from real issues. on the red cards held up were a list of the cuts to education in the past few years and made for interesting reading.
ruairi to give him his credit did not seem fazed and i heard a soundbite afterwards that he had seen much worse! his speech was informative in parts but veered towards very condescending in othets.

lily09

dp

derb12

In fairness, RTE did say that the INTO were mostly quiet and reasonably respectful but I'd say that joe public did not pick up on that nuance.

However, I'm just sickened at the massive own-goal scored by the ASTI hecklers this evening. I know RQ is a minister on a big salary bla bla bla, but he is still a human being who was invited by an organisation to speak at their conference. I felt deeply uncomfortable watching and listening to the reception he got.

I'd love to know what proportion of the attendees behaved this way. How could those hecklers think that that kind of behaviour helps the cause of teachers in general. Just look at the liveline thread on the radio board for a cross section of how the public view this kind of carry on.

Trotter

The teachers could have sat there today like a silent order and the media would still have found an angle to slate us.

doc_17

If he is standing up and lauding the introduction of things like project maths, teachers correcting their own students' work as successes then he deserves a bit of flak to be honest.

I look forward to welcoming him tomorrow here in Galway

tayto lover

The teachers used the conference to voice their dissatisfaction.
Nothing wrong with that.

As for heckling if you want to see that at it's best just visit the Dail.

Inspector Coptoor

They should have day in absolute silence with everyone holding up a red card at him.

Heckling, like striking, will get us nowhere

evolving_doors

Why invite a guy to something and then not let him speek?

Maybe he should have taken questions afterwards, even if they were submitted pre conference!

mathepac

derb12 wrote: »

... but he is still a human being who was invited by an organisation to speak at their conference. I felt deeply uncomfortable watching and listening to the reception he got....

This is the bit that gets on my goat. RQ attended as a Minister representing the Government and as an invited guest. So he blew his own trumpet (and that of his Government) much to the chagrin of a couple of posters - quelle surpise!

As an invited guest he's surely entitled to those courtesies anyone would extend to an invited guest in their own homes and he is entitled to the dignity that should be afforded his office, certainly at the formal parts of the conference. If he chooses to hang out in the bar and get down with the homies, well sin sceal eile.

An unedifying spectacle. Sympathy for or empathy with the delegates, nil.

jonseyblub

Okay
So I was actually at the conference and here are he FACTS:

1. When he was introduced there was absolute silence.

2. He then proceeded for 10 minutes or so to totally avoid the main topics of the day i.e croke park 2 and junior cert reform. At that stage out of frustration a couple of people did heckle asking him to address the issues.

3. He hen proceeded to talk about the "successes" of the project maths course i.e kids love it and more are now talking HL at leaving cert. Bear in mind we had a contributor this morning that informed us that he IMTA had a meeting with his officials last week with the genuine concerns Maths teachers have with the course and were basically told to get in with it and that there will be no change.
I don't know was there lots of maths teachers in he room or not but those comments basically made a lot of people mad and that's when it started getting noisy.

4. He then proceeded to big up the new junior cert programme. Again bear in mind that the whole day today was basically just a discussion based on the survey most teachers in the country contributed to regarding the implementation of this new course.
I have to say I generally am quite easy going and passive but when I heard the truth about how Quinn basically went against the NCCA' s own recommendations regarding JC reform to basically just save money i was very annoyed so you imagine how the more radical members were feeling. So, when he started to bull**** on about how it's for the benefit of the students it was like a red rag to a bull. That's when people started to walk out.


It's very easy to say people shouldn't have heckled or walked out but when you have the facts in front of you and then Quinn blatantly lies to 500 people you are bound to have a few dissenters. This man will be responsible for trying to push through the biggest reform of the junior cycle without consulting the people who are going to be getting the abuse when it's shown for what it is.

limnam

I wasn't at the conference so I only know of what he said based on feedback from yourself and others who were in attendance.
I fully understand that people were not happy with what he had to say and I'm all for teachers to have a forum where they can give feedback on how they feel about it.


