Teachers pull yet another stroke

subpar

After months of tabling objections to the reform of the Junior Cert and teacher union reps claiming that their objections were all educational based and had nothing to do with money, the real price of their co operation is beginning to emerge.

It emerged today that secondary school teachers will receive between 12 and 13 days training in the next year in order to bring in the changes.

The cost of this " training" is massive. On current estimates there are approx 25,000 second level teachers , assume they each go on 12 days out of classroom training and are backfilled by substitute teachers at a cost of 200 euro per day--- then the cost to the taxpayer is 60 Million Euro

This is not only a financial scandal but yet another example of the" pay for change" attitude which is rife throughout the public service.

Compare this with what goes on in the private sector

---

do office workers get training to work a new software package on their pc ? no they are expected to learn on the job. Do bus drivers receive training to drive a new bus ? no because as professional bus drivers they are rightly expected to adapt to new equipment and changes in their working environment.

Shame on the teachers for exacting a toll on the Dept of Education for the introduction of long overdue reforms and shame on the Dept for caving in to their demands -- another 60 million hit on the exchequer .

aunt aggie

So it's the teachers fault that new syllabuses and methods of assessment are been introduced?

It's their fault that training is essential to ensuring the same level of consistency in continuous assessment tasks and results as we currently have in exam papers and exam results?? Saying nothing about planning, implementing and assessing new Modules that currently don't exist in the JC..

And it's their fault that a substitute has to be employed? Because they have to attend what will be mandatory training..

It has nothing to do with the Dept of Ed pushing through a new Junior Cert very few teachers agree with, without any consideration for the costs involved. But surely they'd think to spend that money on improving infrastructure in schools, or supplying more SNAs, or reducing class numbers which can be as high as 34 students to one teacher. You're probably right. Let's just blame the teachers for everything that's wrong with our economy!!

nice_guy80

Teachers need to be retrained for a new syllabus.
when can they do this if not on 'release days'?

this happened back in 1999-2000 when the new primary school syllabus was introduced (badly in need of updating)

there are a lot of teachers who will need retraining
I remember reading somewhere that internationally Irish teachers receive the least amount of inservice training in the OECD countries

Apparently it's more than that: it's up to 16 days in-service days, and 22 hours of less contact time with students (per teacher) over the academic year.

http://www.education.ie/en/Press-Events/Press-Releases/2015-Press-Releases/PR15-14-07.html#sthash.peDDiC0V.dpuf

An extensive CPD programme for teachers, which will provide up to 16 in-service days for the typical teacher during the course of implementation of the new programme is in place. Teachers will be released from school to complete this in-service training and substitute teachers will be employed to replace them.
In addition the new agreement on resources will see full-time teachers spending 22 hours of professional time a year on aspects of Junior Cycle implementation.

The Department says that they have chosen this route of reduced class time because teachers are "already fully deployed" and need this professional time.

But teachers are not necessarily deployed at all during the Summer months. Instead of three months holiday, why aren't they retrained and given professional development over part of the summer instead?

I'm not interested in teacher-bashing, but it's not good enough, claiming that any employees are operating at maximum capacity when they're on paid holiday for three months. Enough.

nice_guy80

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Apparently it's more than that: it's up to 16 days in-service days, and 22 hours of less contact time with students (per teacher) over the academic year.

http://www.education.ie/en/Press-Events/Press-Releases/2015-Press-Releases/PR15-14-07.html#sthash.peDDiC0V.dpuf


The Department says that they have chosen this route of reduced class time because teachers are "already fully deployed" and need this professional time.

But teachers are not necessarily deployed at all during the Summer months. Instead of three months holiday, why aren't they retrained and given professional development over part of the summer instead?

I'm not interested in teacher-bashing, but it's not good enough, claiming that any employees are operating at maximum capacity when they're on paid holiday for three months. Enough.

would a company expect its staff to do training during their holidays?

Gaillimh1976

nice_guy80 wrote: »

would a company expect its staff to do training during their holidays?

If they only work 180 days a year then YES !!!

NewCorkLad

subpar wrote: »

After months of tabling objections to the reform of the Junior Cert and teacher union reps claiming that their objections were all educational based and had nothing to do with money, the real price of their co operation is beginning to emerge.

