Calling for a NO to TUI ballot

man_no_plan

acequion wrote: »

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.

My points about ICTU, nurses, guards etc is because this is what's being trotted out by the TUI grassroots group.

Rather than disband the two unions we need to have one i would say.

acequion

Education matters wrote: »

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.

Why don't you get on to your local TDs about it?

r93kaey5p2izun

Education matters wrote: »

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!

I'm afraid I can't see any basis for your optimism and I can't understand your willingness to vote yes if you don't know where we will stand on the very issues this document purports to address!

So far signing up to two agreements has resulted in unequal pay scales with no option of industrial action, casualisation continuing unabated in spite of the Ward report (because it is weak and full of loopholes), collapse of middle management, hours wasted on box ticking and bureaucratic rubbish, significant increase in S&S resulting in reduced subbing opportunities. And we gained nothing.

I'm at a loss how you think another agreement will lead to any improvements. The evidence just doesn't stack up.

acequion

man_no_plan wrote: »

Rather than disband the two unions we need to have one i would say.

Well on that I completely agree. But unfortunately we're not one, we're two and we're divided.

evolving_doors

Ya I don't know where this notion of 'withdrawing' or 'pulling out' of CP hours is coming from. The last I heard it was due to end in June, that was the agreement. If it ends it ends, no pulling out or withdrawing necessary.
It's ironic, the Department is screwing us for not upholding their own agreement, maybe that's to be expected.

In any event, this government will just last long enough for ministers to qualify for pensions, then it's back to square 1. Richard Bruton hasn't really bothered his posterior to give an opinion, it's all being done for him through dept. spokespersons and the Irish Times.

Let's just withdraw from CP as per agreement, no school shutdowns necessary.

So what if parents have to take time out during the day for a PTM. If it was for their child's health would they wait till they get home from work in the evening? Why is education the poor relation?

Putting in a full day's teaching/supervision and then some just to 'keep the public on our side'... Has that really kept the public on our side?

man_no_plan

Regina Warm Thump wrote: »

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?

Look none of it is nice.

If it's only about croke park hours then take them apart with one hand while getting the increases with the other.

My view is that within the LRA there will be little opposition to dismantling the Croke park hours over time to be mostly non whole school activities that are already being done.

There is no cost implication to having them or not having them. Chip away at them while still doing them and keep your strikes for a bigger fight.

FEMPI might not fall today or tomorrow but it's day will come. Then go big when no argument can be made.

r93kaey5p2izun

man_no_plan wrote: »

Look none of it is nice.

If it's only about croke park hours then take them apart with one hand while getting the increases with the other.

My view is that within the LRA there will be little opposition to dismantling the Croke park hours over time to be mostly non whole school activities that are already being done.

There is no cost implication to having them or not having them. Chip away at them while still doing them and keep your strikes for a bigger fight.

FEMPI might not fall today or tomorrow but it's day will come. Then go big when no argument can be made.

I don't actually care about the CP hours. The cost implication is the death of proper collective bargaining and negotiations. In my eyes this is the big fight. We are already too far down the road of threats and I think we are already standing at the edge of the cliff. "Not nice" doesn't cover it. It's just completely unacceptable.

Again, exactly where is your limit? When will you be making the big argument?

km79

Regina Warm Thump wrote: »

I don't actually care about the CP hours. The cost implication is the death of proper collective bargaining and negotiations. In my eyes this is the big fight. We are already too far down the road of threats and I think we are already standing at the edge of the cliff.

This is my feeling also
I don't think the govt are awfully bothered about CP hours either BUT they know the implications of losing this first battle .......especially if it's to both unions !

man_no_plan

Gebgbegb wrote: »

Ya I don't know where this notion of 'withdrawing' or 'pulling out' of CP hours is coming from. The last I heard it was due to end in June, that was the agreement. If it ends it ends, no pulling out or withdrawing necessary.
It's ironic, the Department is screwing us for not upholding their own agreement, maybe that's to be expected.

In any event, this government will just last long enough for ministers to qualify for pensions, then it's back to square 1. Richard Bruton hasn't really bothered his posterior to give an opinion, it's all being done for him through dept. spokespersons and the Irish Times.

Let's just withdraw from CP as per agreement, no school shutdowns necessary.

So what if parents have to take time out during the day for a PTM. If it was for their child's health would they wait till they get home from work in the evening? Why is education the poor relation?

Putting in a full day's teaching/supervision and then some just to 'keep the public on our side'... Has that really kept the public on our side?

Why is it all about croke park though. The s/s is far more onerous and yet theres not a word.

