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

MrJones1973

coillsaille wrote: »

Yes it's a school based ballot like last time. I can't see them ever going back to the previous balloting system as the turnouts are much higher under the current system.

I have my fingers crossed for a No result. I can accept some of the valid points that have been made criticising how we got into this situation (and of course the lockout mess). But we are where we are now and this is the worst possible time to back down. If we accept these proposals I really think we're done for as a trade union for quite some time. We would be regarded as toothless by the DES who would become even more bullish and forceful in their dealings with us.

Im still waiting for Ed byrne to outline what went wrong in Nov and why he was so quick to run into the arms of the Department. I think Dept saw our 'mettle' in November but i do appreciate that the message was put out there that we would be left outside school gates for a long while. The cave into the guards was also a factor-they wre determined to give in only once.
Lets not despair folks. A new deal is approaching either way. We will be voting again in the autumn-whatever happens.

acequion

feardeas wrote: »

Neither of those gentlemen fill me with much confidence. However time will tell. If it is rejected every teacher in a voluntary school, union or not, will be very much hoping you're correct. And it would need to be rapid.

feadeas, industrial relations battles are generally not resolved rapidly. People impatient for fast results need to question what they are doing in a trade union.

And may I ask why you don't have confidence in these gentlemen? What have they done or not done differently to any other trade union leader since the start of the crash? Is it because their personalities are not as charismatic as more high profile union leaders? In my opinion the more charismatic union leaders speak out of both sides of their mouths. Would you prefer Kieran Christie's predecessor? I certainly wouldn't. No way! Is it that they are not hardball enough? Not reasonable enough? I would like to know your reasoning as a consistent yes voter. Contrary to you, I would have a lot of faith in those two.I find Ed Byrne excellent. Granted neither is as good as we would like them to be over the airways but let's not forget that the media is by and large hostile.

Someone mentioned that the Gardai had professional negotiators. Perhaps that is what we now need. However you must remember that these are unprecedented times in industrial relations. Never before were public service unions and their members treated with such contempt. Never before was there Fempi. In the past it was always collective bargaining. Simple haggling where I want 10, you'll give me 5 and we shake hands on 7. So even if we had the most professional negotiators available at our disposal we'd probably still face a brick wall. You're quite right that effective striking is possibly the only way to get fast results. Personally,I would do it,even though I can't afford it. Because I am quite frankly horrified that elected representatives have decided to treat the country's public servants like dirt. And I feel it is a matter of urgency to stand up to them.

Alqua

Ballot closes on Wed at 5.30, when should we expect a result? Nervous..

feardeas

acequion wrote:

feadeas, industrial relations battles are generally not resolved rapidly. People impatient for fast results need to question what they are doing in a trade union.

Lol I question it every day, as do many of my colleagues. Lots of money paid over the last decade and not a cent for strike pay. Many have paid in for multiples of my time and same story.

My lack of faith in the leadership is based on their poor enough performance in the media. Contrast them to Liam Doran. I just can't imagine them in a negotiation room with people who eat and drink this stuff. Did they have one proposal on the table? What was at the WRC talks? I know we can't be told, there's a media blackout. The only new thing was the pot out of the S and S.

Now I think neither of us would have a hope of convincing the other in fairness. Anyway we will learn more on Thursday.

solerina

Alqua wrote: »

Ballot closes on Wed at 5.30, when should we expect a result? Nervous..

I am a definite no vote but I reckon after a huge discussion at the vote on Friday that the majority in my school will vote yes, our steward came back from the branch meeting saying that head office have no clue what happens next so we shouldn't follow their advice to vote No !! What a disaster for us if this passes.

coillsaille

solerina wrote: »

I am a definite no vote but I reckon after a huge discussion at the vote on Friday that the majority in my school will vote yes, our steward came back from the branch meeting saying that head office have no clue what happens next so we shouldn't follow their advice to vote No !! What a disaster for us if this passes.

