Calling for a NO to TUI ballot

TheDriver

To be honest - I don't know any teacher that dropped out of EC activities because of CP hours. But yes, they are awful hours and serve no positive influence on the profession.

man_no_plan

TheDriver wrote: »

To be honest - I don't know any teacher that dropped out of EC activities because of CP hours. But yes, they are awful hours and serve no positive influence on the profession.

As i recall the department wanted them to be one hour teaching per week initially but the unions weren't having it.

Would an hour per week teaching be less of an insult?

Can we accept the gradual dismantling of the hours with restored pay rather than their abolition with what comes in FEMPI?

I don't buy this argument about feeling bullied.

Benicetomonty

man_no_plan wrote: »

As i recall the department wanted them to be one hour teaching per week initially but the unions weren't having it.

Would an hour per week teaching be less of an insult?

Can we accept the gradual dismantling of the hours with restored pay rather than their abolition with what comes in FEMPI?

I don't buy this argument about feeling bullied.

We already have some of the highest contact hours in the world. An extra hour teaching would mean extra time preparing as well. Not a runner imo.

Dont mind CP hours being used for PT meetings personally even if those days are long but the rest of them have seemed pretty pointless to me.

man_no_plan

33 hours from croke park

12 from m58/04

45 hours less the three m58/04 that are 'bought out' leaves 42 hours

In most schools would there be 5 x 3 = 15 hours for parent teacher meetings

one staff meeting per term = 6 hours

We're already half way there with 21 hours left - how many hours per year for subject planning? 5 per subject? or less? (which can bew done in your own time and are a requirement under the education Act?)

that leaves 11 hours - open night - 3 hours

8 left for 4 meetings in the year give or take.

It's no more than we ever did in fairness for what we're looking at as an alternative.

If the teaching unions think that they can go it alone on the restoration of pay and removal of extra hours then they are misguided at best and irresponsible at worst.

The ASTI have sold an idea of blissful business as usual to members which is not the case.

While I think that the S&S area is dodgy territory for the department if they use FEMPI they can withhold the payment if they like. And you cant decide not to do s/s two days a week. its all or nothing and if schools don't open on health and safety grounds we are in trouble.

Education matters

Totally agree, man-no-plan. If we vote no, we lose Ward, increments frozen, no chance of talks for new entrants unless we actually agree to LRA. If we want pay parity, we need to be covered by an agreement, yes its totally unfair, yes the government have moved the goalposts, yes, we did the work and now we want the payment but is it realistically worth losing the chance to engage about new entrant pay. I think saying no will lead to protracted strike and loss of pay.

acequion

man_no_plan wrote: »

33 hours from croke park

12 from m58/04

45 hours less the three m58/04 that are 'bought out' leaves 42 hours

In most schools would there be 5 x 3 = 15 hours for parent teacher meetings

one staff meeting per term = 6 hours

We're already half way there with 21 hours left - how many hours per year for subject planning? 5 per subject? or less? (which can bew done in your own time and are a requirement under the education Act?)

that leaves 11 hours - open night - 3 hours

8 left for 4 meetings in the year give or take.

It's no more than we ever did in fairness for what we're looking at as an alternative.

If the teaching unions think that they can go it alone on the restoration of pay and removal of extra hours then they are misguided at best and irresponsible at worst.

The ASTI have sold an idea of blissful business as usual to members which is not the case.

While I think that the S&S area is dodgy territory for the department if they use FEMPI they can withhold the payment if they like. And you cant decide not to do s/s two days a week. its all or nothing and if schools don't open on health and safety grounds we are in trouble.

How on earth can you claim that the hours which we now work for free are no more than we ever did? What you are doing here is playing down the implications of signing up to yet another agreement. It the "sure it isn't that bad" argument.

Well it really is that bad and worse. The LRA requires the continued completion of 45 extra hours per year worked free of charge by the teacher. Do your sums whatever way you want but that is way over and above the old half in / half out arrangement or anything we ever did. On top of that the hours are extremely prescriptive and discriminate against working parents. Yes teachers have always worked over and above and have always given freely of their time but it was voluntary, flexible and never prescriptive.

The extra hours are not the only problem here. These continuous agreements are a way to straitjacket teachers and tie our hands. Striking is prohibited. Just look at all that got in through the CPA and the HRA which would never have got in otherwise, the attack on new entrants,the slashing of allowances, the huge reduction in sick pay to give just a few examples.

