ASTI OctNov Action *Post 1 for usual plea for restraint Especially New Posters *

feardeas

km79 wrote:

So we WONT be paid and they are CURRENTLY seeking legal advice Sure no rush with it !!!!! Are they still seeking legal advice on challenging FEMPI too WORRYING

Worrying is putting it mildly. They knew this was coming since last May. The stuff Pat King warned about is all coming to pass it appears.

acequion

How could they legally get away with taking us off the payroll? And how could they legally get away with docking the pay of members who are already docked due to having opted out of S&S?

To me that smacks of tyranny. I would be gobsmacked if they got away with that,I really would!

acequion

feardeas wrote: »

Worrying is putting it mildly. They knew this was coming since last May. The stuff Pat King warned about is all coming to pass it appears.

And so we should all back down like little sheep should we? Losing a lot of money is indeed worrying. But working for a bunch of tyrants who happen to be the Government of this state would actually worry me more.

Eintrachtrob

feardeas wrote: »

Worrying is putting it mildly. They knew this was coming since last May. The stuff Pat King warned about is all coming to pass it appears.

Complete nonsense. King was an utter spoofer who gave away one term of condition of employment after another without so much of a word of opposition.

Time for calm.
The people who have known since last May are the DES.

There's a lot of politics going on, especially with Bruton. He sees himself as FG leader and possibly Taoiseach within a year. He's deliberately playing hardball to impress.

Let's take one stage at a time, and remember why we are taking strike and industrial action.

The strike is primarily for LPT pay restoration.
S&S industrial action is for the fact that we are not being paid for it when others are.

coillsaille

acequion wrote: »

How could they legally get away with taking us off the payroll? And how could they legally get away with docking the pay of members who are already docked due to having opted out of S&S?

To me that smacks of tyranny. I would be gobsmacked if they got away with that,I really would!

I agree with you wholeheartedly acequion. But apparently withdrawing from the SnS scheme includes withdrawal from the opt out part of the scheme.

km79

coillsaille wrote: »

I agree with you wholeheartedly acequion. But apparently withdrawing from the SnS scheme includes withdrawal from the opt out part of the scheme.

Also .........many people were not actually given the option to opt out SO if the people who did opt out were to be paid then it opens another can of worms!

amacca

Rules of the game IMO

If both sides initially dig their heels in and stand firm...first to blink or back down loses - actually a lose lose situation for both sides in the heel of the hunt

* If negotiation (and I mean an actual proper negotiation not this "its the only show in town bull****") where both sides issues are addressed takes place then perhaps some face saving (for both sides) solution can can happen which will probably contain a large smattering of can kicking (on the equal pay issue at very least and probably "reform" of the nonsensical CP hours given all the other unseen and seemingly unappreciated voluntary hours put in)


What I see happening for teachers

1) Payment of the SS.......I can't see how the Govt have a leg to stand on with this issue, it was part of a previous agreement whose terms have been honoured by teachers.......getting paid for work done was never contingent in entering into another agreement - if schools do have to shut on 7th then the blame lies squarely at the Govt door as they have reneged on an agreement with no excuse except for using it as a lever to bully a group of workers.......any hint of removal from payroll etc etc for this imo should be met with a strong united resistance for the kind of precedent it sets.........what is the point of agreeing to any "agreement" if this is how one side keeps the bargain and then attempts to treat the side who have kept their part of the bargain.

2) Existing steps towards pay equalisation with perhaps some window dressing of an extra sweetener and a promise of further steps towards pay equalisation in the future

---

more or less not much if anything beyond what TUI etc has already accepted but it may still have been a worthwhile exercise as perhaps they won't get to kick the can as far down the road as they were hoping too on this one.......without this kind of action I believe the Govt side would keep stringing this out indefinitely

3) No reduction on CP hours (which is wrong, very wrong imo) but much much more flexibility in how they can be used given the nature of the job and the amount of extra hours most teachers put in or are forced to put in due to the nature of the job nowadays....there are lots of necessary tasks that can't be avoided for all teachers that could come under the umbrella of CP, if the Govt doesn't accept this then they don't think they are necessary so they shouldn't be done.

