Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Deal to restore pay for newly-qualified teachers in INTO and TUI
Options
Comments
-
For starters Medicine person, you get paid while being a doctor in training. As a teacher, you now pay over 12,000 for the privilege. The prospects for a graduating teacher are pretty grim for many with occasional work and a part time contract after that. its foolish in the extreme to compare such diverse professions
I could go on but if everything come down to a simple yours is bigger than mine it just means that the privileged elites gain at the expense of everyone else.
In fact undergraduate students pay around 15000 while training while postgraduate ones pay 60000 so you really dont know what you're talking about
You dont know a good deal when you see one0 -
The narrative is completely wrong, and this is so frustrating to anyone who has a decent sense of economics.
Pay 'restoration' should have never entered the vernacular. It really boils my blood and irks me that we make these horrible mistakes, again. Whether we like it or not like it, teachers were way, way over compensated for many years. There was and is a massive disconnect between what the teaching profession should pay, or could rationally be supported, and what it did and does pay. People are always resistant to change, and change is hard, so we had a real chance to bed down something good here and we right messed it up in favour of the game of politics.
No one here seems to have the balls to stick it to the unions like they need to. And young teachers don't realise this two tier Payscale was union led. Young teachers were sold a right turkey as unions sought to put the head in the sand to reality and cling on to these immoral and undeserved pay & benefits for their older members, opting to defer the pain to the next generation. They then talk of pay 'restoration'. It is completely stomach turning.
Some simple changes that need to be made:
1. Pay cuts to existing retired teachers pensions
2. Cut lump sums for next batch of retirement
3. Revenue transfer from teachers over 35 to teachers under 35 to rebalance the years of inequality
4. More linkage to performance based pay
5 Cut pay for one summer month, the salary and benefits are enough already
5. Implement what's known to those outside the public sector as 'non compete clauses' or 'restraint of trade'. Essentially, any teachers doing grinds must give a minimum 70% of the fee back to the state (before tax to the collector general on the remaining 30%) rather than pocketing it entirely. In the commercial world I can't just walk in to a well developed organisation who has developed itself over many years and with much expenditure, and take their customers for a bit of work on the side. It is utterly shocking that teachers think they can sustain the level of undeserved pay and benefits, and also have this side burner.
How do you measure 'performance'?0 -
A government that couldn't care less about education?? Are you having a laugh now or just trying to wind people up??
Our education system is laughable when looked at in today's context and every time the Department try to modernize it the unions kick up a fuss e.g. take coding that ye managed to reduce to selective subject. As someone in the I.T. sector who try's to hire staff on a fairly regular basis our education system is at least 10 years behind the economy and society.
So maybe when ye stop cribbing about every change and are happy to actually work a proper days work for a decent wage I will stop with the narrow minded remarks.
If the government were serious about IT and coding they would have created a Leaving Cert subject for it. I don't honestly see much resistance from teachers. First of all teachers would have to be trained. Realistically there are issues there, to give it equal status with other Leaving Cert subject we are talking about having someone teach it who is degree qualified in Computer Science, or perhaps if you want to fast track it as a subject offer a two year part time masters conversion course type thing. I suspect maths/science teachers would probably be targeted for it.
Aside from that the alternative is to try and persuade graduates with Computer Science degrees to do the PME and go teaching. How many computer science graduates do you honestly see going into teaching with that degree. If they are any good at it, they will be working in the private sector for more money. For those with CS degrees they would only have typically one subject for teaching. It doesn't make them very employable as a teacher. Most teachers have two.
There are a host of issues, which could be solved over time, but it's not going to happen overnight.