For example in my own job if the equivalent of RQ was invited to speak and I boo'd and heckled like that, it's very likely I wouldn't have a job to go to afterwards.
While listening to the radio and reading forums the language used is also very childish. terms like *picking on us* where teachers come off sounding like a few kids in the play ground. I just don't think it's a great example for the students to see or hear.

Powerhouse

derb12 wrote: »

However, I'm just sickened at the massive own-goal scored by the ASTI hecklers this evening. I know RQ is a minister on a big salary bla bla bla, but he is still a human being who was invited by an organisation to speak at their conference. I felt deeply uncomfortable watching and listening to the reception he got.

Massive own-goal? Massive...seriously? What on earth is going to be the end result of this own-goal? The government will retaliate and cut our pay and conditions....hang on a minute...that's happening anyway isn't it?

One of the slyest of all tactics to silence people is 'you know you should be above this don't you?' I don't buy it for a minute. Quinn has the floor to speak unchallenged about education matters for the other 364 days of the year, and as a professional politician I'm sure has a suitably developed epidermus anyway.

I wouldn't by nature be a heckler or support it but I wouldn't support those who are on here heckling the hecklers from the safety of the sidelines either. I see little difference between the two to be honest.

Powerhouse

limnam wrote: »

1) For example in my own job if the equivalent of RQ was invited to speak and I boo'd and heckled like that, it's very likely I wouldn't have a job to go to afterwards.

2) While listening to the radio and reading forums the language used is also very childish. terms like *picking on us* where teachers come off sounding like a few kids in the play ground. I just don't think it's a great example for the students to see or hear.

1) Possibly true, but I can't see the relevance. The hecklers were attending a union conference. They were not in work.

2) If it's any consolation, my students certainly do not mould themselves in my likeness. I don't imagine the teacher conference will have created a new generation of hecklers, whatever the bleeding hearts think briefly before moving onto the next news item to shock/offend them.

the great purveyor of mediocrity

anti-charter inflammatory rant snipped

implausible

the great purveyor of mediocrity wrote: »

That display today really was something but I would not have expected anything else from them. I seem to remember them doing this pretty regularly, if not most years in the past.
I find them collectively to be a self-centered, selfish, deluded bunch of people who year after year masquerade their concern for the "children", when really their only concern is themselves and their money.
The current Minister has inherited an Educational Department that belongs to a bankrupt Nation. I do not envy him or any of the current Government despite their outrageous pay. Perhaps the teachers that voted a maniacal Fianna Fail Government for three administrations in a row should have a look at themselves and their own accountability.

Yup, don't give a sh*t about the kids, that's us, that's how we get through every day ignoring the pesky squirts and their stoopid education. And you've got us in a nutshell there too - we single-handedly voted in FF. :rolleyes:

Anyhow, good to hear from people who were there, I wasn't expecting a great reaction to RQ, but was taken aback by the descriptions in the media. The red card thing was not explained on any reports I heard today.

You always hear about the TUI being the most radical union, so I'll be interested to see how we conduct ourselves tomorrow, especially considering that we've already voted.

evolving_doors

jonseyblub wrote: »

Okay
So I was actually at the conference and here are he FACTS:

Cheers for that order of events, it certainly didn't come across like that listening to the news though!

It makes me wonder was it done as a ploy by RQ! It seems as if the two teaching related topics most likely to incite heckling i.e. project maths and JC reform were lost in the news headlines as all the talk these days is about CP2.

in terms of the battle for public sentiment in this case its RQ= 1 teachers = nill

lily09

Armelodie wrote: »

Cheers for that order of events, it certainly didn't come across like that listening to the news though!

It makes me wonder was it done as a ploy by RQ! It seems as if the two teaching related topics most likely to incite heckling i.e. project maths and JC reform were lost in the news headlines as all the talk these days is about CP2.

in terms of the battle for public sentiment in this case its RQ= 1 teachers = nill

agree with this totally at the into conference the outrage was when he mentioned Sse ( school self evaluation) , he literally looked up and smirked, he knew what the reaction would be to this.
look the fact is the media had the story prepared already, the way it was portrayed was way worse than the actuality. the red cards were not given out by the into head office but by members. many posters here and others fixate on this all being about pay however the raft of new measures such as sse, droichead, numeracy and literacy strategy, jobbridge etc incited far more anger

Powerhouse

Armelodie wrote: »

in terms of the battle for public sentiment in this case its RQ= 1 teachers = nil

With respect, it might be a little naive to assume that public sentiment is going to come into this. Teachers will reject CP2 and it'll happen anyway, in the same way that Post-Primary teacher unions rejected CP1 and it happened anyway.

gerk13

One can only be tested so much and I think that is why people are being pushed to the point of heckling as it is described here.

