**Nov 2016 Teacher Dispute / See post 1 for Warning **

acequion

At this point of logjam we need to start playing smart and minimise the damage to our pockets and to our students while NOT giving in.

I really like Eintrachtrob's suggestion that we temporarily suspend our refusal to do S&S until after Christmas thereby giving the DES time to make their contingency plans. Which we know they don't want to do but it makes us look reasonable and throws the ball right back in their court. That way we get to stay outside Landsowne which I think is vital. There will be huge changes to the LRA in its current incarnation soon anyway and we have resisted it to now.Man-no-plan also had some good ideas as to how we get the schools open.


Meanwhile we continue our action on the LPTs.

Like others I'd be a bit fearful of the Labour court. A smart move from us at this point could yield results.

So as well as throwing out these suggestions here I think people need to mail them directly to Kieran Christie. They will definitely heed good suggestions from the members who are not involved in the White Heat of negociation. What is quite apparent on news bulletins is that the most articulate,logical points are being made by the ordinary teachers outside the school gates.

acequion

coillsaille wrote: »

ASTI standing committee is to meet this afternoon so I suppose we'll see later this evening if anything significant comes from that.

Regarding the lockout situation, from what I hear various BOMs seem to be calling meetings to look at bringing in 6th yrs, using vetted people already in the school as supers and subs. So I would expect the amount of schools on lockout will have gone down a bit by tomorrow and even more by Thursday. If all schools could do this it would be really beneficial. We get to teach our LCs so they don't lose out on any more tuition time and also we then won't have to make up for as much time lost. The LCs and their parents will be a lot happier, and the DES have to pay us if we're teaching.

Happy to hear that. As I've just said if we can get our schools open and get working we will have won a battle,if not yet the war.

Villain

km79 wrote: »

This seems to have blissfully ignored by all and sundry
Media
Ministers
Everyone

They also weren't allowed to participate in the Lansdowne Road agreement, something ASTI seem to ignore.

km79

Villain wrote: »

They also weren't allowed to participate in the Lansdowne Road agreement, something ASTI seem to ignore.

Eh ?
The new deal has kept them WITHIN LRA
They accepted and never left it in spite of refusing to do CP hours for last 10 months

Inspector Coptoor

This part of circular 0071/2016 is really really worrying.

I was working yesterday, teaching JC and LC students.

However, reading this, it doesn't seem
To matter if school is closed, partially open or fully open, ASTI teachers won't be paid by the DES unless they sign the form indicating their availability to perform all duties up to and including S&S.

This looming threat is making people very nervous and scared.

We need to go to the LRC, suspend action on S&S and get the government to retract the threat of non-payment while continuing the strike action over LPTs.

Inspector Coptoor

Part 8 of circular 0071/2016 is really really worrying.

Reading this, it doesn't seem
To matter if school is closed, partially open or fully open, ASTI teachers won't be paid by the DES unless they sign the form indicating their availability to perform all duties up to and including S&S.

I was working yesterday, teaching JC and LC students.

This looming threat is making people very nervous and scared.

We need to go to the LRC, suspend action on S&S and get the government to retract the threat of non-payment while continuing the strike action over LPTs.

pandoraj09

and the DES have to pay us if we're teaching.

The DES is undecided as to whether they will pay teachers in partially opened schools....I've asked the ASTI for clarification but have had no reply yet..

Villain

km79 wrote: »

Eh ?
The new deal has kept them WITHIN LRA
They accepted and never left it in spite of refusing to do CP hours for last 10 months

They weren't allowed to negotiate during the deal, they were told to leave.

Villain

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

Part 8 of circular 0071/2016 is really really worrying.

Reading this, it doesn't seem
To matter if school is closed, partially open or fully open, ASTI teachers won't be paid by the DES unless they sign the form indicating their availability to perform all duties up to and including S&S.

I was working yesterday, teaching JC and LC students.

This looming threat is making people very nervous and scared.

We need to go to the LRC, suspend action on S&S and get the government to retract the threat of non-payment while continuing the strike action over LPTs.

Not sure how you make that out.

where a school is not in a position to openfor students as a result of the withdrawal of teachers from their duties relating to S&S, teachers who have not confirmed their availability for the full range of duties including S&S duties (i.e. who have not submitted a completed and signed form to the Principal of their school) must be recorded as absent.

??

Inspector Coptoor

Villain wrote: »

Not sure how you make that out.



??

There has been no clarification on this.
That's the point.

It can be interpreted in many ways.

Villain

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

There has been no clarification on this.
That's the point.

It can be interpreted in many ways.