Also the government have been pushing STEM careers and subjects for years. The Junior Cert science syllabus has a recommendation of 240-270 hours over three years. The new junior cert science syllabus has a recommendation of 200 hours. Chunks of physics, chemistry and biology have been cut out of it. Our students will be fantastic at putting together power point presentations on science careers but won't know anything about sound waves or that they have kidneys. STEM my arse.0 -
One for the ignore buttonmedicine12345 wrote: »In fact undergraduate students pay around 15000 while training while postgraduate ones pay 60000 so you really dont know what you're talking about
You dont know a good deal when you see one0 -
Jesus they are all back out again after months of hibernation
All I'll say is this. It's our kids that will suffer from ALL of this. It's all money saving . The new JC in particular. One of my lads did his this year and I was DELIGHTED he made it under the old format. The next lad won't and as a parent I'm upset by that0 -
Advertisement
-
-
T
Some simple changes that need to be made:
1. Pay cuts to existing retired teachers pensions
2. Cut lump sums for next batch of retirement
3. Revenue transfer from teachers over 35 to teachers under 35 to rebalance the years of inequality
4. More linkage to performance based pay
5 Cut pay for one summer month, the salary and benefits are enough already
5. Implement what's known to those outside the public sector as 'non compete clauses' or 'restraint of trade'. Essentially, any teachers doing grinds must give a minimum 70% of the fee back to the state (before tax to the collector general on the remaining 30%) rather than pocketing it entirely. In the commercial world I can't just walk in to a well developed organisation who has developed itself over many years and with much expenditure, and take their customers for a bit of work on the side. It is utterly shocking that teachers think they can sustain the level of undeserved pay and benefits, and also have this side burner.
So that's:
1. Cut pay
2. Cut pay
3. Cut pay
4. Cut pay
5. Cut pay
6. No teacher walks into an 'organisation' and tries to poach it's clients. Students (and their parents) seek out grinds, as they are entitled to. Teachers are also entitled to use their skills and qualifications to work on what is essentially as self employed basis. Yes I am aware that lots of teachers do not pay tax on grinds money. Plenty of tradespeople doing work they don't pay tax on either. Teachers aren't alone in that. I don't do grinds, I turn down grinds every year from people who contact me, either through my school or contact me privately.
Teachers also aren't taking 'customers' away from an organisation/school. Students are still attending schools. No one is losing their job in a school as a result of grinds.0 -
medicine12345 wrote: »Good man/woman, nice to ignore your mistakes and the fact that you earn more than doctors for less hours worked
I've yet to meet a poor Doctor0 -
medicine12345 wrote: »If i was a teacher i would be very happy with this new deal, good work by the unions. Newly qualified teachers now starting on higher salaries than doctors. Broken down into pay per hour work a newly qualified teacher probably earns around 30% more than a newly qualified doctor.
I think doctors deserve to be well paid for the qualifications they have and the work they do.
However I don't think you can compare the two. Teaching is possibly now the only public sector profession where you can be on 'hours' rather than have a job. An intern doctor starts on around 30-31k, but that doesn't include their allowances (which are included in the new teacher pay scale) and doctors have the ability to earn a lot in overtime - I'd also acknowledge that they put in long hours as a result.
http://www.irishhealth.com/article.html?id=21295
According to this a trainee doctor is taking home an average of €31k in overtime per year. If that is the case, no doctor living on 30k.
Also if teachers are worth 33k starting salary, it's in no way related to what doctors are worth. Not really for teachers to decide either.
The reality for many teachers is that if they are lucky they will get an 11 hour contract in a school which will based on a 33k salary provide 16.5k per year. Yes they are not working full time hours, but most likely their hours will be spread across the week and will be on site for the vast majority of every day, with little opportunity to work elsewhere. In other public sector jobs, there is either a job or there isn't.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
The narrative is completely wrong, and this is so frustrating to anyone who has a decent sense of economics.
Pay 'restoration' should have never entered the vernacular. It really boils my blood and irks me that we make these horrible mistakes, again. Whether we like it or not like it, teachers were way, way over compensated for many years. There was and is a massive disconnect between what the teaching profession should pay, or could rationally be supported, and what it did and does pay. People are always resistant to change, and change is hard, so we had a real chance to bed down something good here and we right messed it up in favour of the game of politics.