If your livelihood was constantly being threatened and someone was rubbing your nose in it would you find it blissfully easy to sit and listen?

Teachers are human believe it or not and if they end up blurting something out in pure frustration being taunted with untruths then that may well happen.

If your livelihood was being threatened and you are willing to have no emotional reaction and urge to defend yourself then that is indeed your right as a human being also.

If a teacher was heckling the minister at a talk about the lack of resources for autistic children in schools would this be okay? Because this has happened too but you won't get that played on the radio.
People will feel the need to vent when something they are passionate about is threatened whether its about the children's needs at school or their own children's needs or the mortgage that needs to be paid what does it matter.

Lord TSC

Armelodie wrote: »

in terms of the battle for public sentiment in this case its RQ= 1 teachers = nill

You think it's only 1-0?

I don't mean to rant (which means I am about to unfortunately), but it strikes me that a lot of teachers need to wake up to the reality that the public sentiment is already well against teachers, and no amount of silent "dignified" protests are going to change that. Post on After Hours or check the letters and comments on the websites of newspapers, and you'll find that there's already a very vocal majority of the public who are firmly set against teachers; after all, aren't we just lazy, selfish "bad" teachers who walk in at 9, spew whatever random stuff comes into our head first and then clock off at 4, with lovely long holidays where we do nothing but laugh at the peasants below us while we burn our crazy wages.

The public sympathy card is one that we have long since lost the ability to play with the government, and there should only be two factors now in deciding future forms of protest; the needs of the student and the conditions of the profession. It really frustrates me to hear people object to teachers vocalizing their protestations, but then wondering why the government are so quick to slash away at conditions for teachers.

The government have already won the public sentiment fight. They did it years ago. Worse, some teachers haven't even realized that and are still trying to fight that battle, when it's time to move on to a different tactic. I won't advocate strikes again (I've made my case and it's clear alot of teachers refuse to even consider it, so be it), but we as teachers now need to make it clear, to government AND the public, that we won't be shoved round and we don't care if it's not liked; it's for the good of the student and the profession, even if they don't want to acknowledge that. And if that means booing a man who seems determined to erode the profession moreso, then so be it and fair play.

doc_17

The title of this thread is ridiculous

doc_17

Minister got a small round of applause here at TUI.

implausible

Watching online here now, jaysus RQ loves a bit of repetition. There's no sound in the background at all. Is this the case?

doc_17

Silence all round.

doc_17

Silence all round so far

teacherhead

I think we did right today, right today. Showed him respect or was it contempt. Either way he cant have felt too comfortable.

Powerhouse

Reading The Irish Times today certainly proved people correct in that the heckling was the main headline. Nauseating too to have some students criticising teachers for their 'behaviour' when they know well the type of twats we have to deal with at times in the classroom.

Anyway, I can only come to the conclusion that the journalists covering these conferences simply don't understand the issues. In fairness it is difficult to have a grasp of all matters as a journalist and the teacher conferences are just once a year so it's hardly worth grappling with it. But like the letter-writers they simply don't get the effects of cutbacks in school, on middle-management, on those with learning issues, because they are simply not there on the ground in schools. Debate is very poorly informed in relation to education.

Had to laugh at Ruairí Quinn when he admitted that the Junior Cert changes was a 'political decision' before rabbitting on about elections. Why not make it an educational decision instead? Again, if only journalists would stop encouraging these people by writing about their 'legacy'...

Mardy Bum

Powerhouse wrote: »

Reading The Irish Times today certainly proved people correct in that the heckling was the main headline. Nauseating too to have some students criticising teachers for their 'behaviour' when they know well the type of twats we have to deal with at times in the classroom.

