ASTI Vote on Croke park hours

acequion

mirrorwall14 wrote: »

Honestly they seem to genuinely believe that there is absolutely no way the legal challenge will succeed.

And did they explain what grounds they have for believing this? They "got legal advice" doesn't cut it. I would like to hear explicitly exactly what the advice was and who exactly gave it to them.

To me it sounds like scaremongering of the highest order. The type of scaremongering that went on when they were hell bent on forcing us all into HR

For the love of god don't fall for it!

man_no_plan

History Queen wrote: »

I'm not tring to be argumentative here but realistically what was the outcome of the talks? From my reading of the document it seems that the only outcome was "the big bad DES have scared us witless with threats so we're going to vote on LRA again but this time vote right...its ok though because the big bad DES *promise* robust reviews of our core issues"

Again this is not at all a personal attack but i feel betrayed by the union

Quote: man_no_plan
They encouraged a vote against the LRA, theres no reason to change their minds on a whim.
To my knowledge rejection of the LRA was only ever a lever to get sectoral talks opened up, whatever we think of the outcome of those talks.


No offence taken, l did say whatever we think of the outcome.

Was there evera realistic expectation that we would not end up having a second go following the experience with the previous two agreements.

I'm a bit concerned that this whole affair will be bad for both unions in the long term. Divided unions are no good.

MrJones1973

Im no lawyer but Im sure you often get conflicting legal advice and obviously its in TUI interest to spin it. Either way ,a case against FEMPI will have publicity value. A failure would still beg question-are we in an Emergency or a recovery? Which?

Inspector Coptoor

I think the ASTI turnout will be significant this time.

In our school, 47/48 ballots have been handed out.
35 are back in the hands of the steward and will be posted to Head Office on Monday.

The vast majority of the staff have voted Yes to get rid of Croke Park Hours.

Bring on the strike in September.
The time for pussyfooting around is over

km79

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

I think the ASTI turnout will be significant this time.

In our school, 47/48 ballots have been handed out.
35 are back in the hands of the steward and will be posted to Head Office on Monday.

The vast majority of the staff have voted Yes to get rid of Croke Park Hours.

Bring on the strike in September.
He time for pussyfooting around is over

Same in our place . Even better turnout in fact and hopefully a strong yes as well

mirrorwall14

When is the ballot result due for yours? I really want it to come out before our votes go in the post for the TUI? If there is a massive rejection of HRA by the ASTI we are more likely to get a no vote to ours

deiseindublin

ASTI ballot closes next Wednesday, result is usually out the next day, I think I remember one ballot where the result came out that night.

Hopefully this ASTI ballot will have a higher turnout though so might take a bit longer to get the result.

deiseindublin

mirrorwall14 wrote: »

When is the ballot result due for yours? I really want it to come out before our votes go in the post for the TUI? If there is a massive rejection of HRA by the ASTI we are more likely to get a no vote to ours

Were there even dates of our TUI ballot released?

The TUI site is about as useful as a chocolate teapot.

Benicetomonty

Friday at the latest for ASTI result. Big yes in our place.

feardeas

acequion wrote: »

And did they explain what grounds they have for believing this? They "got legal advice" doesn't cut it. I would like to hear explicitly exactly what the advice was and who exactly gave it to them.

To me it sounds like scaremongering of the highest order. The type of scaremongering that went on when they were hell bent on forcing us all into HR

For the love of god don't fall for it!

An equally valid question would be around the advice the ASTI has in relation to taking the case. Now I would be delighted if such a case was won. If it is lost it is not a disaster as it just means the status quo remains and we might eventually benefit from whatever unwinding of the measures the government does under the LRA and its successors.

We all understand the separation of powers but I have doubts as to whether a court will rule in favour of the union on this. It would open the floodgates. I realise that it is probably a murky area given that we are constantly told the crisis is over but I have a feeling that the massively resourced legal team for the state will talk at length about the open nature of our economy, the risks of global or regional shocks [possible Brexit anyone?]. They could even muse about the fact that some provincial urban centres look a little like ghost towns and that the airports have not exactly being clogged with returning migrants.

There might be issues raised about the terrible cuts to services and that these need restoration first take for example the savage cuts to Guidance, to the educational psychological service, to the Education Welfare board etc.

All this would provide cover for one of their lordships to side with the government not withstanding the fact that the Taoiseach and Finance minister tell anybody who wishes to listen that we're back in business.

As for the ballot. I think it was wise to have a school ballot. I imagine that turnout should be high and therefore the result will be more representative. I voted no for reasons I have outlined. In my school if pushed I'd say the majority would be no as well but not by an overwhelming amount.