I don't see how you think if a school is open ASTI teachers won't be paid, it clearly starts with "where a school is not in a position to open for students" thus if it opens then teachers are paid

Inspector Coptoor

Villain wrote: »

I don't see how you think if a school is open ASTI teachers won't be paid, it clearly starts with "where a school is not in a position to open for students" thus if it opens then teachers are paid

All I can say is I hope you're right.

paddybarry

pandoraj09 wrote: »

and the DES have to pay us if we're teaching.

The DES is undecided as to whether they will pay teachers in partially opened schools....I've asked the ASTI for clarification but have had no reply yet..

Was talking to ASTI about this yesterday. They have made enquiries of the same to Dept. Dept refused to put in writing whether partially opened schools would be paid. ASTI believe that they should but Dept categorically refuses to confirm this.

Mardy Bum

okedoke wrote: »

siulach wrote: »

You'd be surprised. In my experience, most teachers do at least some extra curricular activities or give students extra time. For instance, language teachers meet students to practice for oral exams, teachers often spend extra time helping students with projects for practical subjects, science teachers have Young Scientist, business teachers are often involved in Young Entrepreneur, with music, PE and religion teachers often contributing huge amounts of time to school activities like school ceremonies and sports. Yet, not one of these activities are recognised by Croke Park,
and this has eroded a lot of goodwill. And the minority of teachers who do none of the above are often the very ones who do the bare minimum at the CP meetings, so the majority of us are hit twice. To be honest though, I think most parents (and indeed students) acknowledge and respect the extra work.

I believe you but as in every profession, I've no doubt there are a minority of those who would take the opportunity of non-compulsory CP hours to simply avoid them. I say this as a public servant, most of whose colleagues work hard but some of whose don't. I think other public servants and the public at large would balk at allowing this group be the only one in the PS not to have to work extra CP hours.

I'm not going to start naming professions but there are a few groups in the public sector who although in writing are suppose to do CP hours they do not do them.

The majority of teachers work a lot more than 1 extra hour a week doing extra curricular, co curricular and delivering extra tuition. This 1 hour rubbish is a smoke screen. Teachers are professionals and it seems to be taken for granted that the majority work extra hours.

stanley1980

OP- perhaps you should've also included in your lengthy rules for this thread that any posts critical of the ASTI will also not be tolerated! I genuinely couldn't believe my ears yesterday in my staffroom when I heard some (not all) ASTI members complaining that they'd have to stay the whole day even though there were no kids in! I wasn't sure whether to laugh to cry!

evolving_doors

stanley1980 wrote: »

OP- perhaps you should've also included in your lengthy rules for this thread that any posts critical of the ASTI will also not be tolerated! I genuinely couldn't belief my ears yesterday in my staffroom when I heard some (not all) ASTI members complaining that they'd have to stay the whole day even though there were no kids in! I wasn't sure whether to laugh to cry!

There has been criticism of the ASTI on thread, that's fair enough.
What doesn't wash with the forum though is running down the modding, going off topic, running down teachers trained in Ireland calling them lazy and resistant to change (that 'change agenda' went down great in the UK didn't it!!).

Like I said in the PM I sent, it's not the position you take, or some of the points you make, but the way you make them. There are probably some facebook sites or try politics.ie if want to drag a forum way off topic and muddy the waters. It's obvious you don't agree to abide by the rules so, g'luck and thanks for playing.

Member Banned.

StewartGriffin

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Nonsense, ASTI are looking for a way out because they are in a very weak position going on an all out in November. So what they'll do is they will go into WRC and call off the action for the moment. They will then negotiate a new deal which will go to a vote in January with a recommendation from high command that it be rejected and then we will see industrial action for March and the state exams will be threatened.

Most likely scenario. And just what have we gained by this week's action?

worseforwear

I dont come across here as a union basher. However I think that the action being undertaken here by the Asti is very poorly thought out and at best extremely naive.
"The ASTI is aware that a number of schools with ASTI members on their staff remained open today, using a variety of contingency arrangements. We have written to the school management bodies requesting that efforts be redoubled to implement appropriate arrangements to ensure that schools remain open for the benefit of all concerned." yesterday's update.
This smells of ASTI being on the ropes and are now looking for a way to get their members paid without losing face. They issued the directive to withdraw from sns without being aware of what they were exposing the membership to.
The membership have been put in a very precarious position, where in all honesty they cannot afford to go indefinitely without pay.

The Leadership have been completely out played by Bruton, and in fairness, like him or loathe him he holds all the cards on this one. It's vital to recognise when you need to take a standing count before you get knocked out completely.