You think the ASTI is being naive. Well you are being naive if you think progress can be made inside these agreements when nothing but a worsening of conditions has resulted to date.The Government have normalised breaking their side of the agreement and those of you who favour a yes to the LRA are basically saying that it's ok to do that. Well it's not. If you take that view there is no point to being in a union. We may as well all put our heads on the block.

Many battles have been won in the past by union members sticking together and sticking to their guns. These agreements are in no way beneficial to the education sector and I think we should do everything in our power to stay outside. Of recent years our employers have shown that they care little for the concerns of teachers or for Irish education. We owe it to our profession and to young of this country to stand up to them.

man_no_plan

acequion wrote: »

How on earth can you claim that the hours which we now work for free are no more than we ever did? What you are doing here is playing down the implications of signing up to yet another agreement. It the "sure it isn't that bad" argument.

Well it really is that bad and worse. The LRA requires the continued completion of 45 extra hours per year worked free of charge by the teacher. Do your sums whatever way you want but that is way over and above the old half in / half out arrangement or anything we ever did. On top of that the hours are extremely prescriptive and discriminate against working parents. Yes teachers have always worked over and above and have always given freely of their time but it was voluntary, flexible and never prescriptive.

The extra hours are not the only problem here. These continuous agreements are a way to straitjacket teachers and tie our hands. Striking is prohibited. Just look at all that got in through the CPA and the HRA which would never have got in otherwise, the attack on new entrants,the slashing of allowances, the huge reduction in sick pay to give just a few examples.

You think the ASTI is being naive. Well you are being naive if you think progress can be made inside these agreements when nothing but a worsening of conditions has resulted to date.The Government have normalised breaking their side of the agreement and those of you who favour a yes to the LRA are basically saying that it's ok to do that. Well it's not. If you take that view there is no point to being in a union. We may as well all put our heads on the block.

Many battles have been won in the past by union members sticking together and sticking to their guns. These agreements are in no way beneficial to the education sector and I think we should do everything in our power to stay outside. Of recent years our employers have shown that they care little for the concerns of teachers or for Irish education. We owe it to our profession and to young of this country to stand up to them.

Well it does no harm to look at things in the round and consider all sides.

Sick pay and new entrant pay scales were not part of any collective agreement, they were imposed on the whole public service and only the whole public service together will get this sorted.

The guards will have their pay review and possibly join the LRA leaving us on our own complaining about an hour per week of wasted time while nurses work the wards for free as people lie on trollies.

The success we have had as a union have been built on strategic campaigning, not make it up as you go along stuff.

Basically what im reading here is that we want everything back the way it was, which is no bad thing, but i don't think that the unions are capable of achieving that right now.

What is the game plan exactly? Answer there is none.

And as for new entrant salaries and contracts the line i have been hearing is that if they want their say they need to pay up to a union and vote, i waited 4 years for my CID, they can do the same. Surely the chance of pay equalisation is a better chance to take than the risk of a two year Increment freeze.

Solidarity indeed!

Are we really expecting ICTU to call a general strike if FEMPI is invoked while the vast majority of PS workers are in the LRA?? Thats what it boils down to whether we like it or not.

I don't like the CP hours anymore than the next guy but if we start having PTMS in school time and the like then we are losing the public support we gained in the JC campaign. And dont tell me that three per year will do in a school with more than 300 students.

And..... If we do 5 for free, or whatever, wgat does this say? We should be outraged about the right things.

Let it not be forgotten that our entire workload can be changed by the stroke of a pen if anew syllabus is introduced as happened in the DCG, history and geography syllabi over the past ten years to name a few.

Employers trying to squeeze employees is not new but we need to fight the right things at the right time. In my opinion we are putting too much at stake for the sake of the hours.

My ealrier post was intended to highlight that before croke park we probably did the same hours. This proposed agreement allows them to be done in a less prescriptive way. The main argument seems to be the way they were used, so change that and were sorted.

Voting no alobe is not the answer to this. I will walk the picket if I have to in support of the union and my colleagues but, right now, i dont think that this is the best course of action.

r93kaey5p2izun

man_no_plan wrote: »

Sick pay and new entrant pay scales were not part of any collective agreement, they were imposed on the whole public service and only the whole public service together will get this sorted.

The guards will have their pay review and possibly join the LRA leaving us on our own

So no point us fighting ourselves, we have to rely on negotiation with the whole public service but the Gardai get their own pay review having already stopped CP hours? Where's their FEMPI? This just doesn't make logical sense.