(if 3 above doesn't happen then I wouldn't be surprised if a large cohort of teachers start to slowly withdraw much much more than the CP hours in free/voluntary labour they give but get no credit for and in some cases take abusee for doing..........and quite understandably imo)

Not a betting man but I'm interested to see how this develops.

coillsaille

Eintrachtrob wrote: »

King was an utter spoofer who gave away one term of condition of employment after another without so much of a word of opposition.

Have to agree with this. All one has to do is look at the stuff that was brought in while he was at the helm.

man_no_plan

amacca wrote: »

Rules of the game IMO

If both sides initially dig their heels in and stand firm...first to blink or back down loses - actually a lose lose situation for both sides in the heel of the hunt

* If negotiation (and I mean an actual proper negotiation not this "its the only show in town bull****") where both sides issues are addressed takes place then perhaps some face saving (for both sides) solution can can happen which will probably contain a large smattering of can kicking (on the equal pay issue at very least and probably "reform" of the nonsensical CP hours given all the other unseen and seemingly unappreciated voluntary hours put in)


What I see happening for teachers

1) Payment of the SS.......I can't see how the Govt have a leg to stand on with this issue, it was part of a previous agreement whose terms have been honoured by teachers.......getting paid for work done was never contingent in entering into another agreement - if schools do have to shut on 7th then the blame lies squarely at the Govt door as they have reneged on an agreement with no excuse except for using it as a lever to bully a group of workers.......any hint of removal from payroll etc etc for this imo should be met with a strong united resistance for the kind of precedent it sets.........what is the point of agreeing to any "agreement" if this is how one side keeps the bargain and then attempts to treat the side who have kept their part of the bargain.

2) Existing steps towards pay equalisation with perhaps some window dressing of an extra sweetener and a promise of further steps towards pay equalisation in the future

---

more or less not much if anything beyond what TUI etc has already accepted but it may still have been a worthwhile exercise as perhaps they won't get to kick the can as far down the road as they were hoping too on this one.......without this kind of action I believe the Govt side would keep stringing this out indefinitely

3) No reduction on CP hours (which is wrong, very wrong imo) but much much more flexibility in how they can be used given the nature of the job and the amount of extra hours most teachers put in or are forced to put in due to the nature of the job nowadays....there are lots of necessary tasks that can't be avoided for all teachers that could come under the umbrella of CP, if the Govt doesn't accept this then they don't think they are necessary so they shouldn't be done.

(if 3 above doesn't happen then I wouldn't be surprised if a large cohort of teachers start to slowly withdraw much much more than the CP hours in free/voluntary labour they give but get no credit for and in some cases take abusee for doing..........and quite understandably imo)

Not a betting man but I'm interested to see how this develops.

I would say that that analysis is fairly accurate on first reading.

ASTI will effectively enter the LRA.

km79

man_no_plan wrote: »

I would say that that analysis is fairly accurate on first reading.

ASTI will effectively enter the LRA.

I'd also be inclined to agree and TBH if that's all we are going to get after a strike I'd rather they just put it out there now !

Eintrachtrob

Agree pretty much with what amacca stated there, as it's the most likeliest of outcomes.

One where terms and conditions of LPTs are slightly improved on the last offer, with a commitment from government for a full restoration date (this may be harder to achieve than it seems).

The CP hours will probably remain at 33 hours.

We were stupid ever to sign into them, but the time to fight that battle is in the next "agreement".

km79

Eintrachtrob wrote: »

Agree pretty much with what amacca stated there, as it's the most likeliest of outcomes.

One where terms and conditions of LPTs are slightly improved on the last offer, with a commitment from government for a full restoration date (this may be harder to achieve than it seems).

The CP hours will probably remain at 33 hours.

We were stupid ever to sign into them, but the time to fight that battle is in the next "agreement".

