ASTI Ballots

rainbowtrout

implausible wrote: »

I go to union meetings, I've been rep and a branch officer in the past and I have an interest in education generally, I see it as more than just a job. However, many of my friends and colleagues don't. Their priorities lie elsewhere. It's not stupidity.

Part of it is though. The agreements brought in/being brought in, have an effect for many years on our working conditions, which can have a knock on effect on our lives outside school. A most obvious example of that is having to stay back and do Croke Park hours, it means less free time, for those that have children it means an hour less with them every week and possibly an hour extra a week of childminding fees.

When a job occupies 8 hours of a person's day every day from Monday to Friday then it should be of interest to those working there to be concerned about changes to conditions imposed on them.

rainbowtrout

Alex Meier wrote: »

I opened a thread on this but it's also relevant to this thread:

Embedded in Haddington Road are increment delays for public servants.

Taking myself, as a pre-2011 teacher, without these delays I would currently be on an annual salary which is €1356 greater than my current salary since 01 September 2015.

I do not receive this salary until 01 March 2016. . . So that's a loss of €678.

Now on 01 September 2016 my salary would have risen by €1796 without Haddington Road. . . But I will not receive this until 01 June 2017. . . Some nine months later.

This is a loss of €1347 giving a total loss of €2025.

The only pay restoration for me, and 80% of the public sector, is a pay "rise" of €1000 on 01 September 2017 whilst I keep working Croke Park/Haddington Road.

This means my pay "rise" comes to MINUS €1025

Surely this is a con?

Your maths is wrong.

The first freeze came in 2014. Most teachers get their increment in September. So the September 14 increment was frozen until December 14 and became a 15 month increment.

The second increment you should have then got this month September 15 is another 15 month increment and will be paid instead in march 16.


So what you should have got was an extra 1356 when you moved onto point 11 in Sept 14 for the 12 months between Sept 14 and August 15. Then you should have got the 1796 from Sept 15 and August 16.

Total increment payments pre HRA for two 12 month increments of points 11 and 12 = 1356 + 1796

Total = 3152

What you got is:

Sept 14, Oct 14, Nov 14 = 0 (increment frozen for 3 months, nothing extra, stay on point 10)

December 14 - Feb 16 = 15 month increment. 1.25 years of 1356 = 1695
March 16 - August 16 = 6 months of increment 12. 0.5 of 1796 = 898

Total = 2593


Loss in earnings over 2 year period of frozen increments = 559

acequion

Jamfa wrote: »

So you broke the Union directive and spent 12 hours planning outside of school time with a colleague. It begs the question why you'd need much more time this year and if teachers plan & meet anyway why should 22 hours a year be provided. Also as a result of the union directives you've had no CPD for over a year & seem to be getting on with it so are they wasting money providing for it in the future.

This is for mrwhite and not jamfa. I don't normally agree with jamfa but I do see the point here. So please explain what on earth you were doing spending 12 hours planning with a collegue outside of school. I can't for the life of me imagine what you had to plan for second year that took up so much time. In my school the year plans are fairly loosely laid down at subject meetings in such a way as to provide individual teacher scope and flexibility but also ensuring back up and transfer re pass and hons and that all the kids get looked after,that sort of thing. Quite quickly and easily decided by us all. After that you go ahead and plan your own classes as always.

So do please explain as I'm very curious.

MrJones1973

Well firstly having had no training I had to read a few documents to get the gist of the Jc. That took a couple of hours. Then I reviwed the first year plan so as not to duplicate areas. A few phone calls to obtain books I needed. Then I went through JC site and watched the planning video a couple f times. Then I had to choose texts etc. It was really part self training and planning. We have not a subject meeting on Jc as that would break directive. What I did and my colleague also broke the directive but was in our own time. Am I still a bad union boy-Yes I am. Colleagues free to report me but it got to the stage I needed to know what I was doing!
I actually thought the vote would be Yes-so assumed I was just outside the directive ending.
For First year-I used plan in Great expectations book Resource so we didnt plan that really.
Anyway in my view perhaps inefficent view-it will take longer than you think but our department (I always laugh at the use of the word-they hardly exist most schools. No office. No paid head. ) is perhaps dysfunctional to an extent. Half of it is plain nuts.
I really don't think it can be done properly in under 6 hours if its to be thought out properly. This is only a personal view and no criticism of those more efficient than I .
Have I contradicted myself here and there. Probably but that's modern education at its a heart ie literacy strategies without extra money for school libraries erx

MrJones1973

I should add its a detailed plan. As for pass and honours our school has no separation. It's all one big happy classroom. ( psychotic laughter in background !) In JC

aratsarse101

I have noticed from talking to colleagues that most people do not understand the implications of a delay in increments.
Lets talk a simple example of a person who has €1000 increment every year for 20 years.
If increments are delayed for 6 months, then he will, over the course of his career be down €10,000. Am I right?
Increment delays are the cutest way possible of introducin massive cuts for many years.
VOTE NO TO PANTSDOWN ROAD AGREEMENT

acequion

That's interesting Mrwhite and thanks for taking the time to explain.