Anyway, I can only come to the conclusion that the journalists covering these conferences simply don't understand the issues. In fairness it is difficult to have a grasp of all matters as a journalist and the teacher conferences are just once a year so it's hardly worth grappling with it. But like the letter-writers they simply don't get the effects of cutbacks in school, on middle-management, on those with learning issues, because they are simply not there on the ground in schools. Debate is very poorly informed in relation to education.

Had to laugh at Ruairí Quinn when he admitted that the Junior Cert changes was a 'political decision' before rabbitting on about elections. Why not make it an educational decision instead? Again, if only journalists would stop encouraging these people by writing about their 'legacy'...

The majority of journalist are more worried about constructing an on going narrative rather than communicating across actual issues.

implausible

Mardy Bum wrote: »

The majority of journalist are more worried about constructing an on going narrative rather than communicating across actual issues.

True. However, the unions could do with constructing their own narrative or handing one to them on a plate. Each union has its own complaints and agendas, so all that comes out of congress, to the layman, is a torrent of whinging on variety or complicated, unintelligible issue, from which journalists pick only the simplest and outrage worthy. If people knew that the new s/s arrangements proposes that their children will not be taught by a qualified sub for the first day of medical/bereavement etc leave and the implications of the new JC for their children in their local school, then I think that would be a different story. Those red cards could have been put to better use if they were carried by delegates at all 3 congresses with the same 3 or 4 messages on them. I also think that about 20 minutes of congress being given over to advising delegates on how to speak to the media (or even telling them not to) wouldn't go astray. The people who are broadcast often sound like they just rang Joe Duffy and only serve as fuel to the teacher-bashers.

All the public heard this week is about teachers whinging about pay and having to implement a new curriculum. There is no clear message from the unions emerging from congress. We are probably never going to win the PR battle, but some clear reasonable justification for our position would help.

jonseyblub

implausible wrote: »

All the public heard this week is about teachers whinging about pay and having to implement a new curriculum. There is no clear message from the unions emerging from congress. We are probably never going to win the PR battle, but some clear reasonable justification for our position would help.

In fairness, the journalists were sitting in the same conference room as me for the 3 days I was there. They listened to the same debate (yes debate not whining ) on the Junior Cert reform and the Croke Park 2 as i did. Very good points were made regarding conditions of young teachers, the disaster the new Junior cert will be and the problems associated with losing guidance counselors has had in schools. Yes the heckling and walk outs was bad PR but I reckon the press were never going to publish the truth anyway. Take for instance the TUI conference yesterday. The media talked more about the fact Quinn wasn't heckled than the points that the TUI president made in a 1 hour speech.

I think we can forget about the media giving us a fair platform. Its never going to happen

byhookorbycrook

http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnmaccarthy/5335215329/in/photostream Might be worth saving- the no. of hours Irish teachers actually teach, compared to other countries.

limnam

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnmaccarthy/5335215329/in/photostream Might be worth saving- the no. of hours Irish teachers actually teach, compared to other countries.

Are they in classroom hours? or the amount of hours that their contracted to work? do they include work which their paid outside of their normal wage for e.g. marking etc? it's not a very detailed graph. How does it break down between say an infant primary school teacher and a secondary science teacher etc?

Powerhouse

limnam wrote: »

Are they in classroom hours? or the amount of hours that their contracted to work? do they include work which their paid outside of their normal wage for e.g. marking etc? it's not a very detailed graph. How does it break down between say an infant primary school teacher and a secondary science teacher etc?

Clearly it will not include work such as marking which "their" paid for, simply because that is not standard work carried out by every teacher. In the same way that it will not include hours spent with students during Easter holidays (several teachers in my school did this) or after school. Neither I suspect does it include the teachers who have 8 or 10 hours per week work and earn little more than the dole in their 'permanent pensionable' jobs but still have to listen to all the uninformed horse manure trotted out by the angry minority at this time of year.