Its a red herring and the ASTI know it. They have been slated by members for being out of touch and have only recently changed tack. The TUI have had the support of the members throughout.

man_no_plan

Regina Warm Thump wrote: »

I don't actually care about the CP hours. The cost implication is the death of proper collective bargaining and negotiations. In my eyes this is the big fight. We are already too far down the road of threats and I think we are already standing at the edge of the cliff. "Not nice" doesn't cover it. It's just completely unacceptable.

Again, exactly where is your limit? When will you be making the big argument?

When we can win.

r93kaey5p2izun

man_no_plan wrote: »

Why is it all about croke park though. The s/s is far more onerous and yet theres not a word.

Its a red herring and the ASTI know it. They have been slated by members for being out of touch and have only recently changed tack. The TUI have had the support of the members throughout.

Because S&S is now contractually required and is supposed to be paid for! CP hours are supposed to end with this agreement. It is symbolic that these hated hours CAN end. So we must use them to call a halt to this hamster wheel of agreements that give us nothing, leave us vulnerable to sneaky attacks (new entrant pay) and are being forced through using threats.

political analyst

man_no_plan wrote: »

Why is it all about croke park though. The s/s is far more onerous and yet theres not a word.

There was no indication of secondary teachers regarding S&S as a problem until 2000. Presumably, teachers doing break time supervision would have their lunch in a period in their timetable when they didn't have class.

I'd say that a walkabout in the school grounds at break time was much better than being in a room with your colleagues for one or two hours for a pointless meeting.

r93kaey5p2izun

man_no_plan wrote: »

When we can win.

And what state will the profession and the union be in then?! How much will already be forever lost in terms of conditions by then?

man_no_plan

political analyst wrote: »

There was no indication of secondary teachers regarding S&S as a problem until 2000. Presumably, teachers doing break time supervision would have their lunch in a period in their timetable when they didn't have class.

I'd say that a walkabout in the school grounds at break time was much better than being in a room with your colleagues for one or two hours for a pointless meeting.

For three hours a week?

A walkabout?

Substitution for absent colleagues where you are effectively teaching extra classes.

Give me an hour with my colleagues any day.

If all the meetings are pointless you're doing them wrong.

r93kaey5p2izun

The agenda of these meetings is largely being controlled by principals. Not to mention the mind-numbing lectures they organise on how to teach, delivered by people who haven't taught for years and think making teachers write on show-me boards and draw mindmaps is groundbreaking innovation. 80% of ASTI members listed CP hours as the least productive work they do. Obviously a lot of principals are doing it very wrong!

deiseindublin

Fab post by EC on Grassroots page!

***********************************************************************

Threats, Threats and More Threats
As far as I can see there at least 7 different threats being made if we chose to vote No.

1. Increments will be frozen for three years;

2. We won’t be able to negotiate improvements for new entrants;

3. The Cush and Ward Recommendations will be withdrawn;

4. Increases in respect of S and S will not be paid;

5. New salary scales for new entrants as increased under the HRA will be withdrawn;

6. The offset applied to those over 65,000 and losing Sand S will be withdrawn;

7. Removal of protection against compulsory redundancy.

Have I missed anything?

We should be very clear here that the only threat that has any substance in law or collective agreements is 1. This threat existed the last time we voted on the LRA and the TUI recommended a no vote. Members clearly feel that threat was worth facing down given how bad the LRA is. Threat 7 also existed then and members and the TUI Executive clearly felt it was worth gambling on that one too. Any threat of compulsory redundancy should be met with industrial action.

I have dealt with 2 in an earlier post. New entrants are being used as pawns in this vote although nothing substantial has been delivered for them.

In relation to the rest it is quite incredible that the only basis for these is , according to TUI News, that “the government have clarified” or “It has been confirmed that, if the Union is not covered by a collective agreement” all these things will happen. Although it does not say who confirmed this, it seems clear that it was the Department of Education and DPER.

Is this not odd! Most of the items were part of the HRA. TUI members delivered on the hours and took the pay cuts that went with that. But now the employer is saying it is going to withdraw from the commitments it made under that agreement. The Department of Education is now saying it’s going to behave like the worst of employers and withdraw from agreements it freely entered into (we didn’t enter freely because we were bullied into it by FEMPI). A department of state is now going to send out a message to all employers that you are now free to break your agreements with unions.

What’s even odder is that we do not know specifically what our employer is relying on to make these threats. And its not clear that the TUI has asked! What kind of a union roles over to such threats. If your employer makes such threats wouldn’t you expect your union to stand up to them and insist that the employer delivers on their commitments or face industrial action. It is really quite appalling that rather than do this the TUI leadership is now repeating these threats specifically to bully us. I didn’t think things could get any worse in the TUI!