No offence to the person but in my opinion I think a staff would be better off with no school steward than with one like that.
Firstly for a school steward to give an opposite recommendation to the official union recommendation is just wrong plain and simple. They're perfectly entitled to their personal opinion that we should vote Yes but they should not be airing it in their role as school steward. They should either keep their opinion to themselves and just give members the information and the union recommendation or else resign as steward and be free to air their opinion then.
Secondly it was incorrect of them to say the union haven't a clue what they'll do next. It has been made very clear that the union will maintain continuous work to rule type actions and they more or less have indicated that strikes are off the table for the remainder of this school year, unless DES follow through on compulsory redundancies threat.
Christ, with stewards like that who needs the DES to bring us crashing down..

acequion

solerina wrote: »

I am a definite no vote but I reckon after a huge discussion at the vote on Friday that the majority in my school will vote yes, our steward came back from the branch meeting saying that head office have no clue what happens next so we shouldn't follow their advice to vote No !! What a disaster for us if this passes.

Thanks solerina. What you tell us is very worrying. Were ye a majority no last time round?

The problem is as another poster mentioned school stewards pushing a yes. Now while it's democracy that each member calls it and votes as he chooses including school stewards, telling people to vote yes and misinforming them is downright wrong. There is a clear strategy that was decided by the members at SC and CEC and is clearly visible on the asti website. Maybe people don't like the strategy,fine but it is utterly false to say that none exists.

And I agree. A big disaster!

acequion

coillsaille wrote: »

No offence to the person but in my opinion I think a staff would be better off with no school steward than with one like that.
Firstly for a school steward to give an opposite recommendation to the official union recommendation is just wrong plain and simple. They're perfectly entitled to their personal opinion that we should vote Yes but they should not be airing it in their role as school steward. They should either keep their opinion to themselves and just give members the information and the union recommendation or else resign as steward and be free to air their opinion then.
Secondly it was incorrect of them to say the union haven't a clue what they'll do next. It has been made very clear that the union will maintain continuous work to rule type actions and they more or less have indicated that strikes are off the table for the remainder of this school year, unless DES follow through on compulsory redundancies threat.
Christ, with stewards like that who needs the DES to bring us crashing down..

Snap coillsaille. My blood is boiling too.:mad::mad:

acequion

feardeas wrote: »

Lol I question it every day, as do many of my colleagues. Lots of money paid over the last decade and not a cent for strike pay. Many have paid in for multiples of my time and same story.

My lack of faith in the leadership is based on their poor enough performance in the media. Contrast them to Liam Doran. I just can't imagine them in a negotiation room with people who eat and drink this stuff. Did they have one proposal on the table? What was at the WRC talks? I know we can't be told, there's a media blackout. The only new thing was the pot out of the S and S.

Now I think neither of us would have a hope of convincing the other in fairness. Anyway we will learn more on Thursday.

feardeas Liam Doran is all bolshy talk in the media but he was very quick to tell the nurses to vote Yes to HR and that FEMPI would get them if they didn't.

I take your point about EB and KC and that's why I mentioned the possible need for professional negotiators. However what people must realise is that there were no negotiations. Period. The Govt refused point blank to talk unless we did the LRA. They weren't interested in any offers from us if we didn't do that.

We've all been paying our subs to the union. But what I will say is that bad and all as things are,we would be worse without a union. To me this ballot is asking us to trust either the union or the Govt and imperfect though the former may be I'll take them any day over that shower in Dail Eireann. It's like asking me who I trust more, the far from perfect men in my family or a bunch of burglars coming to ransack the house!

acequion

Alqua wrote: »

Ballot closes on Wed at 5.30, when should we expect a result? Nervous..

Sometime Thurs afternoon. if you're nervous I'm a wreck! :eek::eek:

Alqua

acequion wrote: »

Sometime Thurs afternoon. if you're nervous I'm a wreck! :eek::eek:

Nervous wrecks then, both of us!

judeboy101

acequion wrote: »

Sometime Thurs afternoon. if you're nervous I'm a wreck! :eek::eek:

Ppl in my school very resigned to the idea of croke park hrs after midterm and staff meetings. The principal is chompin at the bit for a yes, I cant imagine what he will hv planned. If I hear we are having another 'mindfulness' seminar ill do f**kin time, so I will.

acequion

judeboy101 wrote: »

Ppl in my school very resigned to the idea of croke park hrs after midterm and staff meetings. The principal is chompin at the bit for a yes, I cant imagine what he will hv planned. If I hear we are having another 'mindfulness' seminar ill do f**kin time, so I will.

How did they vote in your school?

judeboy101

acequion wrote: »

How did they vote in your school?

