Where now for ASTI? ****ASTI Action- Part III - See 1st Post***

BoatMad

creamdog88 wrote: »

whats cec

ASTIs central executive council ( ps hint try google )

maude6868

km79 wrote: »

Where does it say that ?
Im assuming if accepted the payment will be made then
They badly need to put up a FAQ on it
It's so vague in parts

What I'm reading is that there is no pay for s&s just that those who opt in won't be deducted by 1769. It says a teacher who opts-in will be required to carry out supervision and substitution duties
and will have the salary reduction associated with the opt-out restored to salary;. Doesn't that mean they will not pay the 1769.

km79

maude6868 wrote: »

What I'm reading is that there is no pay for s&s just that those who opt in won't be deducted by 1769. It says a teacher who opts-in will be required to carry out supervision and substitution duties
and will have the salary reduction associated with the opt-out restored to salary;. Doesn't that mean they will not pay the 1769.

Are people suggesting that we will not get the same payment as TUI members despite accepting the same deal when it happens
Don't be silly of course we will

maude6868

km79 wrote: »

Are people suggesting that we will not get the same payment as TUI members despite accepting the same deal when it happens
Don't be silly of course we will

But TUI are in the LRA. I would imagine that if those doing it were to be paid for doing it then those who don't do it simply would not be paid. why would those who opt out be punished twice.

km79

maude6868 wrote: »

But TUI are in the LRA. I would imagine that if those doing it were to be paid for doing it then those who don't do it simply would not be paid. why would those who opt out be punished twice.

If we accept this we are in LRA too
I don't understand now to be honest
We accept we get the payment as they did
Added to our incremental salary this year and next

maude6868

km79 wrote: »

If we accept this we are in LRA too
I don't understand now to be honest
We accept we get the payment as they did
Added to our incremental salary this year and next

And will those who opt out not only not be paid but pay a hefty fine to opt out? That doesn't seem right at all.

man_no_plan

Benicetomonty wrote: »

S and S section under opt in. Just re read it there and seems to relate to teachers who wish to opt back into s and s, but had a member of SC tell me today everyone was affected. Possible they (and me) jumping to conclusions with that one...

Edit: yeah, bad info on that post. Not the case, s and s would be paid upon acceptance. Dont know about back dating, probably unlikely

I'd imagine backdated til September. The work has been done.

km79

maude6868 wrote: »

And will those who opt out not only not be paid but pay a hefty fine to opt out? That doesn't seem right at all.

Where does it say they won't receive the money due with LRA?
That's a given if we sign up . All teachers get it.
Those who opt out pay the deduction

man_no_plan

maude6868 wrote: »

What I'm reading is that there is no pay for s&s just that those who opt in won't be deducted by 1769. It says a teacher who opts-in will be required to carry out supervision and substitution duties
and will have the salary reduction associated with the opt-out restored to salary;. Doesn't that mean they will not pay the 1769.

There is 796 from sept 2016 and 796 from Sept 2017 under the agreement.

man_no_plan

maude6868 wrote: »

And will those who opt out not only not be paid but pay a hefty fine to opt out? That doesn't seem right at all.

The scale point will move for everyone but they will pay the 179? Then as a reduction.

political analyst

Gebgbegb wrote: »

The only precondition would have been ASTI to join LR! Govt were sticking to their line of not negotiating with those outside LR..... Except Gardai.
The talks were meaningless and a way of saving face. The dept. were gracious enough to play along

Technically, the action that the gardaí threatened to take wasn't a strike - the leadership of both Garda staff associations said that it would be up to each garda to decide whether or not to turn-up for work on that day.

political analyst

In post 247 on this thread, deiseindublin asked:

...will ASTI teachers be expected to complete 33 hours of CP this academic year?

If they have to catch-up on the CP hours meant to be done in this term, then, going by that logic, they'd have to catch-up on the days on which their schools were closed due to strikes or withdrawal from S&S.

I can't imagine that other public-sector workers, e.g. civil servants, would have had to catch-up on the hours they would have missed due to industrial action if they had rejected LRA.

Did ASTI members have to catch-up on the hours after accepting HRA second time around?

km79

political analyst wrote: »

In post 247 on this thread, deiseindublin asked:



If they have to catch-up on the CP hours meant to be done in this term, then, going by that logic, they'd have to catch-up on the days on which their schools were closed due to strikes or withdrawal from S&S.

I can't imagine that other public-sector workers, e.g. civil servants, would have had to catch-up on the hours they would have missed due to industrial action if they had rejected LRA.

Did ASTI members have to catch-up on the hours after accepting HRA second time around?