No one here seems to have the balls to stick it to the unions like they need to. And young teachers don't realise this two tier Payscale was union led. Young teachers were sold a right turkey as unions sought to put the head in the sand to reality and cling on to these immoral and undeserved pay & benefits for their older members, opting to defer the pain to the next generation. They then talk of pay 'restoration'. It is completely stomach turning.
Some simple changes that need to be made:
1. Pay cuts to existing retired teachers pensions
2. Cut lump sums for next batch of retirement
3. Revenue transfer from teachers over 35 to teachers under 35 to rebalance the years of inequality
4. More linkage to performance based pay
5 Cut pay for one summer month, the salary and benefits are enough already
5. Implement what's known to those outside the public sector as 'non compete clauses' or 'restraint of trade'. Essentially, any teachers doing grinds must give a minimum 70% of the fee back to the state (before tax to the collector general on the remaining 30%) rather than pocketing it entirely. In the commercial world I can't just walk in to a well developed organisation who has developed itself over many years and with much expenditure, and take their customers for a bit of work on the side. It is utterly shocking that teachers think they can sustain the level of undeserved pay and benefits, and also have this side burner.
Wow you should be running the country! You're too emotional though,"boils my blood","irks me", "stomach turning". A good exercise in dramatic language for an English class. But you don't know what you're talking about as is evident in your rant about unions and two tier payscales.0 -
rainbowtrout wrote: »I think doctors deserve to be well paid for the qualifications they have and the work they do.
However I don't think you can compare the two. Teaching is possibly now the only public sector profession where you can be on 'hours' rather than have a job. An intern doctor starts on around 30-31k, but that doesn't include their allowances (which are included in the new teacher pay scale) and doctors have the ability to earn a lot in overtime - I'd also acknowledge that they put in long hours as a result.
http://www.irishhealth.com/article.html?id=21295
According to this a trainee doctor is taking home an average of €31k in overtime per year. If that is the case, no doctor living on 30k.
Also if teachers are worth 33k starting salary, it's in no way related to what doctors are worth. Not really for teachers to decide either.
The reality for many teachers is that if they are lucky they will get an 11 hour contract in a school which will based on a 33k salary provide 16.5k per year. Yes they are not working full time hours, but most likely their hours will be spread across the week and will be on site for the vast majority of every day, with little opportunity to work elsewhere. In other public sector jobs, there is either a job or there isn't.
Doctors do not get any allowances anymore not one cent.
Lol the hours that doctors have to work for their overtime 24 hours in a row plus a full weeks work on top of that, we do more hours work in one 24 hour period than teachers do in a whole week.
I cant view your link but a lot of doctors work 80 hours a week. In that case they should certainly be getting 31k in overtime. 40 hours a week = 31k, 80 per week should actually be on much more than 62k per year.
and no way does anyone get paid that much overtime0 -
medicine12345 wrote: »No we dont get paid for being a doctor training? We dont get paid until we are fully qualified...
Who is the privileged elite? Teachers are the ones earning more for less hours so are tou talking about yourself here?
If a doctor kills a patient its medical negligence, if a teacher kills a student, its murder.0 -
rainbowtrout wrote: »I think doctors deserve to be well paid for the qualifications they have and the work they do.
However I don't think you can compare the two. Teaching is possibly now the only public sector profession where you can be on 'hours' rather than have a job. An intern doctor starts on around 30-31k, but that doesn't include their allowances (which are included in the new teacher pay scale) and doctors have the ability to earn a lot in overtime - I'd also acknowledge that they put in long hours as a result.
http://www.irishhealth.com/article.html?id=21295
According to this a trainee doctor is taking home an average of €31k in overtime per year. If that is the case, no doctor living on 30k.
Also if teachers are worth 33k starting salary, it's in no way related to what doctors are worth. Not really for teachers to decide either.
The reality for many teachers is that if they are lucky they will get an 11 hour contract in a school which will based on a 33k salary provide 16.5k per year. Yes they are not working full time hours, but most likely their hours will be spread across the week and will be on site for the vast majority of every day, with little opportunity to work elsewhere. In other public sector jobs, there is either a job or there isn't.
managed to view the article, it is an absolute laugh. The author doesn't have a clue what he's talking about with all this 'trainee' nonsense. These are fully qualified doctors who are the ones performing the surgeries, seeing patients in ED and clinics and doing all the work in the hospitals across Ireland.