What needs to happen here is that the union need to suspend the ban on SNS for the good of their own members. They are already going to forfeit 7 days pay before christmas. If it continues watch what happens, 80 - 90% of the schools will close for the 1st few days and very quickly more and more of the schools will have contingency arrangements in place. There will be a lot of unease created between school managements and teachers. Problem solved and and dept didn't have to touch it.

there's no point in having Liveline celebrating the great "2016 Lockout" in a hundred years time.

Separately whatever about the merits or flaws of the LRA, I want to make a point about the union.
Unless the TUI and ASTI take a joint approach on national agreements the dept will always have the upper hand. In fact I would prefer if there was only one second level union.

In relation to the LRA I refer you to http://www.asti.ie/uploads/media/Nuacht_3_Sept_2015_WEB.pdf

Where, "ASTI Central Executive Council (CEC) elected a sub-committee to draw up a list of
reasons why members should vote NO to the Lansdowne Road Agreement."

This is fair enough, but why were the reasons to vote for the LRA not presented to members?
I'm not advocating one way or another but it's important that members benefit from a balanced interpretation of the proposals. If that were to happen maybe we would find ourselves in fewer cul de sacs

Powerhouse

stanley1980 wrote: »

I genuinely couldn't believe my ears yesterday in my staffroom when I heard some (not all) ASTI members complaining that they'd have to stay the whole day even though there were no kids in! I wasn't sure whether to laugh to cry!

Not believing your ears and not being sure whether to laugh or cry is a slightly exaggerated angle to take given that being there in the first place is essentially an arse-covering exercise. Even the occupants of the moral high-ground might think twice if the knew for absolute certain they would not be paid retrospectively so I'd be slow to feel superior to others.

Powerhouse

worseforwear wrote: »

"The ASTI is aware that a number of schools with ASTI members on their staff remained open today, using a variety of contingency arrangements. We have written to the school management bodies requesting that efforts be redoubled to implement appropriate arrangements to ensure that schools remain open for the benefit of all concerned." yesterday's update.
This smells of ASTI being on the ropes and are now looking for a way to get their members paid without losing face.

I don't understand your issue with this. Is it not reasonable that the union would try to promote a situation where its members get paid? Would you prefer if they did nothing?

Fian

Villain wrote: »

I don't see how you think if a school is open ASTI teachers won't be paid, it clearly starts with "where a school is not in a position to open for students" thus if it opens then teachers are paid

A school is only partially open if it is open for leaving cert and junior cert students only. It is therefore "not in a position to open for students" although it is "in a position to open for some students"

I will not be happy if my three secondary school children (in 2nd, transition and fifth year) are home from school while the teachers can continue to get paid, especially if this became widespread. Unless teachers lose money I would expect the dispute to drag on and on. With pay stopped both sides have pressure to reach an agreement.

Villain

Fian wrote: »

A school is only partially open if it is open for leaving cert and junior cert students only. It is therefore "not in a position to open for students" although it is "in a position to open for some students"

I will not be happy if my three secondary school children (in 2nd, transition and fifth year) are home from school while the teachers can continue to get paid, especially if this became widespread. Unless teachers lose money I would expect the dispute to drag on and on. With pay stopped both sides have pressure to reach an agreement.

It doesn't say all students it just says students so not sure the Dept can win that one.

PowerToWait

worseforwear wrote: »

I think that the action being undertaken here by the Asti is very poorly thought out and at best extremely naive.

This smells of ASTI being on the ropes.

The Leadership have been completely out played by Bruton, and in fairness, like him or loathe him he holds all the cards on this one.

I've no skin in this game, but the wannabe punditry is great craic. All those West Wing and House of Cards box sets paid off.

Fian

Villain wrote: »

It doesn't say all students it just says students so not sure the Dept can win that one.

Except they will ultimately interpret it, not ASTI, and decide whether to pay or not. After the dispute is settled I would not be surprised if retrospective pay for S&S days might be considered though.

I assume teachers are all paid on the same day or is it different for different schools? When is the next payday due - I guess that will clarify it one way or the other.

But my three are students, the school is not in a position to open for them, therefore the school is "not in a position to open for students"

Villain

Fian wrote: »

Except they will ultimately interpret it, not ASTI, and decide whether to pay or not. After the dispute is settled I would not be surprised if retrospective pay for S&S days might be considered though.

I assume teachers are all paid on the same day or is it different for different schools? When is the next payday due - I guess that will clarify it one way or the other.