But for me it's not actually about the CP hours. It's about threats and FEMPI. We followed through fully on two agreements. They broke one agreement and say they will break this one too. Everything we gave is permanent (except CP hours), everything they gave is being revoked. The only thing they offer us now is not taking away what they already gave us.

I'm not willing to agree to anything else under these conditions. So my endgame is a return to proper collective bargaining and industrial relations. Nothing else is good enough. I think it's madness to continue any further down this road. And I will personally lose out on an enhanced CID if the Ward circular is withdrawn. But it's just not worth the price we are paying.

man_no_plan

Regina Warm Thump wrote: »

So no point us fighting ourselves, we have to rely on negotiation with the whole public service but the Gardai get their own pay review having already stopped CP hours? Where's their FEMPI? This just doesn't make logical sense.

But for me it's not actually about the CP hours. It's about threats and FEMPI. We followed through fully on two agreements. They broke one agreement and say they will break this one too. Everything we gave is permanent (except CP hours), everything they gave is being revoked. The only thing they offer us now is not taking away what they already gave us.

I'm not willing to agree to anything else under these conditions. So my endgame is a return to proper collective bargaining and industrial relations. Nothing else is good enough. I think it's madness to continue any further down this road. And I will personally lose out on an enhanced CID if the Ward circular is withdrawn. But it's just not worth the price we are paying.

And that's fair enough if you have considered the full picture. I get the sense that the majority think 'woo hoo no croke park hours' and thats the end of the story.

The guards can make up their hours between now and the end of the year if they want, remember we went to CP late and didn't have to do the full complement of hours in the first year. There will be give there if they go in to LRA i think, and give for us too if we're inside.

km79

man_no_plan wrote: »

And that's fair enough if you have considered the full picture. I get the sense that the majority think 'woo hoo no croke park hours' and thats the end of the story.

The guards can make up their hours between now and the end of the year if they want, remember we went to CP late and didn't have to do the full complement of hours in the first year. There will be give there if they go in to LRA i think, and give for us too if we're inside.

maybe you should set up a separate "Calling for a Yes to a TUI ballot" thread ?

man_no_plan

km79 wrote: »

maybe you should set up a separate "Calling for a Yes to a TUI ballot" thread ?

Sorry I didn't know i wasn't allowed to upset people with my opinion.

km79

man_no_plan wrote: »

Sorry I didn't know i wasn't allowed to upset people with my opinion.

it was a genuine suggestion?
lay out your thoughts on it.
I'm Asti so my vote has been cast.
I desperately hope ye vote NO but you seem to have strong feelings the other way !

Education matters

km79 wrote: »

maybe you should set up a separate "Calling for a Yes to a TUI ballot" thread ?

Isn't he entitled to express his views? There are reasons to vote yes, in my workplace people want their increments, they need them. They'll also be glad to get their s and s payment. I agree the threats are irritating and I also agree that the government are reneging on their agreement but compulsory redundancy is a frightening prospect for most of us. Schools and centres are closing.
I also accept that the LRA is the only show in town. It offers us Ward, Cush and talks about pay parity with the strength of public sector numbers. Patricia King says she will deal with pay parity as a matter of priority, if we vote no new entrants actually go down on the pay scale to pre Haddington Road.
Maybe I'm naive but I believe the threats posted on the DoE website. We had public support during the JC debacle, what support will we have here?

km79

Education matters wrote: »

Isn't he entitled to express his views? There are reasons to vote yes, in my workplace people want their increments, they need them. They'll also be glad to get their s and s payment. I agree the threats are irritating and I also agree that the government are reneging on their agreement but compulsory redundancy is a frightening prospect for most of us. Schools and centres are closing.
I also accept that the LRA is the only show in town. It offers us Ward, Cush and talks about pay parity with the strength of public sector numbers. Patricia King says she will deal with pay parity as a matter of priority, if we vote no new entrants actually go down on the pay scale to pre Haddington Road.
Maybe I'm naive but I believe the threats posted on the DoE website. We had public support during the JC debacle, what support will we have here?

of course he/she is
that's why I suggested a separate thread to clearly outline the reasons he/she feels a YES vote is warranted
It was a genuine suggestion.

Sir123

Majority of increments mean nothing after tax. Working conditions will continue to deteriorate for teachers if the LRA is passed by TUI.