That article is a disgrace its so factually inaccurate and its on some nonsense website.
Pretty rich of you to begrudge someone to be paid for working the 80 hours in a week that they work, do you think they should be only paid for the first 40? shame on you. I hope one of your children never becomes a doctor, you will know all about it when you don't see them from one week to the next as they are working >80 hours in a week, often >30 hours in a row and you have the cheek to imply they are lucky to be paid to work all those extra hours. shame on you0 -
medicine12345 wrote: »Doctors do not get any allowances anymore not one cent.
Lol the hours that doctors have to work for their overtime 24 hours in a row plus a full weeks work on top of that, we do more hours work in one 24 hour period than teachers do in a whole week.
I cant view your link but a lot of doctors work 80 hours a week. In that case they should certainly be getting 31k in overtime. 40 hours a week = 31k, 80 per week should actually be on much more than 62k per year.
and no way does anyone get paid that much overtime
How can you say no one gets paid that much overtime? How do you know? The article quotes that figure as an average.
Doctors do long shifts, I'm not denying that, but that's true of hospital medicine in comparison with most other professions, not just teaching. Teachers don't just put in their 22 hours in the classroom, plenty of time is put in outside the classroom too. But your derogatory comment highlighted above just shows your ignorance of the teaching profession.0 -
medicine12345 wrote: »Pretty rich of you to begrudge someone to be paid for working the 80 hours in a week that they work, do you think they should be only paid for the first 40? shame on you. I hope one of your children never becomes a doctor, you will know all about it when you don't see them from one week to the next as they are working >80 hours in a week, often >30 hours in a row and you have the cheek to imply they are lucky to be paid to work all those extra hours. shame on you
Nowhere in any of my posts do I begrudge doctors their pay. If you went back and actually read my posts, you can see that I said that doctors deserve to be well paid.
I'm merely pointing out that if they do overtime hours, and my understanding is that most if not all doctors in hospitals do overtime hours, that they are paid properly for it. As it should be.
On the other hand, teachers are not paid properly for substitution work, we are required to do it, and if we don't do it we have to take a cut to our basic pay.
Surely in any job, it should be fairly simple: you do overtime, you get paid for overtime. You don't do overtime, you don't get any pay for overtime. Not like it is in teaching where: you are required to do overtime, and don't get properly paid for it, if you refuse to do it, you take a pay cut on the pay you earned for teaching hours worked.0 -
Christie did not come across well on the six one .Ed Byrne is far superior. No doubt the Govt deliberately timed the announcement yesterday to coincide with the ASTI Standing Committee meeting. The ASTI delay in issuing the ballot papers is playing into the Dept hands. The junior cert English is a complete mess, but at least there are info evening coming up, they will be interesting.0
-
I'm sorry but I am heartily sick of reading your claims that the JC dispute was won by the unions when nothing could be further from the truth. You clearly are a huge fan of this new JC which I think beggars belief. You've already pointed out that the dispute was about not assessing our students for state certification and that has been achieved and yes that is correct. But that was never the only issue.There were several other issues as you are well aware,issues that have not been resolved and therefore ASTI members voted it down as they are entitled to do and I wish you'd respect that.
I have second year English this year and I think the new course is a disaster. Too much material, hugely increased workload for English teachers, most of whom also teach the ever changing senior course and don't get me started on the farce that is outcomes based education! Completely discredited in many countries, dumped as a failure in Australia, South Africa and the US which have all returned to a syllabus approach. Good for you if you like it but ASTI members see through it and fear that the LC will be the next casualty.
And I also take issue with this, The ASTI represents 17,000 teachers,do you think we're all thick? And what negotiation? All that has come from the GOV side has been threats and bullying.That is not negotiation. Have you ever heard of collective bargaining? And have you forgotten that many of the injustices such as the new entrants' pay cut came in when union members were straitjacketed in an agreement. Where was the "negotiating" then?