This is the last battle
Whatever we sign up to next is it IMO

Eintrachtrob

km79 wrote: »

This is the last battle
Whatever we sign up to next is it IMO

Wouldn't be so sure about that

There's definitely another "agreement" coming down the line

km79

Eintrachtrob wrote: »

Wouldn't be so sure about that

There's definitely another "agreement" coming down the line

And we will give more not less
We will certainly not lose CP hours if they stay now

jayo76

I for one will be pretty annoyed if I lose a number of days pay, maybe even a week and all we end up with is signing LRA anyway with full acceptance of Croke Park hours and a promise of looking at pay equalisation down the line, how can we work on promises after what happened with Haddington Road?? Seriously if thats all we're gong to get we may as well have just accepted Lansdowne Road last year and then S ans S payments would never have even been an issue.

If the Government docks pay on days when we are turning up to school and available for work as instructed by this letter today and some of us have even been paying not to do the duties we are supposedly not doing, how can we just turn around and then sign an agreement with this government?

Do you all see full acceptance of the Junior Cert as it currently stands then as well?? If so and all these agreements are signed off in one sweeping deal we might as well forget about the ASTI as an effective Union.

political analyst

amacca wrote: »

3) No reduction on CP hours (which is wrong, very wrong imo) but much much more flexibility in how they can be used given the nature of the job and the amount of extra hours most teachers put in or are forced to put in due to the nature of the job nowadays....there are lots of necessary tasks that can't be avoided for all teachers that could come under the umbrella of CP, if the Govt doesn't accept this then they don't think they are necessary so they shouldn't be done.

(if 3 above doesn't happen then I wouldn't be surprised if a large cohort of teachers start to slowly withdraw much much more than the CP hours in free/voluntary labour they give but get no credit for and in some cases take abusee for doing..........and quite understandably imo)

Not a betting man but I'm interested to see how this develops.

There was no mention of the CP hours in the debate that involved Ed Byrne, Paul Murphy, Eddie Hobbs and Damien English on Claire Byrne Live last night. Why did Ed Byrne not mention them?

political analyst

jayo76 wrote: »

I for one will be pretty annoyed if I lose a number of days pay, maybe even a week and all we end up with is signing LRA anyway with full acceptance of Croke Park hours and a promise of looking at pay equalisation down the line, how can we work on promises after what happened with Haddington Road?? Seriously if thats all we're gong to get we may as well have just accepted Lansdowne Road last year and then S ans S payments would never have even been an issue.

If the Government docks pay on days when we are turning up to school and available for work as instructed by this letter today and some of us have even been paying not to do the duties we are supposedly not doing, how can we just turn around and then sign an agreement with this government?

Do you all see full acceptance of the Junior Cert as it currently stands then as well?? If so and all these agreements are signed off in one sweeping deal we might as well forget about the ASTI as an effective Union.

Even if the Department allows for continuous professional development and meetings with inspectors to take place in the CP hours?

man_no_plan

km79 wrote: »

And we will give more not less
We will certainly not lose CP hours if they stay now

LRA is dead in 2018 , HRA was to run until this Summer. You can be very sure that they are doing the sums now on the next agreement.

The big picture is the public pay commission for equalisation, Restoration is guaranteed once FEMPI unwinds. Once FEMPI passed in the Rail it was game over to my mind, the govt are following the law.

The law is you're in or you're out. The law is s/s is part if your contract.

I really hope the ASTI do manage to get some concessions, there are some very good people with some very strong moral positions in the union, I'd hate to see them being hung out to dry if this goes tits up.

I think that the current leadership has bitten off more than it can chew on this one.

jayo76

political analyst wrote: »

Even if the Department allows for continuous professional development and meetings with inspectors to take place in the CP hours?

To be honest if it was just Continuous Professional Development and meetings with inspectors I'm not sure it would swing it for me. Proper recognition of CPD yes would be a major step forward in usage of these hours, meetings with inspectors are not a huge time consideration.