It emerged today that secondary school teachers will receive between 12 and 13 days training in the next year in order to bring in the changes.

The cost of this " training" is massive. On current estimates there are approx 25,000 second level teachers , assume they each go on 12 days out of classroom training and are backfilled by substitute teachers at a cost of 200 euro per day--- then the cost to the taxpayer is 60 Million Euro

This is not only a financial scandal but yet another example of the" pay for change" attitude which is rife throughout the public service.

Compare this with what goes on in the private sector

---

do office workers get training to work a new software package on their pc ? no they are expected to learn on the job. Do bus drivers receive training to drive a new bus ? no because as professional bus drivers they are rightly expected to adapt to new equipment and changes in their working environment.

Shame on the teachers for exacting a toll on the Dept of Education for the introduction of long overdue reforms and shame on the Dept for caving in to their demands -- another 60 million hit on the exchequer .

If teachers have to learn on the job and make it up as they go a long at least 2 years of students would suffer due to this. Im n t a teacher but would fully agree with them being trained up in a new way of teaching and grading students, its not as if they are getting 60 million into their pockets.

Alex Meier

Gaillimh1976 wrote: »

If they only work 180 days a year then YES !!!

It didn't take long for the summer months jealousy to kick in.

"Make them do it in June, July & August Joe. . . "

Only teachers of English will receive training next year. . . Nicely left out by the opening post.

nice_guy80

nice_guy80 wrote:

would a company expect its staff to do training during their holidays?

The private sector and the public sector have different social objectives. Teachers should be the last group of people demanding to be treated as private sector employees, and to answer your question, three months paid holidays would simply not arise for private sector employees. I appreciate there are perfectly legitimate reasons why schools close in the summer months, although I do question the extent of the closure.

The point is that this closure is a consequence of what is deemed to be appropriate for children's learning outcomes, the closure is not a consequence of a teacher's need for holiday time.

Alex Meier wrote: »

It didn't take long for the summer months jealousy to kick in.

If I wanted to be a teacher, I'd have done a HDip. I'm not envious of a teacher's work to any extent. And I like my own job, I don't want three months a year away from my work environment.

Just because someone suggests that CPD be concentrated into the period where schools are closed, doesn't mean they're jealous of anyone. It is blindlingly obvious that such an approach would be better than reducing a teacher's already limited contact time with students.

Alex Meier

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

The private sector and the public sector have different social objectives. Teachers should be the last group of people demanding to be treated as private sector employees, and to answer your question, three months paid holidays would simply not arise for private sector employees. I appreciate there are perfectly legitimate reasons why schools close in the summer months, although I do question the extent of the closure.

The point is that this closure is a consequence of what is deemed to be appropriate for children's learning outcomes, the closure is not a consequence of a teacher's need for holiday time.


If I wanted to be a teacher, I'd have done a HDip. I'm not envious of a teacher's work to any extent. And I like my own job, I don't want three months a year away from my work environment.

Just because someone suggests that CPD be concentrated into the period where schools are closed, doesn't mean they're jealous of anyone. It is blindlingly obvious that such an approach would be better than reducing a teacher's already limited contact time with students.

Teachers in Ireland work among the longest classroom contact hours among OECD countries in both primary and secondary schools.

In other countries teachers have CPD placed on their timetable

This has never occurred in Ireland.

nice_guy80

Plus, a lot of teachers don't get paid during the summer.
Due to farcical contracts and temporary jobs

Some teachers have to effectively reapply for their job every year

Don't tar every teacher with the same brush

Gumbo

subpar wrote: »

Compare this with what goes on in the private sector

---

do office workers get training to work a new software package on their pc ? no they are expected to learn on the job. Do bus drivers receive training to drive a new bus ? no because as professional bus drivers they are rightly expected to adapt to new equipment and changes in their working environment.

To answer your question, yes we do.

When we switched for Autocad to Revit in the Engineers office, we went on a 3 day course in the first week and then one day for 6
Weeks during working hours.