Your union capitulated on everything which in my opinion is very regrettable, but that's what your members voted. Please respect that we voted differently and want to continue to fight against the constant erosion of teachers' working conditions and defend Irish education.
However, the only issue you ever hear coming from the ASTI is "we won't assess our own students" and that is the message that is going out. This issue has been resolved. As teachers, our contract states that we have to teach the syllabus, regardless of industrial relations stance, so complaining about outcomes-based education is a waste of time as that is the syllabus that we are now obliged to teach and no amount of striking is going to reverse that, which is why it's only assessment and CPD that ASTI members are prohibited from doing.
The old JC English syllabus had objectives to be followed and in my school we have always followed the JCSP statements which are not too far off the new JC statements of learning. Initially, I was not a "huge fan" of the JCSA. I objected loudly at staff meetings and union meetings, where I repeated brought up the issue. After the first CPD, I was livid and directly contacted TUI Head Office about how disorganised and uninformative the CPD was. I spoke on the picket line about issues of fairness and workload and added my voice to the campaign to delay implementation of English until 2015.
But the 2015 changes came in, addressing the issue that we do not have to assess our own students for state certification. The next CPD was far more illuminating, we have been given 14 hours planning time this year (ten last year), time to organise and have the SLAR meeting and the paperwork has simply not materialised. This summer, instead of setting and marking a second year English exam, we had our oral assessments and our SLAR meeting and the experience was unstressful for me, positive for the students and easier than marking summer exams. I genuinely am mystified at your claim of a "hugely increased workload for English teachers" and can only speculate that non-attendance at CPD workshops is the reason for this. I have not heard this complaint from English teachers within my ETB who are teaching the syllabus and engaging the assessment.
"What negotiation?" is right. The ASTI refused to engage in talks. Paycuts were a result of the economic climate and the agreement was in lieu of them being unilaterally forced upon us anyway. This too was voted upon.
The concerns I have about the ASTI vote stem from the fact that I suspect many of those who voted were not in full possession of the facts of the 2015 agreement, not that ASTI members are "thick." Obviously, people who go onto boards to discuss education have an interest in it and are somewhat informed, but judging by other teachers I have met and posts on social media groups, I fear that these teachers are in the minority.0 -
A government that couldn't care less about education?? Are you having a laugh now or just trying to wind people up??
Our education system is laughable when looked at in today's context and every time the Department try to modernize it the unions kick up a fuss e.g. take coding that ye managed to reduce to selective subject. As someone in the I.T. sector who try's to hire staff on a fairly regular basis our education system is at least 10 years behind the economy and society.
So maybe when ye stop cribbing about every change and are happy to actually work a proper days work for a decent wage I will stop with the narrow minded remarks.
Your attitude says it all. As does your complete ignorance of and contempt for the nature of teaching and education in general.0 -
As always the devil is in the detail and not RTE and Indo headlines
Here we the bare facts about this "deal" on pay "equalization "
Credit to the person who took the time to do this
https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10157418779110032&id=543610031&set=a.10150412597930032.634380.543610031&source=480 -
Advertisement
-
As always the devil is in the detail and not RTE and Indo headlines
Here we the bare facts about this "deal" on pay "equalization "
Credit to the person who took the time to do this
https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10157418779110032&id=543610031&set=a.10150412597930032.634380.543610031&source=48
The documents issued on the TUI website clearly state that the hdip allowance hasn't been restored and that they will pursue that.
There is a government commitment to establish a public pay commission to look at the 10% across the PS.
This is not being put out as full equalisation by anyone. Its not perfect, but its better than what we were looking at this time last week.
There is some good in this agreement whether we like it or not. The ASTI are codding themselves if they think they're going to get full pay restoration and equalisation in one go.