It's true for what they say (or what it appears to be rather). The ASTI is the more radical union that is in touch with its members. Vote to get ride of CP hours and stand up for your profession.

r93kaey5p2izun

Education matters wrote: »

Isn't he entitled to express his views? There are reasons to vote yes, in my workplace people want their increments, they need them. They'll also be glad to get their s and s payment. I agree the threats are irritating and I also agree that the government are reneging on their agreement but compulsory redundancy is a frightening prospect for most of us. Schools and centres are closing.
I also accept that the LRA is the only show in town. It offers us Ward, Cush and talks about pay parity with the strength of public sector numbers. Patricia King says she will deal with pay parity as a matter of priority, if we vote no new entrants actually go down on the pay scale to pre Haddington Road.
Maybe I'm naive but I believe the threats posted on the DoE website. We had public support during the JC debacle, what support will we have here?

I believe the threats too. That's why I'm voting no. We cannot allow this type of industrial relations to become the norm!

Where do you realistically think we will be in 18 months time if we vote yes? What do you think will be the state of play regarding pay scales, casualisation, PoR and use of CP hours? What do you think will be happening in terms of discussions for the next agreement? I'm genuinely interested how you expect it to go.

Sir123

Regina Warm Thump wrote: »

I believe the threats too. That's why I'm voting no. We cannot allow this type of industrial relations to become the norm!

Where do you realistically think we will be in 18 months time if we vote yes? What do you think will be the state of play regarding pay scales, casualisation, PoR and use of CP hours? What do you think will be happening in terms of discussions for the next agreement? I'm genuinely interested how you expect it to go.

Tbh, I think a lot of the DES threats would be challenged. I mean a permanent teacher cannot lose his/her job. This has never happened before in teaching or in any part of the civil service, in or out of an agreement. It's all bluff. Bluff bluff bluff

man_no_plan

Regina Warm Thump wrote: »

I believe the threats too. That's why I'm voting no. We cannot allow this type of industrial relations to become the norm!

Where do you realistically think we will be in 18 months time if we vote yes? What do you think will be the state of play regarding pay scales, casualisation, PoR and use of CP hours? What do you think will be happening in terms of discussions for the next agreement? I'm genuinely interested how you expect it to go.

Collective bargaining has always been about cash for 'productivity', that will never change.

Look at sustaining progress and t2016 (which TUI voted against by the way). Money for more work. ICTU didn't support us then and won't suport us now. The difficulty now is they gave us the extra work already and are drip feeding the money.

By any measure an increase of about 3% (1000 on the scale point plus half s/s) is progress while keeping the conditions we have now.

Everyone's knickers is in a knot about them but you can be glass half full or half empty.

Dismantle the hours bit by bit, in JC we already achieved 22 hours per year that weren't there by negotiation with a bit of industrial action, there was room on both sides. If we go this way everyone is in a corner and we all lose.

The 33 hours can be put to use in a way that suits us all. They way they were before they became official and counted and caused everyone to watch everyone else to make sure they were doing their hours.

Education matters

Sir123 wrote: »

Tbh, I think a lot of the DES threats would be challenged. I mean a permanent teacher cannot lose his/her job. This has never happened before in teaching or in any part of the civil service, in or out of an agreement. It's all bluff. Bluff bluff bluff

What about school closure? What about the staff in centres that are no longer required? There are a myriad of issues with simply stating bluff bluff bluff! I know people who are in this situation, the school is going, they have no idea what will happen them. There are members of staff who under Ward will be entitled to a CID and now it will be gone. It wasn't bluff when they introduced FEMPI first time around or second.

Education matters

Regina Warm Thump wrote: »

I believe the threats too. That's why I'm voting no. We cannot allow this type of industrial relations to become the norm!

Where do you realistically think we will be in 18 months time if we vote yes? What do you think will be the state of play regarding pay scales, casualisation, PoR and use of CP hours? What do you think will be happening in terms of discussions for the next agreement? I'm genuinely interested how you expect it to go.

I wish I knew, I do know that if we're not within LRA and in dispute, which is an obvious assumption any action taken will be referred to WRC and they'll simply tell us we need to be in LRA. We have a chance to address pay parity, why throw it away. I'm a member of a union who fought JC until it went from 100 percent internal assessment to 0! They also professional time for me to carry out the work. All of this while we were locked into HRA. I believe they will achieve more from this, but we gotta be in first!

acequion

man_no_plan wrote: »

Sorry I didn't know i wasn't allowed to upset people with my opinion.

Look,of course you are entitled to your opinion man_no_plan and the good thing is that everyone is being civilised,for now anyway

We all have different views but like km79, I too am ASTI, and like km79, I too very much hope and urge ye to vote no.