Then when we embraces Adobe Photoshop, Illustratior and that we went on a one day a week for 5 week course all during work hours.

nice_guy80

subpar wrote: »

This is not only a financial scandal but yet another example of the" pay for change" attitude which is rife throughout the public service.

Compare this with what goes on in the private sector

---

do office workers get training to work a new software package on their pc ? no they are expected to learn on the job. Do bus drivers receive training to drive a new bus ? no because as professional bus drivers they are rightly expected to adapt to new equipment and changes in their working environment.

Shame on the teachers for exacting a toll on the Dept of Education for the introduction of long overdue reforms and shame on the Dept for caving in to their demands -- another 60 million hit on the exchequer .

I know a few lads who are in IT companies in Dublin
they regularly get brought for meals and have free bars laid by their companies due to the performance targets met and the success of their workers - and fair play to them. They deserve it as they work hard.

whereas teachers, well they have people on online forums moaning about them and their holidays
they have to meet with parents who give out to them despite the parents often being the problem and not working with their children
and then after all that, they have to pay for their own meals at the end of the year staff function.
and that's after paying for teaching materials and resources out of their own pockets all year because the schools are underfunded compared to other OECD countries and can barely afford the heating and ESB bills

gaiscioch

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Instead of three months holiday, why aren't they retrained and given professional development over part of the summer instead?... it's not good enough, claiming that any employees are operating at maximum capacity when they're on paid holiday for three months. Enough.

Gaillimh1976 wrote: »

If they only work 180 days a year then YES !!!

Of course the fact that the Irish state is only paying the second-level teachers for 180 days work (it's actually 167 but let's not allow facts to interfere) puts an entirely different complexion to this standard ignorant nonsense about teachers' holidays. That the payment for 167 days work is spread over 365 days does not mean teachers are paid for their holidays no more than anybody else is. Why is this basic nuance in the English language not understood? No employer pays people for going on holidays! You are *only* paid for work, and that payment is divided evenly across the entire year. When will this sink in?

In a nutshell, if the Irish state wants Irish teachers to work more than 167 days, they will have to pay them. End of.

endacl

gaiscioch wrote: »

Of course the fact that the Irish state is only paying the second-level teachers for 180 days work (it's actually 167 but let's not allow facts to interfere) puts an entirely different complexion to this standard ignorant nonsense about teachers' holidays. That the payment for 167 days work is spread over 365 days does not mean teachers are paid for their holidays no more than anybody else is. Why is this basic nuance in the English language not understood? No employer pays people for going on holidays! You are *only* paid for work, and that payment is divided evenly across the entire year. When will this sink in?

In a nutshell, if the Irish state wants Irish teachers to work more than 167 days, they will have to pay them. End of.

There's no point in saying that. It'll be ignored.

Sleepy

gaiscioch wrote: »

Of course the fact that the Irish state is only paying the second-level teachers for 180 days work (it's actually 167 but let's not allow facts to interfere) puts an entirely different complexion to this standard ignorant nonsense about teachers' holidays. That the payment for 167 days work is spread over 365 days does not mean teachers are paid for their holidays no more than anybody else is. Why is this basic nuance in the English language not understood? No employer pays people for going on holidays! You are *only* paid for work, and that payment is divided evenly across the entire year. When will this sink in?

In a nutshell, if the Irish state wants Irish teachers to work more than 167 days, they will have to pay them. End of.

If you look at it that way we're vastly over-paying our teachers.

Take the entry position on the post 2011 scale of €27,814 and divide it by 167 to get a daily rate of pay of €166.55.

Multiply that by a regular FTE (260 working days - 20 days annual leave - 9 days public holidays) of 239 and you'll find we're paying Irish teachers in their first year of employment an Full Time Equivalent Salary of €39,805.66 per annum.

I think our teachers can manage to work a few more days a year at their existing pay levels tbh. No graduate fresh out of college is worth an FTE of almost €40k.

Jolly Red Giant

Sleepy wrote: »

If you look at it that way we're vastly over-paying our teachers.

Take the entry position on the post 2011 scale of €27,814 and divide it by 167 to get a daily rate of pay of €166.55.