This seems to be what they're after, and it is a very worthy goal, but in the real world this deal is a step along a journey to the same goal. The arguments about the new JC are moot at this stage. I'd sooner be moving slowly towards my goal than standing still telling everyone about it.0 -
Mark Priestly has written about the use of learning outcomes in curricula design & he raises many of the concerns you mentioned but also benefits of adopting the generic approach which the NCCA have used: http://ncca.ie/en/Publications/Other_Publications/A-Perspective-on-Learning-Outcomes-in-Curriculum-and-Assessment.pdf
39 broad learning outcomes over 3 years is a vastly different approach than have 100s which lead to box ticking.
Of course with a new curriculum there will be extra work in the initial years but based on your logic nothing will ever be allowed change include texts etc. The planning time was hard fought for by both unions & includes substitution cover. I can't understand why anyone wouldn't see it as a positive in reducing the workload of a new curriculum.
Schools also have 3 days they can take this year to plan & prepare for the junior cycle. And finally the junior cycle reforms were not introduced simply as a money saving exercise & in their current format they will cost far more over the period of 2013-2025.
I have read that document by Mark Priestly and have found it vague and waffly, but the same could be said about any literature on OBE, both by supporters and detractors, such is the vague nature of it. Since we're trading links take a look at this http://www.ourcivilisation.com/dumb/dumb3.htm, A quote from this which comes to mind is the following:If OBE were applied to basketball, the basket would have to be lowered so all could score equally
That would sum up one of the main issues and however they may claim to be watering it down in Ireland, OBE is still OBE. I have read nothing in the document referenced to justify why Ireland is taking a route which has failed in other countries, but maybe I didnt read it all, will go back to it later.
I just cannot see why we need to change a functioning system for one which has no concrete proof of effectiveness.Brandishing the "teachers don't like change" stick is a bit silly. Teachers adapt to change all the time. This year I have four brand new groups of 30 students,never saw any of them before [my school is huge]so 120 new pupils, that not change?
The old JC English course was fine, it just needed a bit of cosmetic work and an updated exam format. The teacher could choose the texts, yes teachers did chop and change texts, to suit their classes and set about preparing the kids for a high standard exam in line with the expectations of the LC. So why change for the sake of change?
OBE is a fad. It sounds greats in theory, for the lingo of today, "child centred","team work" etc and of course is very PC. It's interesting that the EU wants it adopted but Ireland is the only EU country which has signed up. Best boy in the class,anyone? Well England has also used it but are now rowing back from it and we all know how England feel about the EU.
As for the workload and the planning time. Ok that's a concession but personally it galls me to have to be absented from work which I find much more important,ie 5th an 6th year classes to get my head around this rubbish.
And sorry but rubbish it is.It's vague, it's pie in the sky, it's a fad and teachers will still go on teaching like before, but tinkering with tried and tested systems which have served us well and most likely going beyond that to incorporate the LC in the future, is potentially disastrous. How you can say that the original goal was not cost cutting is beyond me and several posters have already pointed out exactly how the Gov will claw back money in the coming years. Bear in mind that the current JC costs 20 million a year.
So, if you're happy with it,grand,but there's a fair few teachers out there far from happy.0 -
man_no_plan wrote: »The documents issued on the TUI website clearly state that the hdip allowance hasn't been restored and that they will pursue that.
There is a government commitment to establish a public pay commission to look at the 10% across the PS.
This is not being put out as full equalisation by anyone. Its not perfect, but its better than what we were looking at this time last week.
There is some good in this agreement whether we like it or not. The ASTI are codding themselves if they think they're going to get full pay restoration and equalisation in one go.
This seems to be what they're after, and it is a very worthy goal, but in the real world this deal is a step along a journey to the same goal. The arguments about the new JC are moot at this stage. I'd sooner be moving slowly towards my goal than standing still telling everyone about it.
Hard to disagree with anything you say there but I very much doubt that the Gov would have moved so fast were it not for the militancy of the ASTI.
The Gov are hell bent on getting the ASTI into the LRA and this latest move is a masterstroke on their part as it very possibly will convince ASTI members to jump on board. Which,long term is a shame because with constant Gov victories brought about through a combination of bullying and divide and conquer tactics we will NEVER be free of these "agreements" which are essentially carte blanche for the Gov to continue to erode working conditions.