Young staff voted yes, middle and older voted no. Prob a 60/40 no/ yes . Last time about 90/10 no/ yes. Short term gain, long term pain :-(

Mekekka

judeboy101 wrote: »

Young staff voted yes, middle and older voted no. Prob a 60/40 no/ yes . Last time about 90/10 no/ yes. Short term gain, long term pain :-(

Just joining the thread now and this comment breakdown of voting for epitomises the confusion/resignation around this vote... Younger teachers voting yes baffles me when those who fall into the LPT category are the ones who have so much to fight for! I'm not an LPT but am in the non CID category (as yet) and most others in my situation (should be applying this year for CID but won't be as it currently stands) were talking of voting yes in order to get the CID entitlement back... No long term thinking

acequion

judeboy101 wrote: »

Young staff voted yes, middle and older voted no. Prob a 60/40 no/ yes . Last time about 90/10 no/ yes. Short term gain, long term pain :-(

A 60% No is fine. There are loads of schools with No majorities,granted loads with Yes too. But neither result is a foregone conclusion and crazy to be even thinking of CP hours yet!

acequion

Alqua wrote: »

Nervous wrecks then, both of us!

lol :pac: How did they vote in your school Alqua?

solerina

acequion wrote: »

Thanks solerina. What you tell us is very worrying. Were ye a majority no last time round?

The problem is as another poster mentioned school stewards pushing a yes. Now while it's democracy that each member calls it and votes as he chooses including school stewards, telling people to vote yes and misinforming them is downright wrong. There is a clear strategy that was decided by the members at SC and CEC and is clearly visible on the asti website. Maybe people don't like the strategy,fine but it is utterly false to say that none exists.

And I agree. A big disaster!

yes, I think almost 100% No last time round....our steward isn't interested in union issues, he was simply next in line (crazy, but that's how its done in our school) so he simply reported what he heard at the branch, I know he wasn't helping anyone but I don't really blame him for the problem, it came from branch level !!

coillsaille

solerina wrote: »

yes, I think almost 100% No last time round....our steward isn't interested in union issues, he was simply next in line (crazy, but that's how its done in our school) so he simply reported what he heard at the branch, I know he wasn't helping anyone but I don't really blame him for the problem, it came from branch level !!

Just asking this out of curiosity. Were there any other teachers from your school at the branch meeting who could confirm what was said at it?

acequion

coillsaille wrote: »

Just asking this out of curiosity. Were there any other teachers from your school at the branch meeting who could confirm what was said at it?

I'd be wondering the same solerina. To me it seems incredible that over 50% of your staff would change from a No to a Yes like that just on what they heard from a school steward who isn't even that engaged. Surely a lot of them went and found it out for themselves? And surely a few went to that branch meeting? And worrying too that a branch would be misinforming people to that extent.

Now I'm not for one minute questioning your honesty as I know you're no fan of these agreements but jesus if an entire staff change sides like that it's hugely alarming.

Alqua

acequion wrote: »

lol :pac: How did they vote in your school Alqua?

I have no idea, and that's what's worrying! Staff were much quieter this time and I got the feeling that maybe those quiet people had changed to a yes since the last vote. I was quite vocal about voting no and several people just listened and nodded, but said nothing. At our meeting, one staff member (soon to retire) spoke very strongly for a Yes - saying the ASTI are useless and always have us striking and we get nowhere (her words). She had the agreement of another senior teacher (who I found out afterwards, hasn't read anything of the "deal"). Thankfully, the other side of the argument was given too. Most of the new/young teachers didn't say a word and I've no idea what they voted. I fear that the CID issue could have swayed them. It's so hard to call, but it will probably be close!?

acequion

Alqua wrote: »

I have no idea, and that's what's worrying! Staff were much quieter this time and I got the feeling that maybe those quiet people had changed to a yes since the last vote. I was quite vocal about voting no and several people just listened and nodded, but said nothing. At our meeting, one staff member (soon to retire) spoke very strongly for a Yes - saying the ASTI are useless and always have us striking and we get nowhere (her words). She had the agreement of another senior teacher (who I found out afterwards, hasn't read anything of the "deal"). Thankfully, the other side of the argument was given too. Most of the new/young teachers didn't say a word and I've no idea what they voted. I fear that the CID issue could have swayed them. It's so hard to call, but it will probably be close!?

I know Alqua. You really wouldn't know what to be prepared for. But look let's keep the fingers crossed, we've not much longer to wait.