Your say a lot of things in your posts and I can see your point in some things but re a few I'll say this:

There is no way we were doing anything like these extra hours in the pre CP days. We did our staff and P/T meetings in half in/half out,in my school we came back a day early in the summer to do all our planning etc and then we could get that day back later in the year for a long weekend or something. Now we do an early day but it's for CP. Fine there are people who always went to every cock fight in a school, awards, open day etc but it was voluntary and not everyone did it. Don't forget as well that for HR, the S&S people got hit with a double whammy,up from 1.5 hours per week to 3 and for zero pay. Pay restoration for that is derisory. So people are now putting in a huge amount of extra hours. Fact.

You speak of strategic union successes. The way I see it is that public service unions have had little to no success of recent years, partly because of a very successful divide and conquer strategy from the Gov,partly because they ran scared and caved in. And here we go again with that. Another poster is already calling the LRA the only show in town.Where did we hear that one before?

The LRA guarantees nothing for new entrants. The Gov have already made that clear.

I see your point re the nurses,but we're not the nurses. We have our own issues and must forget about the nurses etc and deal with our own issues. The whole problem with ICTU is the one size fits all approach. One size doesn't fit all. And there is no point in worrying about public opinion. The media will make sure that we are painted in the very worst light anyway.

So do we just say ,"ah we're fcked and give in"? As we did last time and the time before that! Nothing would ever be achieved in this world if people constantly became intimidated by the obstacles and ran scared. Many, many things have been achieved against the odds due to unity, determination and perseverence. If we, the teachers had all stuck together long ago,with the two unions on the same page, we would not be in the mess we're in now.

And finally as for wanting things to go back to the way they were,yes it's an aspiration but not the end game. The end game is compromise. But not in the straitjacket of an odious agreement at a time when our economy is performing one of the best in Europe.

If we all eventually end up in the LRA we might as well disband the two unions and resign ourselves to the inevitable downward spiral which is what this "public sector reform" is turning out to be.

Sir123

Education matters wrote: »

What about school closure? What about the staff in centres that are no longer required? There are a myriad of issues with simply stating bluff bluff bluff! I know people who are in this situation, the school is going, they have no idea what will happen them. There are members of staff who under Ward will be entitled to a CID and now it will be gone. It wasn't bluff when they introduced FEMPI first time around or second.

I do understand where you're coming from and I do sympotise with you and that of your peers who find themselves in that situation. But wasn't the ward report a seperate entity altogether? As far as I was aware it itself was never attached to the HRA. Sure Fempi will be reviewed in June and maybe then it'll highlight the reversal of cids to 4 years.

On top of that, wasn't the school closure agreement a separate agreement again, one that had never anything to do with CP or HR where permanent/cid teachers were automatically redeployed? I'm sorry if this all comes across as a rant but i'm just completely fed up of this government. Everything is targeted at teachers and essentially we're all victims of their so called threats.

Education matters

Sir123 wrote: »

I do understand where you're coming from and I do sympotise with you and that of your peers who find themselves in that situation. But wasn't the ward report a seperate entity altogether? As far as I was aware it itself was never attached to the HRA. Sure Fempi will be reviewed in June and maybe then it'll highlight the reversal of cids to 4 years.

On top of that, wasn't the school closure agreement a separate agreement again, one that had never anything to do with CP or HR where permanent/cid teachers were automatically redeployed? I'm sorry if this all comes across as a rant but i'm just completely fed up of this government. Everything is targeted at teachers and essentially we're all victims of their so called threats.

No I get you and likewise! Ward is just an agreement and can be pulled anytime apparently. And according to the Department compulsory redundancies are on the cards for those outside the LRA.

acequion

Education matters wrote: »

I'm a member of a union who fought JC until it went from 100 percent internal assessment to 0! !

You are very naive if you think that's an achievement. 0% assessment!! Have you forgotten about the CBA's, the SLAR's? And don't tell me that coming from 100%was an achievement. 100% internal assessment was never going to happen, not even 50%. Ruari Quinn knew that full well.

So you guys got nowhere on the JC,even though you might think you did. And ye left us out in the cold while ye were at it. Now if we achieve concessions ye'll automatically get them too.Like the option to buy out of S&S. Hardly fair but as we're divided,we get conquered, unfortunately.

man_no_plan

Education matters wrote: »

No I get you and likewise! Ward is just an agreement and can be pulled anytime apparently. And according to the Department compulsory redundancies are on the cards for those outside the LRA.