Each to his own but no way in a million years would I use so much of my own time for something so boring and bureaucratic. Even at meetings I find it really tedious. No way either will I be caught even looking at anything to do with the new JC until it's in.

But again school plans need not be so much work. We have them here for all subjects, both my subjects have had subject inspections in the last 5-7 years where the plans have been examined and deemed satisfactory.

And I imagine the situation re subject departments is similar everywhere.In our school some subjects have paid heads,as in post holders,some have unpaid heads and some have no heads where teachers do the necessary together at meetings. We use a lot of CP hours for subject meetings and it's grand. Whatever needs to be done gets done.

But you're right that this whole JC thing needs a new post,an A post. Another reason why I voted no was the requirement for subjects teachers to rotate the coordination of the SLARS. For free!! Forget that!! All extra administrational and bureaucratic duties must be remunerated. Simple as.

rainbowtrout

aratsarse101 wrote: »

I have noticed from talking to colleagues that most people do not understand the implications of a delay in increments.
Lets talk a simple example of a person who has €1000 increment every year for 20 years.
If increments are delayed for 6 months, then he will, over the course of his career be down €10,000. Am I right?
Increment delays are the cutest way possible of introducin massive cuts for many years.
VOTE NO TO PANTSDOWN ROAD AGREEMENT

No, again your maths is wrong. The teacher still receives all of those increments, just with a 6 month delay initially. I did a worked example above.

Where are you getting the figure of 10k?

joebloggs32

rainbowtrout wrote: »

No, again your maths is wrong. The teacher still receives all of those increments, just with a 6 month delay initially. I did a worked example above.

Where are you getting the figure of 10k?

You will be down 10 k over 20 year in the simple example. If 1k increments are delayed by six months then my salary for the year is reduced by €500 for each year worked.

rainbowtrout

joebloggs32 wrote: »

You will be down 10 k over 20 year in the simple example. If 1k increments are delayed by six months then my salary for the year is reduced by €500 for each year worked.

Are you talking about a 6 month delay in total, or for all increments to becoming 18 month increments instead of 12 month increments?

aratsarse101

rainbowtrout wrote: »

No, again your maths is wrong. The teacher still receives all of those increments, just with a 6 month delay initially. I did a worked example above.

Where are you getting the figure of 10k?

I don't know how you could say my maths was wrong again, as this was my first time doing any maths or commenting on this or related topic.
Anyhow, if increments are delayed once for 6 months, then every increment will be delayed for 6 months automatically after that so as far as I can see I am correct and in reality for younger teachers it will be a lot more than 10 k?

aratsarse101

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Are you talking about a 6 month delay in total, or for all increments to becoming 18 month increments instead of 12 month increments?

I'm open to correction here but I think it is yourself who doesn't understand the concept of one delay of 6 months leading to every increment in the future being delayed. That's my point...

Alex Meier

aratsarse101 wrote: »

I'm open to correction here but I think it is yourself who doesn't understand the concept of one delay of 6 months leading to every increment in the future being delayed. That's my point...

The point rainbowtrout makes is that you eventually get paid at the right point on the scale until you're behind on the incremental scale.

My point is simple - This delay on the incremental scale is being used to cut your wage and so give you your "pay rise" to the point you should be on if there had been no delay in the first place.

We are literally being bribed with our own money.

Furthermore in the LRA the Croke Park/Haddington Road hours carry on and there is no firm commitment to end these incremental delays.

You'd want to have lead in your head to got vote YES to the LRA

MrJones1973

Can somebody clarify about Landsdowne road and increments? I think it will be rejected but I was wrong on JC! Thought it would pass but I voted no.

As a side note-Glad/delighted ASTI has appointed Kieran Christie-an actual worker leading a Union. An actual teacher. Yes I know Pat king was but he spent years in head office as Asst Sec before ascending. Kieran has been a real thorn in the side of the teaching council.
Now KC will find he is not only up against the Gov and the O' Brien dominated media but also up against his own members. Hard to motivate them! Hard to get them to hold firm-though to be fair ASTI always last to give up.

2011abc

Hard to imagine Mr Christie could do a WORSE job than current GS .Hopefully good news for ASTI members .Third times a charm for the new millennium ?

deiseindublin

I think Christie is a great choice. Sounds like he'll be a lot more proactive and intune with the goings on of a school.

MrJones1973

2011abc wrote: »

Hard to imagine Mr Christie could do a WORSE job than current GS .Hopefully good news for ASTI members .Third times a charm for the new millennium ?

To be fair to Pat King-the members are problematic. CEC rejected HR-members voted Yes though the ASTI roadshow on HR gave a different tune to CEC. Who led that roadshow?

joebloggs32

We might have to enlist some carrier pigeons to get the ballots in if this postal strike persists!

evolving_doors

joebloggs32 wrote: »

We might have to enlist some carrier pigeons to get the ballots in if this postal strike persists!

Extended to the 12th..

Jamfa

What happens when the result is no? Will both unions be given a chance to not accept or threatened like before?

MrJones1973

Well Landsowne road has passed de facto with SIPTU saying Yes-so it remains to be seen what ASTI will do if as expected we vote NO. We should leave ICTU, as its a joke office workers voting de facto on teacher pay deals