They didn't BUT it was flagged before acceptance that only hours already scheduled for the rest of the year would have to be completed

I think a lot is still unclear and will be cleared up once it's sent to ballot after CEC meeting .........at that point a FAQ section will most likely appear on ASTI site

political analyst

I'm baffled by the ASTI leadership's "all or nothing" approach to industrial action.

It would have been better just to continue with single days of striking throughout the academic year and continue doing S&S on a voluntary basis.

Furthermore, the ASTI leadership could have and should have given members who are teachers of JC English an derogation so that they could facilitate the CBA and, by default, the AT. The CBA is for the profile of achievement, which is not part of the State exams. The AT is part of the main exam in English and thus will be marked externally. Then the ASTI could have continued the refusal to facilitate assessment for the profile of achievement in other subjects while talks took place to bring about a resolution to that issue.

joebloggs32

maude6868 wrote: »

And will those who opt out not only not be paid but pay a hefty fine to opt out? That doesn't seem right at all.

It is very simple.
S&S will now be part of a teachers salary, as is already the case for TUI staff. It is no longer an allowance for doing extra duties as was the case in the past. It is now just part of the job.
However if one is not doing S&S their salary is reduced by ca€1700.
The pay gap between those who do it and those who don't is there to reflect the fact that those doing S&S will be delivering up to 43 hours more work per year. Also quite correctly this pay gap will increase over time to reflect the increased value of 43 hours work in 5 years, 20 years time etc.

acequion

Reading all your posts am I glad I have only a few years left. And for all that I love teaching. I love having the craic with the kids and I love settling them down to teach them serious stuff.

Time was when the hardest part of teaching was managing the kids, approx 7 periods of 30 of them in a day. Now that's become the easiest part. So doesn't it really say one helluva lot about how the job has changed and will continue to change.

It saddens me to read the posts here seeing committed anti agreement voters earnestly seeking information on the advantages to them on joining LR whether LR 2,3,or 40. A really awful vision of the future. But understandable as its human nature to save oneself first.

But, at enormous personal inconvenience and crazy short notice I will travel from the other side of the country this weekend to Dublin to attend CEC to do whatever I can to keep us outside of these dreadful agreements which are a death knell to our profession and to unionised labour.

acequion

Gebgbegb wrote: »

The only precondition would have been ASTI to join LR! Govt were sticking to their line of not negotiating with those outside LR..... Except Gardai.
The talks were meaningless and a way of saving face. The dept. were gracious enough to play along

I so very much hope Gebgbegb that you are being at your most witty and sarcastic in using the word "gracious" when referring to our employers!

amacca

acequion wrote: »

Reading all your posts am I glad I have only a few years left. And for all that I love teaching. I love having the craic with the kids and I love settling them down to teach them serious stuff.

Time was when the hardest part of teaching was managing the kids, approx 7 periods of 30 of them in a day. Now that's become the easiest part. So doesn't it really say one helluva lot about how the job has changed and will continue to change.

It saddens me to read the posts here seeing committed anti agreement voters earnestly seeking information on the advantages to them on joining LR whether LR 2,3,or 40. A really awful vision of the future. But understandable as its human nature to save oneself first.

But, at enormous personal inconvenience and crazy short notice I will travel from the other side of the country this weekend to Dublin to attend CEC to do whatever I can to keep us outside of these dreadful agreements which are a death knell to our profession and to unionised labour.

And fair play to you for doing so.

Is there anything to be said for boxing clever here?

Give members more than just the option for all out strike or all in capitulation and possibly lose members both ways + probably end up a spent force for years to come if the agreement is accepted.

Would a middle road looking something like remain outside LRA, give a date in January/February for withdrawing unpaid SS labour (thus giving Govt side plenty of time to organise supervision and the headache of doing so with no excuses for lockouts this time and the added benefit of seeing just how much labour should cost) ... play for time on the Pay equalisation (not restoration) issue with a revised schedule of one day strikes (more spread out so the monetary hit is much reduced) to keep the issue in the public eye until a LRA successor is being negotiated?...and strongly recommend this giving simple reasons for doing so including the idea that this may well be the last stand given that the wedge that was driven a number of years ago will soon take the door off its hinges.

Benefits would be avoiding the CP hours and only losing out on the fairly paltry SS payment after tax + a couple of one day strikes + prompting a proper conversation on this nonsense of JC Reform/yellow packing? and the realisation that the CP hours not being done didn't seem to affect the running of the schools in the slightest.....what about a proper work to rule? if feasible that really would affect the running of schools and highlight just how much extra is done outside contracted hours by teachers and what a bad idea CP hours are for the sector in their current guise and probably any other

Maybe a bit more funds spent on some highlighting the teachers side of the issue/legitimate concerns in the media given how badly misrepresented they can be due to bias...maybe even fight dirty on this front like the establishment seems to...........

km79

amacca wrote: »

And fair play to you for doing so.