Multiply that by a regular FTE (260 working days - 20 days annual leave - 9 days public holidays) of 239 and you'll find we're paying Irish teachers in their first year of employment an Full Time Equivalent Salary of €39,805.66 per annum.

I think our teachers can manage to work a few more days a year at their existing pay levels tbh. No graduate fresh out of college is worth an FTE of almost €40k.

I am a school teacher since the beginning of June I have been on holiday -

Week 1 - The first week of my 'holiday' I spent correcting summer tests for school. They had to be completed by 10 June for school reports to be sent home to parents. 160 test papers.

Week 2 - three days in the school saving computer files, reformatting hard drives and reinstalling software. The computers get riddled with all kinds of rubbish during the school year and the school cannot afford to pay a computer tech to do it. Then took two days off to attend a friend's wedding.

Week 3 - three days reviewing students projects in order to make sure everything is progressing as it should for next year - averaged about 4 hours a day. Two days reviewing class tests for the previous year - looking specifically which students have been struggling and giving consideration to what can be done in September to improve the learning of students.

Week 4 - received my timetable for next year. Teaching one of my regular subject to a new class year next September - spend three days (including 10 hours on one day) reviewing the content of the course and preparing resource material for the subject. Teaching one of my regular subjects at TY next September 6 hours on the Thursday and Friday planning and preparing resources for the TY - specifically project work.

Week 5 - I am due to teach a new subject next year. I spent the week reviewing the Syllabus, reviewing the textbooks, planning the teaching of the course and preparing the resources I will need in the classroom.

Week 6 - spent the Monday in school cleaning out my classroom and putting up posters on the walls (There are in the region of 50 posters and I removed them the evening the school finished for the summer because the room was being used as a special accommodation centre for the exams). I also checked the tables and chairs to make sure that none were damaged or might be dangerous to students. Took Tuesday and Wednesday off - went to the beach with my kids. Back in the school on Thursday to wipe and reinstall the staff room computers and spent 5 hours on Friday checking the school printers, checking ink stock and checking replacement stock for keyboards and mice - these get damaged very easy.

Week 7 - this week - Monday and Tuesday - working on subject department websites (I teach four subjects and the teachers use the websites for notification of homework and making resources available for student study - the teachers supply the materials and I upload them - two days 4 hours each tidying up the websites, archiving homework details, etc. Didn't do anything since except spent about 90 minutes on Wednesday night reading through a new textbook that we might use next September.

So I have three months holidays - isn't it great. Now I am not whinging about this - I work hard to be the best teacher I can be and I know I had to work hard preparing my classes on a day-to-day, week-to- week and month-to-month basis. I love my job and believe I am a decent teacher who respects students and hopefully is respected by them.

And by the way - I won't be going on any holiday this year - I can't afford it. We had planned a two week break but my car is banjaxed and I am currently looking at buying an 8 year old car to get to work in September.

But what do I know - the hacks on here know that all teachers are overpaid, lazy, useless, only work half a year and half a week and spend all their time whinging.

robp

Sleepy wrote: »

I think our teachers can manage to work a few more days a year at their existing pay levels tbh. No graduate fresh out of college is worth an FTE of almost €40k.

They are if that is the market rate. In the same way you could argue that a lectureship position is only a position for someone straight out of college (via a PhD) and worth not worth 40k but in the UK a lecturer salary scales start at about £37,394 the equivalent of €53,651.

Sleepy

Jolly Red Giant wrote: »

So I have three months holidays - isn't it great. Now I am not whinging about this - I work hard to be the best teacher I can be and I know I had to work hard preparing my classes on a day-to-day, week-to- week and month-to-month basis. I love my job and believe I am a decent teacher who respects students and hopefully is respected by them.

And by the way - I won't be going on any holiday this year - I can't afford it. We had planned a two week break but my car is banjaxed and I am currently looking at buying an 8 year old car to get to work in September.

But what do I know - the hacks on here know that all teachers are overpaid, lazy, useless, only work half a year and half a week and spend all their time whinging.

