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

milosh

Or we accept that we are a democratic organisation with a CEC who's job it is to represent the opinion of the membership. If the opinion is that if put to a ballot it would be accepted by the membership then it should be put to the membership to decide.

In any vote I will be voting no but will accept a yes vote.

joebloggs32

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 !!

So you don't want the members of your union to be allowed to have a vote is what you are saying.
I think if this happens it will be a disaster for the ASTI. Regardless of where the industrial action has gotten you to at this stage, the membership must be given there say. The CEC may have a lot of committed union activists on it, but the only way of knowing if the foot soldiers are behind them is to let vote on it.

solerina

joebloggs32 wrote: »

So you don't want the members of your union to be allowed to have a vote is what you are saying.
I think if this happens it will be a disaster for the ASTI. Regardless of where the industrial action has gotten you to at this stage, the membership must be given there say. The CEC may have a lot of committed union activists on it, but the only way of knowing if the foot soldiers are behind them is to let vote on it.

The members have already voted and said no..the 'agreement' is not that different to what was already voted on...people who havnt a clue and have no idea what they are voting on will vote to accept to avoid the all out S&S situation without really understanding what they are voting on.

feardeas

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 !!

Truly staggered by this. It has to be put to ballot. Otherwise I know lots of people including myself who will be gone.

As for the further point about people voting in ignorance. Well we got a recommendation the last time born out of willful ignorance of the legal situation.

Also the union is to represent the membership not just the activists who may want never ending dispute.

If it's rejected then people like myself can leave safe in the knowledge that our viewpoint is in the minority and not represented by the union.

milosh

solerina wrote: »

The members have already voted and said no..the 'agreement' is not that different to what was already voted on...people who havnt a clue and have no idea what they are voting on will vote to accept to avoid the all out S&S situation without really understanding what they are voting on.

A touch condescending! The assumption being that anyone who voted yes to LR or would be inclined to vote yes to this agreement cannot inform themselves on what they vote on. I would without doubt vote no but I do know some of my colleagues who believe that the best way to pay equalisation is through these agreements. I can say without any doubt that these people are as informed as any of us who would favour strike action. The talks are finished, the agreement while not substantially different have been described as final so members should be given a vote. I would strongly consider my membership of the union if the CEC do not allow a ballot on the issue. This meeting on Saturday will take place without a branch meeting to gauge the views of the membership of my branch and I would assume that this is the case across most branches. Any other decision other than a ballot is undemocratic and would be a disaster for our union.

joebloggs32

milosh wrote: »

A touch condescending! The assumption being that anyone who voted yes to LR or would be inclined to vote yes to this agreement cannot inform themselves on what they vote on. I would without doubt vote no but I do know some of my colleagues who believe that the best way to pay equalisation is through these agreements. I can say without any doubt that these people are as informed as any of us who would favour strike action. The talks are finished, the agreement while not substantially different have been described as final so members should be given a vote. I would strongly consider my membership of the union if the CEC do not allow a ballot on the issue. This meeting on Saturday will take place without a branch meeting to gauge the views of the membership of my branch and I would assume that this is the case across most branches. Any other decision other than a ballot is undemocratic and would be a disaster for our union.

Well said.
Im not Asti, but if I was i would want my vote. Not some inner cabal to decide on my behalf at this stage. A union should always consult its members on issues of such importance. If it comes back as a rejection then the mandate is strengthened.

km79

There is absolutely zero chance it won't go to ballot
The only question is whether there will be a recommendation either way

deiseindublin

feardeas wrote: »

Truly staggered by this. It has to be put to ballot. Otherwise I know lots of people including myself who will be gone.

As for the further point about people voting in ignorance. Well we got a recommendation the last time born out of willful ignorance of the legal situation.

Also the union is to represent the membership not just the activists who may want never ending dispute.

If it's rejected then people like myself can leave safe in the knowledge that our viewpoint is in the minority and not represented by the union.

So basically, you're leaving unless it's accepted?

I find it a bit unpalatable to hear members being called activists for standing up for their rights.

feardeas

deiseindublin wrote:

So basically, you're leaving unless it's accepted?

Well read

Benicetomonty

People will threaten to leave however the vote goes. Same threats made over CP and HR. The numbers that do will be negligible

The only thing the document that could in any way be seen to validate a reballot is the 15 year opt out, which, imo, constitutes even more inequality. The Junior Cert has nothing to do with any of this and its been lumped in, which for me, selfishly, is the most unpalatable part of the whole sorry mess.

I expect it will go to ballot although Id be pleasantly surprised if Im wrong. No way Im voting to accept if it does.

evolving_doors

joebloggs32 wrote: »

Well said.
Im not Asti, but if I was i would want my vote. Not some inner cabal to decide on my behalf at this stage. A union should always consult its members on issues of such importance. If it comes back as a rejection then the mandate is strengthened.

Nothing new to vote on really though!

evolving_doors

Benicetomonty wrote: »

People will threaten to leave however the vote goes. Same threats made over CP and HR. The numbers that do will be negligible

The only thing the document that could in any way be seen to validate a reballot is the 15 year opt out, which, imo, constitutes even more inequality. The Junior Cert has nothing to do with any of this and its been lumped in, which for me, selfishly, is the most unpalatable part of the whole sorry mess.

I expect it will go to ballot although Id be pleasantly surprised if Im wrong. No way Im voting to accept if it does.

I wonder what would be the upshot if the new JC doesn't go through and June passes without a plague of locusts and armageddon ? Will that be the ASTI's last real bargaining chip!

deiseindublin

Gebgbegb wrote: »

Nothing new to vote on really though!