Is there anything to be said for boxing clever here?

Give members more than just the option for all out strike or all in capitulation and possibly lose members both ways + probably end up a spent force for years to come if the agreement is accepted.

Would a middle road looking something like remain outside LRA, give a date in January/February for withdrawing unpaid SS labour (thus giving Govt side plenty of time to organise supervision and the headache of doing so with no excuses for lockouts this time and the added benefit of seeing just how much labour should cost) ... play for time on the Pay equalisation (not restoration) issue with a revised schedule of one day strikes (more spread out so the monetary hit is much reduced) to keep the issue in the public eye until a LRA successor is being negotiated?...and strongly recommend this giving simple reasons for doing so including the idea that this may well be the last stand given that the wedge that was driven a number of years ago will soon take the door off its hinges.

Benefits would be avoiding the CP hours and only losing out on the fairly paltry SS payment after tax + a couple of one day strikes + prompting a proper conversation on this nonsense of JC Reform/yellow packing? and the realisation that the CP hours not being done didn't seem to affect the running of the schools in the slightest.....what about a proper work to rule? if feasible that really would affect the running of schools and highlight just how much extra is done outside contracted hours by teachers and what a bad idea CP hours are for the sector in their current guise and probably any other

Maybe a bit more funds spent on some highlighting the teachers side of the issue/legitimate concerns in the media given how badly misrepresented they can be due to bias...maybe even fight dirty on this front like the establishment seems to...........

Very good suggestion
The thought of CO evenings is SO depressing
Maybe we could pay for an opt out

doc_17

If you strike and have NONE of your issues addressed other than the pieces that were offered prior to strike action then you're in trouble. They cannot accept this deal. They need to reject it and stay out of LRA.

Inspector Coptoor

It's been posted already albeit in a different way but this is what I sent to my SC rep and to the Gen Sec today.

"Speaking from a personal context, I have to say I find the contents of this document to be both incredulous and insulting.
How did it take three weeks of talks to come up with this crap?

This is essentially the LRA document the INTO and TUI signed up for with and S&S opt out for those with >15 years service.

1. S&S
If this document is accepted by our union, we will get the €796 from Sept 1st 2016 and another€796 in Sept 2017 with the sum of €1596 then subsumed into the common payscale.
No Change here.
Teachers with more than 15 years service can opt out of S&S. This will come with a deduction of €1768 per annum that is linked to increments so the cost of opting out will increase year on year.
The opt out is irrevocable.

2. Lesser Paid Teachers and NQTs.
This cohort of teachers would receive €4918 of restoration, equiavlent to the Honours Degree Allowance.
This cohort of teachers will not get H Dip allowance or Masters/PhD allowances and will still start on point 1 of an inferior scale.
The €4918 would represent approximately 60% restoration.
2 points stick out for me here:
1. No timeline for FULL restoration has been given.
2. 60% less inequality is STILL inequality.
This is the EXACT same deal offered to the INTO and TUI

3. Croke Park Hours
If accepted, this document will bring Croke Park Hours back into our lives.
We will get 8 discretionary hours initially which will rise to 10 next year.
There is no word on whether the Croke Park Hours for this year would be done on a pro rata basis or if we would be facing the prospect of doing all 33 hours from January.
This will put us inside the LRA.

4. Junior Cycle
Contained within this document is an assurance that teachers will not have to assess any part of the Junior Cycle for State Examination purposes.
However, this would mean the acceptance of the new Junior Cycle with common level papers for every subject except English, Irish and Maths.

The ASTI Standing Committee met yesterday and neither rejected nor accepted the document which was a disappointing outcome.
It now goes to the Central Executive Committee who meet on Saturday to discuss it.

I hope they reject it out of hand and do NOT ask our members to ballot on these "proposals" which are essentially LRA all over again.

I would prefer to continue doing S&S for free, stay outside LRA, not do Croke Park Hours and continue the non-cooperation with the Junior Cycle until a better deal is offered.

MrJones1973

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

It's been posted already albeit in a different way but this is what I sent to my SC rep and to the Gen Sec today.

"Speaking from a personal context, I have to say I find the contents of this document to be both incredulous and insulting.
How did it take three weeks of talks to come up with this crap?

This is essentially the LRA document the INTO and TUI signed up for with and S&S opt out for those with >15 years service.