Its worth remembering what the TUI said about the HRA when we voted. In its Q and A it said, for example,
"In recognition of the loss of the S&S pensionable allowance and the change to a compulsory scheme, a gross payment of €1592 will be applied to the incremental scale for all teachers. This will be pensionable and will be applied to the incremental scale in two equal moieties; €796 in the school year 2016/17 and €796 in the school year 2017/18".

This sounds unconditional to me. Can you find the part which says “ and only if you sign up to another agreements which is as bad as this one”. If you do, let me know.

acequion

man_no_plan wrote: »

Its a red herring and the ASTI know it. They have been slated by members for being out of touch and have only recently changed tack. The TUI have had the support of the members throughout.

And therein lies the whole problem with TUI.

political analyst

man_no_plan wrote: »

If all the meetings are pointless you're doing them wrong.

I'm just reflecting what many posters on boards.ie are saying.

There always have been staff meetings in schools but, as far as I know, there wasn't one every week in the pre-Croke Park days.

man_no_plan

deiseindublin wrote: »

Fab post by EC on Grassroots page!

***********************************************************************

They are very convincing arguments to be fair.

But, the difference now is that the threat is imminent. When we voted on this before the HRA still had months to run now its almost finished.

Rejecting the LRA was only ever about getting sectoral talks. TUI went in without ASTI because ASTI wouldn't talk. Maybe that was the time for the Solidarity?

Two unions had a strong no vote from members and the TUI got what they got.

what's the difference now? What will the difference be after the vote if it goes the way grassroots would like? Thats the important thing?

deiseindublin

man_no_plan wrote: »

Two unions had a strong no vote from members and the TUI got what they got.

They got SFA! Nothing concrete, I just hope everybody sees this hot air doc for what it is.

man_no_plan

deiseindublin wrote: »

They got SFA! Nothing concrete, I just hope everybody sees this hot air doc for what it is.

It's true they got very little concrete. And as I say this was against the backdrop of a rejection by both teacher unions. What will be different next time?

There will be a next time.

TheDriver

deiseindublin wrote: »

Fab post by EC on Grassroots page!

***********************************************************************

Worse again, its written in a number of circulars stating what we will be getting in 2016/2017 and beyond if we signed up to HRA, not if we signed up to HRA and the next agreement.

Personally, its all about the broken promises here

evolving_doors

man_no_plan wrote: »

Why is it all about croke park though. The s/s is far more onerous and yet theres not a word.

Its a red herring and the ASTI know it. They have been slated by members for being out of touch and have only recently changed tack. The TUI have had the support of the members throughout.

CP is due to end in June, if we continue to work them then it is entering into a new contract. We vote so we agree to finish them, then at least it is understood that we're finished.
It's the same as when you do a job for 20 years and then decide that you don't want to do some duties, even if there's no contract stating duties it's understood that an agreement is in play.

Sorry that was long winded.

deiseindublin

man_no_plan wrote: »

What will be different next time?

Hopefully ASTI and TUI will be on the one page, that'd be a start, strength in numbers and all that.

man_no_plan

deiseindublin wrote: »

Hopefully ASTI and TUI will be on the one page, that'd be a start, strength in numbers and all that.

They were on the same page until the ASTI said they didn't want to talk to the Department.

Both rejected LRA. TUI had a mandate for strike action if the DES wouldn't talk, I'm not sure about asti, talks were offered.

Both unions could be together on this right now, we shouldn't need to wait.

deiseindublin

TUI should never have talked, end of, the DES moved the goal posts, they have upheld their side of the bargain, we should talk IF and WHEN they do.

man_no_plan

deiseindublin wrote: »

TUI should never have talked, end of, the DES moved the goal posts, they have upheld their side of the bargain, we should talk IF and WHEN they do.

We had a ballot for industrial action if the DES wouldn't talk!! How did you vote in that?

r93kaey5p2izun

We had agreed strike action if issues were not meaningfully addressed in talks. There is nothing meaningful in the document except threats. We should not have engaged in talks while the threat of FEMPI was part of the equation - such talks could never truly meaningfully address our issues.

man_no_plan

We better hope its a yes with our new president!

Sir123

I feel sorry for the unions that signed up to the LRA such as the nurses. They then fight for pay restorations and working conditions pre 2008 levels but the government are not budging (talking for that matter). The reason why they're not budging is because they accepted the LRA and the government is no longer obliged to offer anything extra to them until they plan their next agreement before September 2018.

These agreements will never stop. Enough is enough and any TUI member that votes yes to hold onto croke park hours, thus accepting LRA that they previously rejected is mad.

I think it would be wise for TUI members to take a look at why they voted No to the LRA before they cast their vote.