Honestly, fair play, it's great to see someone putting in so much effort. My point was that gaiscioch was being entirely disingenuous in claiming that teachers are only paid for 167 days a year when it's a salaried position and any decent teacher will be putting in more time than that.

robp wrote: »

They are if that is the market rate. In the same way you could argue that a lectureship position is only a position for someone straight out of college (via a PhD) and worth not worth 40k but in the UK a lecturer salary scales start at about £37,394 the equivalent of €53,651.

What market? There is no market rate for a teachers salary. There's the scale that the government were able to get the unions to agree to. And that scale is obscene if you ask me. The unions should have never been allowed to protect their own interests at the expense of new entrants to the profession.

Make the argument that good teachers deserve higher pay, make the argument that non classroom hours should be rostered and considered part of the school year, make the argument that there isn't time over the summer to fit in teacher training but don't use bull**** logic your Junior Certs should be capable of seeing through to make them.

As to my own views on education, I'll quote Sam Seaborn from The West Wing:

...education is the silver bullet. Education is everything. We don't need little changes, we need gigantic, monumental changes. Schools should be palaces. The competition for the best teachers should be fierce. They should be making six-figure salaries. Schools should be incredibly expensive for government and absolutely free of charge to its citizens, just like national defense. That's my position. I just haven't figured out how to do it yet.

Geuze

You say that the salary scale is obscene, i.e. too high.

And then you quote, and support, the idea of high wages for teachers.

Am I confused?

jank

Jolly Red Giant wrote: »

Week 2 - three days in the school saving computer files, reformatting hard drives and reinstalling software. The computers get riddled with all kinds of rubbish during the school year and the school cannot afford to pay a computer tech to do it. Then took two days off to attend a friend's wedding.

Did you ever hear of a thing called an image or PXE boot? It would take you a week to do how many computers?
Seems to me you are not working efficiently. Ever hear of multi-tasking?

femur61

aunt aggie wrote: »

So it's the teachers fault that new syllabuses and methods of assessment are been introduced?

It's their fault that training is essential to ensuring the same level of consistency in continuous assessment tasks and results as we currently have in exam papers and exam results?? Saying nothing about planning, implementing and assessing new Modules that currently don't exist in the JC..

And it's their fault that a substitute has to be employed? Because they have to attend what will be mandatory training..

It has nothing to do with the Dept of Ed pushing through a new Junior Cert very few teachers agree with, without any consideration for the costs involved. But surely they'd think to spend that money on improving infrastructure in schools, or supplying more SNAs, or reducing class numbers which can be as high as 34 students to one teacher. You're probably right. Let's just blame the teachers for everything that's wrong with our economy!!

I hope your not a teacher as you don't appear to have read the question properally.

The OP is stating other sectors don't get paid for training days. Workers view them as part of advancement in their position, furthering their career.

Why can't they train in one of their blocks of holidays, 2 weeks Christmas, or two one week mid term breaks, two weeks of at Easter or their three months long summer break. Emm. I suppose it would be really hard to find 12 days in their 16 week holidays they get every year. Or, even in their 22 hours week would be really hard to find forfeit a few extra hours.

michael999999

Sleepy wrote: »

If you look at it that way we're vastly over-paying our teachers.

Take the entry position on the post 2011 scale of €27,814 and divide it by 167 to get a daily rate of pay of €166.55.

Multiply that by a regular FTE (260 working days - 20 days annual leave - 9 days public holidays) of 239 and you'll find we're paying Irish teachers in their first year of employment an Full Time Equivalent Salary of €39,805.66 per annum.

I think our teachers can manage to work a few more days a year at their existing pay levels tbh. No graduate fresh out of college is worth an FTE of almost €40k.

And what about the cash they get from grinds!

That's another massive chunk of change right there!

femur61

Alex Meier wrote: »

It didn't take long for the summer months jealousy to kick in.

"Make them do it in June, July & August Joe. . . "

Only teachers of English will receive training next year. . . Nicely left out by the opening post.

The only reason why Ireland have the longest holidays in the world is historically the farmers used to take the boys out of school to work on the farms.


http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/education/do-pupils-lose-out-in-our-long-summer-holidays-31325012.html

gaiscioch

femur61 wrote: »

The only reason why Ireland have the longest holidays in the world is historically the farmers used to take the boys out of school to work on the farms.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/education/do-pupils-lose-out-in-our-long-summer-holidays-31325012.html

From that article:

"According to OECD figures, Irish second-level teachers spend 735 hours teaching every year, which is above the average of 709. Despite the perception of short hours, Irish primary teachers spend 915 hours at the chalkface, compared to an OECD average of 790 hours."