1. S&S
If this document is accepted by our union, we will get the €796 from Sept 1st 2016 and another€796 in Sept 2017 with the sum of €1596 then subsumed into the common payscale.
No Change here.
Teachers with more than 15 years service can opt out of S&S. This will come with a deduction of €1768 per annum that is linked to increments so the cost of opting out will increase year on year.
The opt out is irrevocable.

2. Lesser Paid Teachers and NQTs.
This cohort of teachers would receive €4918 of restoration, equiavlent to the Honours Degree Allowance.
This cohort of teachers will not get H Dip allowance or Masters/PhD allowances and will still start on point 1 of an inferior scale.
The €4918 would represent approximately 60% restoration.
2 points stick out for me here:
1. No timeline for FULL restoration has been given.
2. 60% less inequality is STILL inequality.
This is the EXACT same deal offered to the INTO and TUI

3. Croke Park Hours
If accepted, this document will bring Croke Park Hours back into our lives.
We will get 8 discretionary hours initially which will rise to 10 next year.
There is no word on whether the Croke Park Hours for this year would be done on a pro rata basis or if we would be facing the prospect of doing all 33 hours from January.
This will put us inside the LRA.

4. Junior Cycle
Contained within this document is an assurance that teachers will not have to assess any part of the Junior Cycle for State Examination purposes.
However, this would mean the acceptance of the new Junior Cycle with common level papers for every subject except English, Irish and Maths.

The ASTI Standing Committee met yesterday and neither rejected nor accepted the document which was a disappointing outcome.
It now goes to the Central Executive Committee who meet on Saturday to discuss it.

I hope they reject it out of hand and do NOT ask our members to ballot on these "proposals" which are essentially LRA all over again.

I would prefer to continue doing S&S for free, stay outside LRA, not do Croke Park Hours and continue the non-cooperation with the Junior Cycle until a better deal is offered.

Why will the cost of opt out increase every year ? Opt out from s and s ? Does the amount they pay for s and s increase every year??

MrJones1973

joebloggs32 wrote: »

It is very simple.
S&S will now be part of a teachers salary, as is already the case for TUI staff. It is no longer an allowance for doing extra duties as was the case in the past. It is now just part of the job.
However if one is not doing S&S their salary is reduced by ca€1700.
The pay gap between those who do it and those who don't is there to reflect the fact that those doing S&S will be delivering up to 43 hours more work per year. Also quite correctly this pay gap will increase over time to reflect the increased value of 43 hours work in 5 years, 20 years time etc.

But those doing s and s are to be paid ? They will be about 800 euro better off a year .After tax. Correct? So why should the gap between those doing it and not doing it ... increase every year ??Are you saying the fine will increase every year ?1700 up and up ??

km79

Mrwhite1970 wrote: »

But those doing s and s are to be paid ? They will be about 800 euro better off a year .After tax. Correct? So why should the gap between those doing it and not doing it ... increase every year ??

Excellent point

joebloggs32

Mrwhite1970 wrote: »

But those doing s and s are to be paid ? They will be about 800 euro better off a year .After tax. Correct? So why should the gap between those doing it and not doing it ... increase every year ??Are you saying the fine will increase every year ?1700 up and up ??

Yes because in 25 years time 1700 would be very little money for working 43 hours due to inflation.

km79

joebloggs32 wrote: »

Yes because in 25 years time 1700 would be very little money for working 43 hours due to inflation.

The 1700 for working this hours will NOT increase but the 1769 to not do them will
That's his point

So yes 1700 in 25 years time would be very little wouldn't it ........

judeboy101

km79 wrote: »

The 1700 for working this hours will NOT increase but the 1769 to not do them will
That's his point

So yes 1700 in 25 years time would be very little wouldn't it ........

Gov made a massive mistake not inflation proofing opt out fee last time they wont make that mistake again.

joebloggs32

km79 wrote: »

The 1700 for working this hours will NOT increase but the 1769 to not do them will
That's his point

So yes 1700 in 25 years time would be very little wouldn't it ........

When pay rises come through in the future of x% then the 1600 S&S moiety in salary will in effect rise by by x%. Therefore the 1600 will rise and that's why the opt out of 1769 will rise.

solerina

I see a major issue with this new agreement if it comes to a ballot, all the talk in my staff room is accepting so that we do not have an all out situation for S&S again....nothing else seems to matter to them.....we really need a rejection before it gets to a ballot or we are screwed !!

km79

solerina wrote: »

I see a major issue with this new agreement if it comes to a ballot, all the talk in my staff room is accepting so that we do not have an all out situation for S&S again....nothing else seems to matter to them.....we really need a rejection before it gets to a ballot or we are screwed !!

This is the truth