I imagine, however, that Yes will win. If that is the case I wonder what is the legal standing for the Department to impose increment freezes, withhold salary pay backs to a teacher working in an 'ASTI' school but who is not a member of a union. How could that be legal? A successful case on that matter would be interesting and could have significant effects.

man_no_plan

feardeas wrote: »

An equally valid question would be around the advice the ASTI has in relation to taking the case. Now I would be delighted if such a case was won. If it is lost it is not a disaster as it just means the status quo remains and we might eventually benefit from whatever unwinding of the measures the government does under the LRA and its successors.

We all understand the separation of powers but I have doubts as to whether a court will rule in favour of the union on this. It would open the floodgates. I realise that it is probably a murky area given that we are constantly told the crisis is over but I have a feeling that the massively resourced legal team for the state will talk at length about the open nature of our economy, the risks of global or regional shocks [possible Brexit anyone?]. They could even muse about the fact that some provincial urban centres look a little like ghost towns and that the airports have not exactly being clogged with returning migrants.

There might be issues raised about the terrible cuts to services and that these need restoration first take for example the savage cuts to Guidance, to the educational psychological service, to the Education Welfare board etc.

All this would provide cover for one of their lordships to side with the government not withstanding the fact that the Taoiseach and Finance minister tell anybody who wishes to listen that we're back in business.

As for the ballot. I think it was wise to have a school ballot. I imagine that turnout should be high and therefore the result will be more representative. I voted no for reasons I have outlined. In my school if pushed I'd say the majority would be no as well but not by an overwhelming amount.

I imagine, however, that Yes will win. If that is the case I wonder what is the legal standing for the Department to impose increment freezes, withhold salary pay backs to a teacher working in an 'ASTI' school but who is not a member of a union. How could that be legal? A successful case on that matter would be interesting and could have significant effects.

FEMPI talks about grades covered by a collective agreement not whether their in a union or not.

mirrorwall14

feardeas wrote: »

An equally valid question would be around the advice the ASTI has in relation to taking the case. Now I would be delighted if such a case was won. If it is lost it is not a disaster as it just means the status quo remains and we might eventually benefit from whatever unwinding of the measures the government does under the LRA and its successors.

We all understand the separation of powers but I have doubts as to whether a court will rule in favour of the union on this. It would open the floodgates. I realise that it is probably a murky area given that we are constantly told the crisis is over but I have a feeling that the massively resourced legal team for the state will talk at length about the open nature of our economy, the risks of global or regional shocks [possible Brexit anyone?]. They could even muse about the fact that some provincial urban centres look a little like ghost towns and that the airports have not exactly being clogged with returning migrants.

There might be issues raised about the terrible cuts to services and that these need restoration first take for example the savage cuts to Guidance, to the educational psychological service, to the Education Welfare board etc.

All this would provide cover for one of their lordships to side with the government not withstanding the fact that the Taoiseach and Finance minister tell anybody who wishes to listen that we're back in business.

As for the ballot. I think it was wise to have a school ballot. I imagine that turnout should be high and therefore the result will be more representative. I voted no for reasons I have outlined. In my school if pushed I'd say the majority would be no as well but not by an overwhelming amount.

I imagine, however, that Yes will win. If that is the case I wonder what is the legal standing for the Department to impose increment freezes, withhold salary pay backs to a teacher working in an 'ASTI' school but who is not a member of a union. How could that be legal? A successful case on that matter would be interesting and could have significant effects.

They said that the INTO has just lost a specific legal case against FEMPI and that the guards lost one just last year though we didn't get into any further specifics

joebloggs32

deiseindublin wrote: »

Were there even dates of our TUI ballot released?

The TUI site is about as useful as a chocolate teapot.

I believe the papers issue next week, with a return date of may 30th

MrJones1973

man_no_plan wrote: »

Do you think theres any chance that the ASTI will vote against the recommendation of the union and end up where TUI are now?

I and many others called it wrong on HR. I thought HR would be be rejected narrowly-instead it was passed by wide margin. People often say one thing and do another. However teachers really hate these hours and I would still be confident of a Yes vote but my track record has not been good lately

I bet FF would get under 40 seats and SF over 23 seats. I support neither party btw!

Keep up pressure on TDs over FEMPI renewal June 10th.