So, the long and the short of this seems to be jealously of teachers' holidays, and nothing more.

gaiscioch

michael999999 wrote: »

And what about the cash they get from grinds!

That's another massive chunk of change right there!

While I appreciate, and indeed admire, the rebellious spirit you bring into every thread, Michael, it's untrue (to say the least) to give the impression that all Irish teachers - "they" - are running successful grinds schools on the side. A tiny minority do so, and they are invariably concentrated in so-called "difficult" subjects like maths and languages. If you have evidence to the contrary I'd be interested in seeing it.

Rightwing

Teachers work amongst the hardest in the PS, however I do concede that is not saying a whole lot, but the PS unions do know how to milk any given situation. Hit the taxpayer hard, and a Government will be loath to bring in new reforms again.

gaiscioch

femur61 wrote: »

The OP is stating other sectors don't get paid for training days. Workers view them as part of advancement in their position, furthering their career.

If, for the purpose of argument, a teacher goes off and takes a fortnight out of their holidays to improve their subject knowledge, tell us how this will lead to "advancement in their position, furthering their career"? It won't. They will return to a classroom. Sin é. There's no incentive at all for teachers so the comparison with private industry where career advancement and considerable financial incentive are dependant on partaking in such courses is a non sequitur.

This lack of career progression, and thus limitation on career income, is obviously one of the biggest downsides to teaching.

michael999999

gaiscioch wrote: »

If, for the purpose of argument, a teacher goes off and takes a fortnight out of their holidays to improve their subject knowledge, tell us how this will lead to "advancement in their position, furthering their career"? It won't. They will return to a classroom. Sin é. There's no incentive at all for teachers so the comparison with private industry where career advancement and considerable financial incentive are dependant on partaking in such courses is a non sequitur.

This lack of career progression, and thus limitation on career income, is obviously one of the biggest downsides to teaching.

And were they forced into there careers?

Surely they knew how limited there chances of climbing the career ladder was when they were training to be teachers?

Sheldons Brain

michael999999 wrote: »

And were they forced into there careers?

Surely they knew how limited there chances of climbing the career ladder was when they were training to be teachers?

Of course they knew, although perhaps they did not expect politicans to reduce their salaries while wanting more work so as to bail out banks.

Perversity in public administration cannot be justifed by saying that those working there knew it was crap when joining.

gaiscioch

Rightwing wrote: »

Teachers work amongst the hardest in the PS, however I do concede that is not saying a whole lot, but the PS unions do know how to milk any given situation. Hit the taxpayer hard, and a Government will be loath to bring in new reforms again.

In fairness in terms of "hitting the taxpayer hard" I doubt any non-public servant has the words "PRD" on their payslip, an extra tax (no matter what idiot Kenny tries to claim) which takes up to 10.5% of all public servants' income each week.

purplecow1977

Would the begrudgers not be better off targeting their annoyance at politicians who can claim five pensions???! FIVE PENSIONS?!?!?!

Rightwing

gaiscioch wrote: »

In fairness in terms of "hitting the taxpayer hard" I doubt any non-public servant has the words "PRD" on their payslip, an extra tax (no matter what idiot Kenny tries to claim) which takes up to 10.5% of all public servants' income each week.

He had no choice on the matter, they are your employer. Just like if our bank has a poor year, bonuses will suffer. I can't complain about that if punters say in the IT industry get bonuses if they have a profitable year.

Red Kev

Sleepy wrote: »

If you look at it that way we're vastly over-paying our teachers.

Take the entry position on the post 2011 scale of €27,814 and divide it by 167 to get a daily rate of pay of €166.55.

Multiply that by a regular FTE (260 working days - 20 days annual leave - 9 days public holidays) of 239 and you'll find we're paying Irish teachers in their first year of employment an Full Time Equivalent Salary of €39,805.66 per annum.