If you are looking for comparisons between Primary teachers of specific classes and teachers of specific subjects at Post-Primary level, I would imagine such a strange ad hoc comparison would require you to come up with custom-made graphs as they would seem to be irrelevant to any meaningful comparison others are likely to make. But I'm sure if you keep looking you'll find something outrageous and offensive.

limnam

Powerhouse wrote: »

If you are looking for comparisons between Primary teachers of specific classes and teachers of specific subjects at Post-Primary level, I would imagine such a strange ad hoc comparison would require you to come up with custom-made graphs as they would seem to be irrelevant to any meaningful comparison others are likely to make. But I'm sure if you keep looking you'll find something outrageous and offensive.

I'm looking for anything that's relevant. It looks like your explanation is clear that the picture doesn't give an accurate picture of anything at all. It's difficult to claim teachers work x when you just gave many examples were teachers may very well not be working anywhere near those hours. so who exactly does the graph represent?

Powerhouse

limnam wrote: »

so who exactly does the graph represent?

The graph represents the standard hours that teachers in different countries would work in the classroom. It is in fact very easy to claim that teachers work 'x' hours as that information would undoubtedly be in the public domain across the various countries.

RealJohn

limnam wrote: »

I'm looking for anything that's relevant. It looks like your explanation is clear that the picture doesn't give an accurate picture of anything at all. It's difficult to claim teachers work x when you just gave many examples were teachers may very well not be working anywhere near those hours. so who exactly does the graph represent?

It seems high based on my own rough calculations.
By my own calculations, a full time secondary teacher would be in class 735 hours on average and a primary teacher around 800 (I'm not sure how many hours per week a primary teacher is in class so that one is more approximate). Both of those figures are comfortably higher than england and the often lauded Finnish though.
The 900+ hours might be the time students spend in class and would be about right for a secondary school student I think.

Of course you can add at least 50% to that for most teachers when you take planning, preparation and marking into account but you knew that anyway.

limnam

Powerhouse wrote: »

The graph represents the standard hours that teachers in different countries would work in the classroom. It is in fact very easy to claim that teachers work 'x' hours as that information would undoubtedly be in the public domain across the various countries.

Ah, so we can say a primary school teacher who generally has "low infants" works the same amount of hours as secondary school teacher, regardless of the subject matter? So on that basis can I say teachers earn CIRCA 60,000kEURO and based on the hours working teachers are earning in excess of 65.00EURO an hour?

spurious

Some posts coming dangerously close to breaking the forum charter here.
Please only post factual examples, no hearsay and supposition, thanks.

RealJohn

limnam wrote: »

Ah, so we can say a primary school teacher who generally has "low infants" works the same amount of hours as secondary school teacher, regardless of the subject matter? So on that basis can I say teachers earn CIRCA 60,000kEURO and based on the hours working teachers are earning in excess of 65.00EURO an hour?

Where did you get €60million from?
Or even €60,000 for that matter?
And even if that was the case, are you saying €65 per hour in class or have you accounted for all the other work there too?

limnam

RealJohn wrote: »

Where did you get €60million from?
Or even €60,000 for that matter?
And even if that was the case, are you saying €65 per hour in class or have you accounted for all the other work there too?

Well in that picture from flickr that was posted by a mod. Seems to just bundle in hours of teachers time with no break down based on type of teacher type of school or subject. on that basis I'm asking if we can do the same for salaries? If the picture is only accounting for a specific criteria that no one here can answer, why would the same criteria have to apply to wages?

http://www.asti.ie/pay-and-conditions/pay/salary-scale/salary-scale-for-teachers-appointed-prior-to-january-2011/ seems to suggets just over 60k

RealJohn

You've given the entire pay scale there. How can you say that the typical teacher is on €60,000 just because some teachers are? With the various different scales at present, it's difficult to say what the typical teacher is on.

Regardless, I imagine the picture was posted to point out that while non-teachers in this country seem to think that teachers have very short working years, our class contact time is in no way below average by comparison to the rest of the EU so whatever the reason for it is, it seems to be in keeping with the conventional wisdom of the day and in fact (if the picture is to be trusted and in fairness, I'm not sure it can be), we spend more time in class than our nearest neighbours and also more time in class than teachers in Finland, a country which is often (misleadingly) touted as being one of the better educational systems in the world.

limnam

RealJohn wrote: »

You've given the entire pay scale there. How can you say that the typical teacher is on €60,000 just because some teachers are? With the various different scales at present, it's difficult to say what the typical teacher is on.