I have previously said I have no problem with at least 26 hours, 18 for PT meetings and 8 for Staff meetings outside schools. I could probably stretch to another four for subject department meetings if we as departments not the Principal got to set the agenda and I genuinely saw them as beneficial.

If the other hours are to remain in place which I guess they are gong to I would just genuinely love if they could recognise that look the vast vast majority of teachers are contributing way above these hours anyway in correcting. preparation, extra curricular, organisation and participation in school trips.

Eintrachtrob

man_no_plan wrote: »

LRA is dead in 2018 , HRA was to run until this Summer. You can be very sure that they are doing the sums now on the next agreement.

The big picture is the public pay commission for equalisation, Restoration is guaranteed once FEMPI unwinds. Once FEMPI passed in the Rail it was game over to my mind, the govt are following the law.

The law is you're in or you're out. The law is s/s is part if your contract.

I really hope the ASTI do manage to get some concessions, there are some very good people with some very strong moral positions in the union, I'd hate to see them being hung out to dry if this goes tits up.

I think that the current leadership has bitten off more than it can chew on this one.

Sounds great until you realise that there was no vote in the Dail for the renewal of FEMPI as Paschal Donohoe wouldn't allow one.

Eintrachtrob

jayo76 wrote: »

To be honest if it was just Continuous Professional Development and meetings with inspectors I'm not sure it would swing it for me. Proper recognition of CPD yes would be a major step forward in usage of these hours, meetings with inspectors are not a huge time consideration.

I have previously said I have no problem with at least 26 hours, 18 for PT meetings and 8 for Staff meetings outside schools. I could probably stretch to another four for subject department meetings if we as departments not the Principal got to set the agenda and I genuinely saw them as beneficial.

If the other hours are to remain in place which I guess they are gong to I would just genuinely love if they could recognise that look the vast vast majority of teachers are contributing way above these hours anyway in correcting. preparation, extra curricular, organisation and participation in school trips.

Do you know why there will never be any CP hours for extra curricular activity?

Because the teachers keep doing them.

It's as simple as that.

feardeas

jayo76 wrote:

I have previously said I have no problem with at least 26 hours, 18 for PT meetings and 8 for Staff meetings outside schools. I could probably stretch to another four for subject department meetings if we as departments not the Principal got to set the agenda and I genuinely saw them as beneficial.

Three ptm were bought out under previous deals like sustaining progress before cp. Mind you the pay gains were wiped out by cuts

man_no_plan

What we really, really, REALLY need to look out for is a 9-5 school day. That is a great idea in the heads of some people and was mooted around the time of CP agreement.

This is the problem as I see it - nobody pays attention to what's going on, nobody knows what's going on and we end up with people in an impossible situation.

We should be glad in a funny way that both unions aren't out as the give would ride us all, hard. This way if the ASTI wins we all win, it the ASTI lose they're no worse off than us. Both out We all lose, badly.

jayo76

man_no_plan wrote: »

I really hope the ASTI do manage to get some concessions, there are some very good people with some very strong moral positions in the union, I'd hate to see them being hung out to dry if this goes tits up.

.

To me, my opposition to the Lansdowne Road Agreement is a moral issue. I can take that there will be people out there who disagree with me, but to me pay inequality is morally wrong and is discrimination whatever way you look at it. The LRA does not end or provide for an end to this discrimination. I also find it morally wrong that a government can sign an agreement, we honour it but then we are docked pay accused of repudiating an agreement we never signed up to.

acequion

jayo76 wrote: »

I for one will be pretty annoyed if I lose a number of days pay, maybe even a week and all we end up with is signing LRA anyway with full acceptance of Croke Park hours and a promise of looking at pay equalisation down the line, how can we work on promises after what happened with Haddington Road?? Seriously if thats all we're gong to get we may as well have just accepted Lansdowne Road last year and then S ans S payments would never have even been an issue.

If the Government docks pay on days when we are turning up to school and available for work as instructed by this letter today and some of us have even been paying not to do the duties we are supposedly not doing, how can we just turn around and then sign an agreement with this government?