I think our teachers can manage to work a few more days a year at their existing pay levels tbh. No graduate fresh out of college is worth an FTE of almost €40k.

260-20-9=231 , not 239. ;-)

Somebody might need some grinds in basic Maths.

purplecow1977

I always enjoy reading this (figures would have to be adjusted for Ireland but you get the idea!)

ARE YOU SICK OF HIGHLY-PAID TEACHERS? IF YES, READ ON!

Teachers' hefty salaries are driving up taxes, and they only work nine or ten months a year! It's time we put things in perspective and pay them for what they do -- babysit! We can get that for less than minimum wage!!!!

That's right. Let's give them $3.00 an hour and only the hours they worked; not any of that silly planning time, or any time they spend before or after school. That would be $19.50 a day (7:45 to 3:00 PM with 45 min. off for lunch and planning -- that equals 6-1/2 hours).
So each parent should pay $19.50 a day for these teachers to baby-sit their children. Now how many students do they teach in a day...maybe 30? So that's $19.50 x 30 = $585 a day.

However, remember they only work 180 days a year!!! I am not going to pay them for any vacations.

LET'S SEE....

That's $585 X 180= $105,300 per year. (Hold on! My calculator needs new batteries).

What about those special education teachers and the ones with Master's degrees? Well, we could pay them minimum wage ($7.75), and just to be fair, round it off to $8.00 an hour. That would be $8 X 6-1/2 hours X 30 children X 180 days = $280,800 per year.

Wait a minute -- there's something wrong here! There sure is!

The average teacher's salary (nationwide) is $50,000.

$50,000/180 days = $277.77 per day / 30 students = $9.25 / 6.5 hours = $1.42 per hour per student -- a very inexpensive baby-sitter and they even EDUCATE your kids!)

WHAT A DEAL!!!!

purplecow1977

Red Kev wrote: »

260-20-9=231 , not 239. ;-)

Somebody might need some grinds in basic Maths.

I'm free for the summer if you want to PM me - reasonable rates!

Kermit.de.frog

Sack them all. Rehire on zero hour contract. Solved.

zeffabelli

I'm curious, what qualifications are required for primary school teachers? Do they only have bachelors or do they also have masters in childhood education?

Should salaries reflect this?

purplecow1977

zeffabelli wrote: »

I'm curious, what qualifications are required for primary school teachers? Do they only have bachelors or do they also have masters in childhood education?

Should salaries reflect this?

A standard B.Ed is sufficient although with the high competition of latter years & the scramble for jobs, or hours, many will have completed a Masters. However, completing a Masters when you've no source of employment is a tricky one and not something I would consider myself. I find after several years teaching, it is only recent years I've got a proper handle on a 'balanced' lifestyle and probably only now when I would consider a masters. I'm not sure it would have any personal benefit for me though.

There was talk about making a masters a requirement, and in the US I think this may be the case, but I can't say I'd support it here without sufficient persuasion.

Kermit.de.frog

purplecow1977 wrote: »

This would not solve anything

As an actually productive taxpayer in the economy who gives rather then takes (as in the case of teachers) I think it would solves things very quickly.

PolaroidPizza

My tow cents for what they're worth,

People are quick to criticise teachers based on their high exposure to them. they feel like they understand their workload/pay balance more then the majority of other professions.
If your average citizen was exposed for 12 years ~6 hours a day to the workload of a librarian or a county council clerk, then doubtless we would hear a hell of a lot of criticism of their conditions also.
During my time in school I experienced several very poor teachers who hated their job and had a very detrimental effect on their students, but poor workers exist in every profession....you just wouldn't hear about them as much.

to all those people attacking teachers here, you need to put these criticisms in the context of the entire public service. They are at the front-line, so extrapolate out your criticism to the public service in general.

purplecow1977

PolaroidPizza wrote: »

My tow cents for what they're worth,

People are quick to criticise teachers based on their high exposure to them. they feel like they understand their workload/pay balance more then the majority of other professions.
If your average citizen was exposed for 12 years ~6 hours a day to the workload of a librarian or a county council clerk, then doubtless we would hear a hell of a lot of criticism of their conditions also.
During my time in school I experienced several very poor teachers who hated their job and had a very detrimental effect on their students, but poor workers exist in every profession....you just wouldn't hear about them as much.

to all those people attacking teachers here, you need to put these criticisms in the context of the entire public service. They are at the front-line, so extrapolate out your criticism to the public service in general.