CWF

People on here saying the shop steward shouldn't be publically going against the union recommendation to vote no is absolute non sense in my opinion. The person holds that democratic right. I'm a school steward and voted no BTW, I just think that opinion is completely wrong!

coillsaille

CWF wrote: »

People on here saying the shop steward shouldn't be publically going against the union recommendation to vote no is absolute non sense in my opinion. The person holds that democratic right. I'm a school steward and voted no BTW, I just think that opinion is completely wrong!

Well I respectfully disagree and think that you are completely wrong. If the union was recommending a Yes and a steward was publicly recommending a No I would be of the same opinion that they were wrong, even though I strongly support a No vote.
I have served as steward myself, eight years in total, and I would never consider urging members to vote against a union recommendation even if I strongly felt that the recommendation was wrong. I would resign as steward before I'd do that. For the union representative in a school to urge members to oppose the official union line is just wrong.
As I said in my previous post, of course the steward is entitled to their personal opinion. But they are not entitled to use their role in the school to influence others to vote against the union.

CWF

coillsaille wrote: »

Well I respectfully disagree and think that you are completely wrong. If the union was recommending a Yes and a steward was publicly recommending a No I would be of the same opinion that they were wrong, even though I strongly support a No vote.
I have served as steward myself, eight years in total, and I would never consider urging members to vote against a union recommendation even if I strongly felt that the recommendation was wrong. I would resign as steward before I'd do that. For the union representative in a school to urge members to oppose the official union line is just wrong.
As I said in my previous post, of course the steward is entitled to their personal opinion. But they are not entitled to use their role in the school to influence others to vote against the union.

I understand what you'e saying. But I'm not talking about trying to influence people, I'm simple saying that I see no problem with a steward sharing their personal opinion on the matter. I would make it very clear to my members that the union recommends x but I personally disagree. As school steward your role is to relay information from the union to it's members. Nowhere does it state the steward must keep their opinions on such critical matters to themselves. I would make it all very clear to my members, honesty is how I operate. If the union aren't happy with that then I would happily resign. I have never actually had an opposing opinion to a union recommendation, but my point and principles still remain.

clunked

feardeas wrote: »

Lol I question it every day, as do many of my colleagues. Lots of money paid over the last decade and not a cent for strike pay. Many have paid in for multiples of my time and same story.

My lack of faith in the leadership is based on their poor enough performance in the media. Contrast them to Liam Doran.

Liam Doran is all mouth and no delivery for nurses. Their conditions are even worse than ours. Like the rest of the ICTU cabal he talks a very good game but look at staffing levels in our hospitals for example.

solerina

coillsaille wrote: »

Just asking this out of curiosity. Were there any other teachers from your school at the branch meeting who could confirm what was said at it?

I am not certain but as far as I know just the steward was at the meeting, no one else indicated that they were anyway.

coillsaille

solerina wrote: »

I am not certain but as far as I know just the steward was at the meeting, no one else indicated that they were anyway.

Thanks for answering Solerina. I find it very hard to believe that the information you said the steward brought back to the staff came from the committee of an ASTI branch. It runs completely contrary to the official union line and is the complete opposite to what was said at my branch meeting.
Obviously I don't know the steward involved or which branch but it just doesn't make sense. To me it sounds much more like your steward brought back opinions that came from members on the floor rather than from the branch committee, possibly also coloured by his own personal disillusionment with the union.

Mekekka

coillsaille wrote: »

To me it sounds much more like your steward brought back opinions that came from members on the floor rather than from the branch committee, possibly also coloured by his own personal disillusionment with the union.

I was thinking the same thing. At our last meeting some members expressed this opinion that there was no plan of action in the event of another no vote but thankfully those who had been at the SC and CEC meetings filled them in.

solerina

coillsaille wrote: »

Thanks for answering Solerina. I find it very hard to believe that the information you said the steward brought back to the staff came from the committee of an ASTI branch. It runs completely contrary to the official union line and is the complete opposite to what was said at my branch meeting.
Obviously I don't know the steward involved or which branch but it just doesn't make sense. To me it sounds much more like your steward brought back opinions that came from members on the floor rather than from the branch committee, possibly also coloured by his own personal disillusionment with the union.

It's possible, although our steward is pretty straight so I imagine it's an accurate enough reflection of what was said at the meeting....maybe from the floor though as you suggest !!