Regardless, I imagine the picture was posted to point out that while non-teachers in this country seem to think that teachers have very short working years, our class contact time is in no way below average by comparison to the rest of the EU so whatever the reason for it is, it seems to be in keeping with the conventional wisdom of the day and in fact (if the picture is to be trusted and in fairness, I'm not sure it can be), we spend more time in class than our nearest neighbours and also more time in class than teachers in Finland, a country which is often (misleadingly) touted as being one of the better educational systems in the world.

How can we say teachers work X amount of hours when it depends on so many different factors? If it's ok to bundle them together to work out their hours I don't see why it should be any different when quoting salaries. You can't have it both ways

Powerhouse

limnam wrote: »

Ah, so we can say a primary school teacher who generally has "low infants" works the same amount of hours as secondary school teacher, regardless of the subject matter? So on that basis can I say teachers earn CIRCA 60,000kEURO and based on the hours working teachers are earning in excess of 65.00EURO an hour?

So on that basis can I say teachers earn CIRCA 60,000kEURO

You can if you like, although there is the slight difficulty that the payscale for teachers at this stage runs from €30k to €53k and that's after 20+ years teaching. I'm not sure where you are plucking 'circa 60k' from on that spectrum. That's a figure beyond the wildest dreams of most aspiring teachers at this stage. With respect, it is clear you are not even vaguely conversant with the facts. You are probably another victim of sloppy journalism.

That said, €65 an hour+ seems reasonable. I had to pay a plumber €60 for just standing in my kitchen recently. Getting him to actually work was was extra!

RealJohn

limnam wrote: »

How can we say teachers work X amount of hours when it depends on so many different factors? If it's ok to bundle them together to work out their hours I don't see why it should be any different when quoting salaries. You can't have it both ways

We can say that teachers work X amount of hours because there is a set number of hours and a set number of days a full time teacher is expected to work. We can't do the same for pay because while the hours are set for all full time teachers, what they're being paid can be vastly different, depending on how long they've been teaching, what qualifications they have (and at what level) and thanks to the governmrnt's particularly despicable attempt to divide and conquer, what year they started teaching.

You attitude seems to be typical of the general attitude across the country - no idea what you're talking about but still feel that you're in a position to tell us how over-paid we are, how little we work and how easy we have it. Out of curiosity, what's your profession?

limnam

Powerhouse wrote: »

So on that basis can I say teachers earn CIRCA 60,000kEURO

You can if you like, although there is the slight difficulty that the payscale for teachers at this stage runs from €30k to €53k and that's after 20+ years teaching. I'm not sure where you are plucking 'circa 60k' from on that spectrum. That's a figure beyond the wildest dreams of most aspiring teachers at this stage. With respect, it is clear you are not even vaguely conversant with the facts. You are probably another victim of sloppy journalism.

That said, €65 an hour+ seems reasonable. I had to pay a plumber €60 for just standing in my kitchen recently. Getting him to actually work was was extra!

You're looking at a scale of teachers who joined from 2012 I assume or the scale from that year. there is a lot of teachers who are currently employed on much higher scales based on previous scales.

You should have got more quotes from plumbers but hear say on plumbers wages should probably be left for another thread. 65e an hour is reasonable? 8 times the minimum wage at a time when we're as good as bankrupt. At last I found something to be outraged by.

limnam

RealJohn wrote: »

We can say that teachers work X amount of hours because there is a set number of hours and a set number of days a full time teacher is expected to work. We can't do the same for pay because while the hours are set for all full time teachers, what they're being paid can be vastly different, depending on how long they've been teaching, what qualifications they have (and at what level) and thanks to the governmrnt's particularly despicable attempt to divide and conquer, what year they started teaching.

You attitude seems to be typical of the general attitude across the country - no idea what you're talking about but still feel that you're in a position to tell us how over-paid we are, how little we work and how easy we have it. Out of curiosity, what's your profession?

But the graphic doesn't break up the teachers into any groups. A primary school teacher does not have the same amount of class room time as a secondary school teacher. This is all ready established. Yet the graphic bundles them all together. My profession is not relevant, I do not draw a salary from the public purse.