Nothing new, just more divide and conquer techniques, and in 5 years time we'll keep reading that the older teachers sold out the younger ones.

Really hope CEC don't ballot but I wouldn't be surprised if they do and it's accepted. Just hope there's a NO recommendation with a possible ballot.

man_no_plan

solerina wrote: »

The members have already voted and said no..the 'agreement' is not that different to what was already voted on...people who havnt a clue and have no idea what they are voting on will vote to accept to avoid the all out S&S situation without really understanding what they are voting on.

Well they didn't really. They had a say on LRA pte the TUI agreement and pre FEMPI and pre the DES carrying through on their indicated response.

If this agreement is accepted or rejected it is in the full knowledge of all of the above. But I would think that the whole membership should have a say

That said I'm not ASTI so maybe its none of my business!

km79

Well now didn't see this coming

http://m.independent.ie/irish-news/asti-governing-body-recommends-teachers-reject-pay-proposals-35264898.html

Maybe all is not lost

judeboy101

km79 wrote: »

Well now didn't see this coming

http://m.independent.ie/irish-news/asti-governing-body-recommends-teachers-reject-pay-proposals-35264898.html

Maybe all is not lost

SC voted against agreement but EL Presidenté overruled them and pushed it to CEC, methinks the top brass have being turned.

feardeas

km79 wrote:

Maybe all is not lost

Depends on point of view. If yesterday's Times article is correct it seems they now don't trust the president and gen sec even though they are in line with their general thinking.

ccazza

It's going to be sent out for ballot with recommendation to reject the deal.

judeboy101

ccazza wrote: »

It's going to be sent out for ballot with recommendation to reject the deal.

The fact that 1/3 of cec think this is a good deal is frightening.

feardeas

ccazza wrote: »

It's going to be sent out for ballot with recommendation to reject the deal.

Is this your opinion or is it the result of the meeting? If this is what happens then along with the recommendation I think there needs to be a very clear lay out of the following

1. What form of action do they propose is carried out if it is rejected and for how long they intend to carry it out for?

2. If this action, whether by strike or indeed indefinite closure once again, will mean a deduction in salary then will the contingency fund of th eunion be used for strike pay?

3. What the repercussions of a rejection might be i.e continued withdrawal of the Ward Report measures, non payment of €1000 in September under LRA 1 non payment of the S and S, non payment of the restored degree allowance in stages for LPTs, non restoration of the cuts for those over 65k, no posts under the 1000 ear marked for September in the Budget for ASTI schools, continued confusion over the junior cycle as students sit the first exam and other subjects make their way on to the programme, the possibility that there could be redundancy instead of redeployment. [Granted I see this as hard to believe but they have done everything they said they would last May and I see no reason on God's green earth why that would change.]

This information along with the deal, poor as it might be, need to be published by the union and disseminated to all members prior to the ballot along with the text urging us to vote every few days.

4. Finally what the plan is for the future.


Anyway if this is the decision of the CEC so be it, I thought they may have issued it without recommendation. I'm not going to contribute much more on this, Good luck voting and enjoy the festive period.

km79

ballot = game over

Hra was sent out for reballot with a no recommendation wasn't it?

And that was passed even without all the lockout furore behind it

km79

http://www.asti.ie/news/latest-news/news-article/article/asti-members-urged-to-reject-department-proposals-in-ballot/

ballot not till January

judeboy101

km79 wrote: »

ballot = game over

Hra was sent out for reballot with a no recommendation wasn't it?

And that was passed even without all the lockout furore behind it

Good luck for an 80% turnout /vote. Guards vote out next week will settle it in many teachers minds. You can say what you want about the pat king era, but he wouldn't have come out of 3 weeks negotiations with the ****e the current crew came back with.

2011abc

You must be joking he would have been the worst but for the fact one of his predecessors was bleeding the place dry ! You got a reliable source that president was arguing against SC for CEC debate ?

evolving_doors

judeboy101 wrote: »

Good luck for an 80% turnout /vote. Guards vote out next week will settle it in many teachers minds. You can say what you want about the pat king era, but he wouldn't have come out of 3 weeks negotiations with the ****e the current crew came back with.

Why what could pat king have hoped to get? What was his bargaining chip... He wanted the ASTI in any deal that was going at the time.

evolving_doors

km79 wrote: »

ballot = game over

Hra was sent out for reballot with a no recommendation wasn't it?

And that was passed even without all the lockout furore behind it

They're recommending a 'reject' this time, no?

judeboy101

Gebgbegb wrote: »

Why what could pat king have hoped to get? What was his bargaining chip... He wanted the ASTI in any deal that was going at the time.

A better opt out des for one thing, one that would cost the government in the long term

evolving_doors

judeboy101 wrote: »

A better opt out des for one thing, one that would cost the government in the long term

What if govt. said no Deal?

judeboy101

2011abc wrote: »

You must be joking he would have been the worst but for the fact one of his predecessors was bleeding the place dry ! You got a reliable source that president was arguing against SC for CEC debate ?

If the SC is recommending a NO and only announced that today it means the president must have used his veto to prevent them doing so the night they met. He has power to pass any decision onto the cec without SC (which is obviously what happened). What scares me is they spent 3 weeks in a room with a woman who said she would only proceed if both sides move. I don't see much movement on des side but our crew got feck all.

judeboy101

Gebgbegb wrote: »

What if govt. said no Deal?

All the better, we spin we were will to accept JC, CP hrs and move for new teachers but govern collapsed talks . Make them out to be the bad guys and make us look like we were willing to move mountains for our precious little snowflakes.