TheDriver

I have been reading the LRA and our friend Sean O'Foughlu made an error/misrepresented the info. The €1000 increase in 2017 is ONLY for salaries up to 65k. Now that doesn't affect most however any A post holders or top of scale with a B post will not get this increase. Keep in mind that if someone opts out of S&S and takes the cut their salary is still counted as the before reduction rate. Couple this with the other slight increases due to S&S, there will be more driven above the threshold.

man_no_plan

TheDriver wrote: »

I have been reading the LRA and our friend Sean O'Foughlu made an error/misrepresented the info. The €1000 increase in 2017 is ONLY for salaries up to 65k. Now that doesn't affect most however any A post holders or top of scale with a B post will not get this increase. Keep in mind that if someone opts out of S&S and takes the cut their salary is still counted as the before reduction rate. Couple this with the other slight increases due to S&S, there will be more driven above the threshold.

You are 100% correct that the LRA says "On 1 September annualised salaries up to €65,000 are increased by €1,000."

But i think the 1000 is to be added to every point on the pay scale, I read it somewhere but cant find it now. Found it here http://www.into.ie/ROI/LansdowneRoadAgreement/Downloads/LRAFacts.pdf

We should get this clarified.

TheDriver

I wonder if you are 64995 and get 1000 added on, then the FEMPI cuts kick in so you in theory don't get a pay rise of 1000 but rather your gross goes up by that much but then the percentage is cut off it before usual deduction. but yes, we would want to get that clarified.

acequion

Mrwhite1970 wrote: »

I and many others called it wrong on HR. I thought HR would be be rejected narrowly-instead it was passed by wide margin. People often say one thing and do another. However teachers really hate these hours and I would still be confident of a Yes vote but my track record has not been good lately

I bet FF would get under 40 seats and SF over 23 seats. I support neither party btw!

Keep up pressure on TDs over FEMPI renewal June 10th.

Any chance of a template please? Not sure how to word the letter and maybe we really all should sing off the same hymn sheet here. Thanks.

acequion

Re the predictions. My school is huge but I would confidently say that a majority voted yes. How big that majority or how significant the no is always difficult to gauge.

Fingers crossed, folks.

km79

TheDriver wrote: »

I wonder if you are 64995 and get 1000 added on, then the FEMPI cuts kick in so you in theory don't get a pay rise of 1000 but rather your gross goes up by that much but then the percentage is cut off it before usual deduction. but yes, we would want to get that clarified.

That's pretty much me !

Cheese Wagstaff

Sorry if I'm thinking too simplistically, but in regards to the legal case against FEMPI, isn't the fact that the terms of a legally binding contract are being broken not grounds enough?

Any clarity would be appreciated

coillsaille

Cheese Wagstaff wrote: »

Sorry if I'm thinking too simplistically, but in regards to the legal case against FEMPI, isn't the fact that the terms of a legally binding contract are being broken not grounds enough?

Any clarity would be appreciated

I'm not sure but wouldn't they be two separate legal cases. One challenging FEMPI not being scrapped and another case against the DES for breaching the HRA.

man_no_plan

HRA will have expired, S /S is the only thing in that from memory that is due from the DES side, could be wrong, so you'd imagine this would have to be paid.

FEMPI is the law, it allows the minister to alter any contract.

I think that the FG government would use FEMPI without a thought, It could be a Tory govt.

km79

man_no_plan wrote: »

HRA will have expired, S /S is the only thing in that from memory that is due from the DES side, could be wrong, so you'd imagine this would have to be paid.

FEMPI is the law, it allows the minister to alter any contract.

I think that the FG government would use FEMPI without a thought, It could be a Tory govt.

You would imagine s and s would have to be paid indeed as work has been delivered
So why are the govt "threatening "that it won't be and the TUI intimating the same ?
Why are the TUI saying any legal challenge will fail ?
There is PLENTY of grounds for a legal case IF all the threats are carried out .....

man_no_plan

From the DES website. Line by line, top line is what they say about voting for staying in a collective agreement, second line is voting against LRA/CP hours

Point 1
New Teachers up to €26,000 better off between now and end 2020

New Teachers up to €26,000 worse off between now and end 2020

Verdict - probably an accurate ball park figure, depending on scale point, if incremental progression is delayed and additions to the scale not made. I didn't do the maths overly carefully, I think non payment of s/s is included?

Point 2

Longer serving teachers up to €31,000 better off between now and end 2020

Longer serving teachers up to €31,000 worse off between now and end 2020

Verdict - i can't see why longer serving teachers would get more money than newer entrants over 4 years? Theres incremental progression, although im about to hit the plateau myself so its a red herring in money terms. Possibly includes the over 65k restoration?

Point 3

Inclusion of the S&S allowance of €1,592 in the pay scale – half in September 2016 and half in September 2017

Non-inclusion of the S&S allowance in the pay scale

Verdict - yeah but you already said that. And its part of the HRA and has been delivered. would almost certainly clise schools indefinitely unless outside supervisors come in as they did before. A directive to principals not to cooperate with external supervisors would sort that though i think.