Do you all see full acceptance of the Junior Cert as it currently stands then as well?? If so and all these agreements are signed off in one sweeping deal we might as well forget about the ASTI as an effective Union.

I think it's all speculation at the moment jayo76 and it is hard to tell what the outcome will be,though hard, even for the most optimistic, not to agree with amacca's scenario a few posts back. However,I agree that the idea of eventually signing up to the LRA and accepting the awful CP hours in whatever version would be hard to stomach especially after the hit to pay caused by strikes.In any case,you can be sure there will be much wrangling and disagreement about it,on and off line.

Re the JC,I shudder to think that full acceptance of that would somehow sneak through. My two biggest issues would actually be that and the CP hours.

But it's only early days yet!

jayo76

feardeas wrote: »

Three ptm were bought out under previous deals like sustaining progress before cp. Mind you the pay gains were wiped out by cuts

Yeah there are 12 hours which predate CP, 3 PT meetings and 3 half in/ half out staff meetings. No problem for me obviously with those remaining in situ plus the other 3 ptm's for 9 hours and 5 more hours for staff meeting to allow for 8 hours of meetings wholly outside of school time. I suppose I genuinely know it's a forlorn hope but I would really love the other hours outside of these to take account of what teacher contribute in a variety of ways other than sitting in meetings together.

man_no_plan

jayo76 wrote: »

Yeah there are 12 hours which predate CP, 3 PT meetings and 3 half in/ half out staff meetings. No problem for me obviously with those remaining in situ plus the other 3 ptm's for 9 hours and 5 more hours for staff meeting to allow for 8 hours of meetings wholly outside of school time. I suppose I genuinely know it's a forlorn hope but I would really love the other hours outside of these to take account of what teacher contribute in a variety of ways other than sitting in meetings together.

I posted a few pages back of how to use all the hours in a reasonable way. We have not had a speaker in for any croke park meeting since they were introduced, we work together or separately but the main thing is that we use the hours to get stuff done. That seems to be the main gripe, not home til 7 but no further on.

At least when I get home there's a sense that something has been addressed or improved or even disbanded! It shouldn't be all doom and gloom.

Maybe the lack of reasonableness was a response to a rigidity from teachers ? That's not on the list so I'm not doing it, OK, let's all have a meeting. If you go for win - lose there's always a loser.

jayo76

man_no_plan wrote: »

I posted a few pages back of how to use all the hours in a reasonable way. We have not had a speaker in for any croke park meeting since they were introduced, we work together or separately but the main thing is that we use the hours to get stuff done. That seems to be the main gripe, not home til 7 but no further on.

At least when I get home there's a sense that something has been addressed or improved or even disbanded! It shouldn't be all doom and gloom.

Maybe the lack of reasonableness was a response to a rigidity from teachers ? That's not on the list so I'm not doing it, OK, let's all have a meeting. If you go for win - lose there's always a loser.

Yeah can see that point fully but I guess so much of it comes down to what our own localised experiences of these hours are unfortunately.

In our Croke Park hours we have had lots of them dedicated to outside speakers, some of these I genuinely enjoyed e.g mood watchers but others have literally been soul destroying. Full two hour meetings in a room lectured at on use of ICT, numeracy and literacy strategies followed up by full two hour staff meetings on said numeracy and literacy lectures. Subject meetings with full page agendas supplied by management, discuss application of said numeracy and literacy strategies in your subject, no trust that we as a subject department might genuinely have the interest of the school and students at heart and progress in a meaningful way if left to our own devices.

You obviously are in a situation where there has been more progressive use of these hours, I wish we were all in that boat!

Blueshirttwat

The opt out is irrevocable under HRA clause(18). By both sides I presume.

Blueshirttwat

If a school closed because of snow or failed heating etc. The teachers would not be docked pay. They are expected to make up the lost day in the Feb midterm or Easter holidays. What would the difference be if the school closes on the 7th Nov. Because of a perceived h&s issue.