Ward is part of the HRA, if we're out they're out. Would we expect any more or less? The law is the 2003 act.

r93kaey5p2izun

man_no_plan wrote: »

Collective bargaining has always been about cash for 'productivity', that will never change.

Look at sustaining progress and t2016 (which TUI voted against by the way). Money for more work. ICTU didn't support us then and won't suport us now. The difficulty now is they gave us the extra work already and are drip feeding the money.

By any measure an increase of about 3% (1000 on the scale point plus half s/s) is progress while keeping the conditions we have now.

Everyone's knickers is in a knot about them but you can be glass half full or half empty.

Dismantle the hours bit by bit, in JC we already achieved 22 hours per year that weren't there by negotiation with a bit of industrial action, there was room on both sides. If we go this way everyone is in a corner and we all lose.

The 33 hours can be put to use in a way that suits us all. They way they were before they became official and counted and caused everyone to watch everyone else to make sure they were doing their hours.

Yes, collective bargaining involves increased productivity in return for cash. Not increased productivity in exchange for holding on to what we already have. We did the CP hours so they wouldn't cut our pay any further or introduce compulsory redundancies beyond already significant cuts and levies. They cut the new entrants' pay anyway.

The increased payment was already secured in return for S&S which has been done and will be done. Now they will renege even if we continue with the work. This is not a proper collective agreement.

What it boils down to is that the only thing teachers are actually pulling out of is 33 hours of wasted valuable time in order to make a stand against unacceptable and unethical threats. While in response to the loss of hours that achieve absolutely nothing for students, the government will freeze pay, impose compulsory redundancies, renege on payment for work already done and withdraw the Ward circular. Do you think this is fair terms of reference for negotiations or collective bargaining? Because I don't, and I think it's time to call a halt to this before it goes any further. When will you call a halt? Where is your limit for continuing to negotiate with people who are dishonest, who move the goalposts when they feel like it, who cannot be trusted?

km79

Education matters wrote: »

No I get you and likewise! Ward is just an agreement and can be pulled anytime apparently. And according to the Department compulsory redundancies are on the cards for those outside the LRA.

You know the A in LRA stands for Agreement too.......as it did in HRA which will not be honored . So yes these "Agreements" can indeed be pulled at anytime . Or bits of them that don't suit the Govt.
I really hope enough TUI members look back on the history of these "agreements" . Don't have to look too far as some of the threats are to do with work delivered under The Haddington Road AGREEMENT . Work which now won't be paid for .......

Education matters

acequion wrote: »

You are very naive if you think that's an achievement. 0% assessment!! Have you forgotten about the CBA's, the SLAR's? And don't tell me that coming from 100%was an achievement. 100% internal assessment was never going to happen, not even 50%. Ruari Quinn knew that full well.

So you guys got nowhere on the JC,even though you might think you did. And ye left us out in the cold while ye were at it. Now if we achieve concessions ye'll automatically get them too.Like the option to buy out of S&S. Hardly fair but as we're divided,we get conquered, unfortunately.

God, I'm sorry you were left out in the cold. That was not my decision but your unions vote. I haven't forgotten CBA s or Slars, in fact just completed both. I used my professional time, done and dusted and delighted with the result.

Education matters

km79 wrote: »

You know the A in LRA stands for Agreement too.......as it did in HRA which will not be honored . So yes these "Agreements" can indeed be pulled at anytime . Or bits of them that don't suit the Govt.
I really hope enough TUI members look back on the history of these "agreements" . Don't have to look too far as some of the threats are to do with work delivered under The Haddington Road AGREEMENT . Work which now won't be paid for .......

I do I do, it's the Fempi acronym I've an issue with....especially when it's introduced as we ballot on an Agreement.

man_no_plan

acequion wrote: »

You are very naive if you think that's an achievement. 0% assessment!! Have you forgotten about the CBA's, the SLAR's? And don't tell me that coming from 100%was an achievement. 100% internal assessment was never going to happen, not even 50%. Ruari Quinn knew that full well.

So you guys got nowhere on the JC,even though you might think you did. And ye left us out in the cold while ye were at it. Now if we achieve concessions ye'll automatically get them too.Like the option to buy out of S&S. Hardly fair but as we're divided,we get conquered, unfortunately.

Why is this gone ASTI V TUI? Tui policy was set at Congress 2013, it was pursued and satisfied.