Point 4

Increments paid as normal

Increment freeze until July 2018

Verdict - yeah but you already said that. AND some people are still on a freeze until july 2017 anyway so its on a case by case basis.


Point 5

Continuation of improved pay scales for 2011 and 2012 entrants

Withdrawal of improved pay scales for 2011 and 2012 entrants

Verdict - possible but political dynamite in my view. Is that counted earlier in the 26000?

Point 6

Protection against compulsory redundancy

No protection against compulsory redundancy (particularly in situations of school closure or teacher surplus) and only statutory payments for teachers who are made redundant

Verdict - how many schools are closing this year? Plus, in an interview an experienced teacher will almost always be in a better position to pick up a job. Previous service wouked count im sure aling with same payscale etc. You could make money on this one! ( though i wouldn't like to be in that position myself)

POINT 7

Continuation of the Ward report benefits for fixed-term and part-time teachers e.g. teachers eligible to be considered for a CID after 2 years of service

Withdrawal of the Ward report benefits for fixed-term and part-time teachers i.e. fixed-term teachers will not be considered for a CID until after 4 years of service

Verdict - probably, but if you're good enough you'll keep the job into the second year, without interview, and the old CID law still applies.

Point 8

Continued alleviation of the pay cut for teachers earning over €65,000 until the reversal of the cut

Withdrawal of the alleviation of the pay cut for teachers earning over €65,000 i.e. a further pay reduction of up to €1,769

Verdict - probably aswell. Can't figure if this is calculated into the 31000 above.

Point 9

Continuation of alleviation of the moratorium on filling PoR vacancies

Continuation of the moratorium on filling PoR vacancies – no PoR vacancies will be filled

Verdict - They did it before,they'll do it again. Painful in schools and hard in those expecting a post soon.

Point 10

Pay increase of €1,000 on 1 September 2017

Pay increase of €1,000 on 1 September 2017

Verdict - its in LRA so wont get it. Is it just for salaries under 65k?

Also listed as a consequence of rejecting LRA

Delay or loss of the following may also ensue:

Reversal of the pay reductions for higher earners

Verdict Again this is is in the LRA so probably.


- See more at: http://www.education.ie/en/Education-Staff/Information/Payroll-Financial-Information/ASTI-Ballot-FAQ.html#sthash.MNuXVB0f.dpuf


I wouldn't call the above detailed analysis but its a start. Would anyone like to take a sample teacher and run a scenario or two?

This is all about the financial benefits of the LRA. Is there more to life than this? The Croke park hoirs are still part of this agreement. They die with HRA if LRA isnt accepted. Will there be another chance to get shut of them when the LRA dies? Will they be bought and paid for by a pay increase in the future?

For me it was never the time but the nature of them in some schooks, for what its worth they were well used in quite a few places, squandered in others but used opressively in the majority.

ethical

Croke PARK HOURS WERE PREDOMINANTLY a gravy train for 'retired' teachers to come into staffrooms and spoof sh1t at their colleagues for a couple of hours a few times a week after a long school day! Was/is that fair?

doc11

ethical wrote: »

Croke PARK HOURS WERE PREDOMINANTLY a gravy train for 'retired' teachers to come into staffrooms and spoof sh1t at their colleagues for a couple of hours a few times a week after a long school day! Was/is that fair?

Would you have preferred to teach an extra 2 classes a week as the alternative?

ethical

Extra curricular has suffered as a result of this 'disease'!

doc11

ethical wrote: »

Extra curricular has suffered as a result of this 'disease'!

Pity that there's so many hiding behind the voluntary work of their colleagues. Many wouldn't know what Extra curricular meant unless it involved a paid post of responsibility.

What Extra Curricular work have you stopped Ethical?

Chilli Con Kearney

doc11 wrote: »

Pity that there's so many hiding behind the voluntary work of their colleagues. Many wouldn't know what Extra curricular meant unless it involved a paid post of responsibility.

What Extra Curricular work have you stopped Ethical?

It's not about people hiding behind others. Although it can be frustrating at times, that the pool of teachers doing extra curricular activities may be small, you have to look at it in a positive light. If you spent your life viewing things in such a negative fashion, you'd never do anything!

That those who are willing to give, to do the extra, do. They make a real difference, whether it be gaa, soccer, rugby, badminton, basketball, history club, drama club, trips to matches, tours away. Unfortunately these people are doing pointless hours and have decided to curb their efforts in other beneficial areas. That's the real pity.