We will all suffer in the long run.0 -
+1Benicetomonty wrote: »And, most unbelievably, this is contingent on further reforms!! Cannot believe the spin and positivity at this.
The media spin is turning my stomach, still not equal, and contingent on more reform.
0 -
The narrative is completely wrong, and this is so frustrating to anyone who has a decent sense of economics.
Pay 'restoration' should have never entered the vernacular. It really boils my blood and irks me that we make these horrible mistakes, again. Whether we like it or not like it, teachers were way, way over compensated for many years. There was and is a massive disconnect between what the teaching profession should pay, or could rationally be supported, and what it did and does pay. People are always resistant to change, and change is hard, so we had a real chance to bed down something good here and we right messed it up in favour of the game of politics.
No one here seems to have the balls to stick it to the unions like they need to. And young teachers don't realise this two tier Payscale was union led. Young teachers were sold a right turkey as unions sought to put the head in the sand to reality and cling on to these immoral and undeserved pay & benefits for their older members, opting to defer the pain to the next generation. They then talk of pay 'restoration'. It is completely stomach turning.
Some simple changes that need to be made:
1. Pay cuts to existing retired teachers pensions
2. Cut lump sums for next batch of retirement
3. Revenue transfer from teachers over 35 to teachers under 35 to rebalance the years of inequality
4. More linkage to performance based pay
5 Cut pay for one summer month, the salary and benefits are enough already
5. Implement what's known to those outside the public sector as 'non compete clauses' or 'restraint of trade'. Essentially, any teachers doing grinds must give a minimum 70% of the fee back to the state (before tax to the collector general on the remaining 30%) rather than pocketing it entirely. In the commercial world I can't just walk in to a well developed organisation who has developed itself over many years and with much expenditure, and take their customers for a bit of work on the side. It is utterly shocking that teachers think they can sustain the level of undeserved pay and benefits, and also have this side burner.
This is, without doubt, the funniest and most ignorant post I've ever read on boards! Take a bow😂😂0 -
medicine12345 wrote: »Good man/woman, nice to ignore your mistakes and the fact that you earn more than doctors for less hours worked
These comments are priceless and deserve a far wider audience than they are getting here. How much per year does it cost to study medicine at undergrad again?
Rofl0 -
These comments are priceless and deserve a far wider audience than they are getting here. How much per year does it cost to study medicine at undergrad again?
Rofl
Whatever the current registration fee is, i think its around 3000 per year now? The same as it costs to do the average arts degree that a teacher has only you have to do it for either 5 or 6 years rather than 3. Also now around 50% of doctors to postgrad medicine which costs 15-18000 per year. Whats your point?0 -
This is, without doubt, the funniest and most ignorant post I've ever read on boards! Take a bow😂😂
Let's deal with it in turn then:
1. Teachers are grossly, grossly overpaid.
2. Younger members were actively shafted in favour of older members.
Let's start there. What of that is incorrect?
It is truly shameful that we return to this, we learnt nothing from the crash at all, we have totally missed the opportunity to do what is right and proper here and cut the benefits of teachers, especially the older members in order to rebalance the wrong.
It is mind boggling that it would go the other way, and see an increase.0 -
Your attitude says it all. As does your complete ignorance of and contempt for the nature of teaching and education in general.
You mean the nature of education that is years behind other EU countries, my attitude is based on a successful career in I.T. Despite my education not because of it and as I write another job spec to advertise I know those applying will suffered the same lack of modern subjects that I did nearly 20 years later.0 -
Advertisement
-
medicine12345 wrote: »If i was a teacher i would be very happy with this new deal, good work by the unions. Newly qualified teachers now starting on higher salaries than doctors. Broken down into pay per hour work a newly qualified teacher probably earns around 30% more than a newly qualified doctor.
please read the charter about comparing apples and oranges. I've yet to see doctors throwing in the towel and moving into teaching.
Ta.
Mod
0
Advertisement