But my three are students, the school is not in a position to open for them, therefore the school is "not in a position to open for students"

Pay day is tomorrow but that is for the previous 2 weeks, the Dept could argue that I suppose, then it would get real messy!

Engine No.9

Here's my take on it as I understand it. Teachers are striking because their younger colleagues who started in 2011 and after came in on a lower pay scale!?

God love them.

I'm in the private sector and having been unemployed for 4 years I finally got back to work last year. Years searching for work and I came into that job with a hell of a lot more experience than some of my younger colleagues. They started on €8k per year more than me. I had to put up or shut up.

This is nuts. These people are lucky to have the jobs they have. They signed a contract. If they weren't happy they should not have signed it, negotiated and moved on if still unhappy. I can't get over how these people signed a contract and then say, you know what, I'm not happy with the conditions I was happy to sign until my colleagues told me I shouldn't be.

Get real.

Powerhouse

Fian wrote: »

A school is only partially open if it is open for leaving cert and junior cert students only. It is therefore "not in a position to open for students" although it is "in a position to open for some students"

.

Just wondering about these definitions which you have in quotation marks - are they your own or are they from some official document?

Schools have a long tradition of having students returning at the beginning of the year on a staggered basis and I've never heard anyone quibble about definitions of being "open" just because not all students were there so the provenance of your definitions are of some interest in that context.

Fian

Powerhouse wrote: »

Just wondering about these definitions which you have in quotation marks - are they your own or are they from some official document?

Schools have a long tradition of having students returning at the beginning of the year on a staggered basis and I've never heard anyone quibble about definitions of being "open" just because not all students were there so the provenance of your definitions are of some interest in that context.

https://www.education.ie/en/Circulars-and-Forms/Active-Circulars/cl0071_2016.pdf



8. In the case of teachers paid on payrolls operated by this Department and in order to facilitate the appropriate pay deduction(s), where a school is not in a position to open for students as a result of the withdrawal of teachers from their duties relating to S&S, teachers who have not confirmed their availability for the full range of duties including S&S duties (i.e. who have not submitted a completed and signed form to the Principal of their school) must be recorded as absent. Overpayments of salary will be recovered in accordance with Circular 0084/2015.

Powerhouse

pajopearl wrote: »

Here's my take on it as I understand it. Teachers are striking because their younger colleagues who started in 2011 and after came in on a lower pay scale!?

God love them.

I'm in the private sector and having been unemployed for 4 years I finally got back to work last year. Years searching for work and I came into that job with a hell of a lot more experience than some of my younger colleagues. They started on €8k per year more than me. I had to put up or shut up.

This is nuts. These people are lucky to have the jobs they have. They signed a contract. If they weren't happy they should not have signed it, negotiated and moved on if still unhappy. I can't get over how these people signed a contract and then say, you know what, I'm not happy with the conditions I was happy to sign until my colleagues told me I shouldn't be.

Get real.

Nonsense. Everyone has their own work context and they can decide what makes them happy themselves. Why should teachers have their views dictated by you because you had things tough? Should we not aspire to buy a decent house because some people are homeless?

As for wondering why people signed a contract they weren't happy with - well if you were genuinely au fait with the dispute you would realise that there is in fact an attempt to force ASTI members to accept conditions which they never signed to accept. It's more or less the opposite of what you think.

feardeas

Second day on the picket and by God it was a wet one. Just taking a brief look at what's going on here.

Have heard that standing committee are meeting today and may have something from that. There seems to be some talk about change in CP hours, in so far as that as long as PTM and staff meetings are all outside of school time then the Dept don't seem to be too pushed about how they are used. It would seem that about 15 could be used at teacher's discretion. Perhaps for extra curricular/planning/marking etc. Personally I think that wouldn't be too bad. I spent three hours correcting essays last week, sure that's a bloody fifth of them gone already. I'd guarantee that there are many teachers that would have 15 extra hours done by the middle of September not to mind over the year and guess what we have to do that i.e. preparation and marking id we're anyway serious about the job and I think most of us are. Not to talk of all the time on extra curricular.

Are there people that would shirk them, of course. That's an issue for management. They're paid well enough to do manage people and situations. It would madden me to think that some would be getting away scott free. However I think that one byproduct of this action will be heat turned on those that are a little wanting when it comes to work.

I agree with the idea of professionalism extending beyond the classroom and it would be great if principals did distribute leadership and allow staff to take responsibility for areas of policy and/or whole school practice. However very few wish to do that so those groups were pretty meaningless over the last few years.

Also I see some talk of suspending action and all the rest. Fine if it leads to speedy resolution but I don't think there is any appetite for a repeat of this in the near future.