This plays a major part. Because people spent 8 years in primary, and 5/6 in secondary, they figure they are experts!

It's very easy to speculate on the outside looking in!

Kermit.de.frog

purplecow1977 wrote: »

Teachers pay tax too! Don't ya know

They are not net contributors. The tax they pay is from the tax taken from private sector employees. Ergo they contribute nothing.


The solution is very simple. Let them go on strike - see how they get on for two weeks with no money - then rehire on zero hour contracts (a contract that also includes automatic dismissal for being incompetent or not of a certain standard). This is coming anyway so best to do it now and get it over with so teachers can get use to their new earned standard of living.

Alex Meier

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

They are not net contributors. The tax they pay is from the tax taken from private sector employees. Ergo they contribute nothing.

You don't really how the taxation system works do you. . . Ah Bless.

If you're claiming this then the corollary is that the net wage of a teacher is their actual wage. . . which would make my salary (a teacher of many many years experience) about 30K

Do you therefore believe that Irish teachers are poorly paid?

purplecow1977

Alex Meier wrote: »

You don't really how the taxation system works do you. . . Ah Bless.

If you're claiming this then the corollary to this is that the net wage of a teacher is their actual wage. . . which would make my salary (a teacher of many many years experience) about 30K

Do you therefore believe that Irish teachers are poorly paid?

Also, if the tax I contribute is 'nothing' can I keep it instead then? It would bulk my wages up a fair whack!!

NorthStars

nice_guy80 wrote: »

Teachers need to be retrained for a new syllabus.
when can they do this if not on 'release days'?

During some of their extended and well paid holiday leave?

zl1whqvjs75cdy

Don't see the issue here. New system is introduced so people need to be trained. Same in any private sector industry.

purplecow1977

donkeyoaty0099 wrote: »

Don't see the issue here. New system is introduced so people need to be trained. Same in any private sector industry.

I agree.

If something is given a fairly major overhaul it is necessary that correct training is given.

New things, strategies, ideas are constantly introduced and teachers must update and inform themselves in these areas. But for something as important as this, I think inservice is necessary.

Kermit.de.frog

Alex Meier wrote: »

If you're claiming this then the corollary to this is that the net wage of a teacher is their actual wage. . . which would make my salary (a teacher of many many years experience) about 30K

Your wage comes entirely from taxes paid by the wealth creating private sector. Otherwise you would have no money. So your argument is nonsense as it always has been. The usual rubbish. "What about the tax we pay"?

Teachers, like all public servants, are and always have been leeches upon those that generate the money to keep the country going. And it is time for some discipline to be put in place to prevent what I consider as the theft of taxpayer money that puts this country at risk because it damages the competitiveness of the country when public servants are vastly overpaid.

This was a fundamental part of the crisis. Forget the banks and that nonsense. This country was priced out of the market by an overpaid, bloated public sector. We can't go back to that world so things have to happen and decisions have to be taken about how we fund public services.

The logical conclusion to prevent crisis and make productive work pay is to cut teachers in the first place (because we have too many) - hire on zero hour contracts (everyone, not just new entrants) and open the sector more to private capital. This would enforce discipline and save taxpayer's money.

Like I said this process has thankfully started. These reforms are needed and are coming regardless but I think it should go faster because right now it is not acceptable the amount of money wasted on public services (not only teachers).

Mod: Banned for leeches abd other poor quality posts.

purplecow1977

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Your wage comes entirely from taxes paid by the wealth creating private sector. .

Serious question: Where does the 'wealth creating private sector' get their 'wealth' from????

coolbeans

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

As an actually productive taxpayer in the economy who gives rather then takes (as in the case of teachers) I think it would solves things very quickly.

Go on then what do you do that makes you such an invaluable member of society? If you're going to characterise a whole sector of society in the way you have I think it's only fair that you tell us what you do. I'm not a teacher by the way nor do I work in the public sector.