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

judeboy101

happywithlife wrote: »

I think you're showing your youth in many if indeed not all of your posts
Equal work for equal pay is the union tag line although I do agree it is misleading
ONE common PAYSCALE is what members want to give equality

A grave digger works as hard a day as a neurosurgeon, equal pay for equal work

PureClareGold

judeboy101 wrote: »

A grave digger works as hard a day as a neurosurgeon, equal pay for equal work

Don't understand. You want a grave digger tonne paid the same as a neurosurgeon?? That's not equal work. Teaching the same amount of hours a week is! Perhaps the union need to clarify this equal pay for equal work crack seeing as that is not what they mean

judeboy101

PureClareGold wrote: »

Don't understand. You want a grave digger tonne paid the same as a neurosurgeon?? That's not equal work. Teaching the same amount of hours a week is! Perhaps the union need to clarify this equal pay for equal work crack seeing as that is not what they mean

Work=force by distance and I'd say that the force exerted by a grave digger moving 2ton of soil might well be greater than the force exerted by a neurosurgeon removing a couple of grams of brain and scalp.

Moody_mona

PureClareGold wrote: »

judeboy101 wrote: »

Equal pay for equal work and the new jc assessed exactly the way the old one was via terminal exam/ terminal project aka externally, with multiple levels and no school cert.

Never has been equal for equal work. Two teachers both teaching 22 hours but began 10 years apart have always been on different points of the scale. Do you want a flat rate for all teachers regardless of experience?
Why don't we go back to the hedge schools? They worked fine too sure. Why bother with school buildings? If it worked well donkey's years ago why bother trying to modernize?

This is just such a ridiculous comment.

I didn't argue with your discussion on the Junior Cycle because although I have huge issues with it in my subject, I respected how clear you were in your decision to accept it.

The union doesn't want every teacher to earn the same. Nobody here wants every teacher to earn the same. Why are you even making that comment? You know fine well what equal pay for equal work means and stating otherwise is acting unnecessarily obtuse.

It's also a huge insult to those who do not receive equal pay for equal work. I have two colleagues who graduated on the same day, but because one taught in England for a year and didn't make the pre 2011 cut, she earns €8000 less. Stupid comments like yours are a kick in the teeth to people who are already down. The pay inequality deserves grown up discussion, without union members who clearly aren't team players slamming it.

TheDriver

judeboy101 wrote: »

A grave digger works as hard a day as a neurosurgeon, equal pay for equal work

Ah lads, lets get back on track and keep it focused on the dispute, the teaching profession and all aspects of the ASTI decisions. Consider this a mod intervention for the greater good..........

deiseindublin

PureClareGold wrote: »

Perhaps the union need to clarify this equal pay for equal work crack seeing as that is not what they mean

Did you honestly get through your Degree and HDip - and still have difficulty in understanding the campaign?


Baffled.

evolving_doors

I suppose some see NQT's as looking for a payrise!
As opposed to pay restoration

PTO

Will the nurses going on strike have any impact on the ASTI action? I know they were looking for pay restoration as well. Or is their action indifferent to us?

PureClareGold

Moody_mona wrote: »

This is just such a ridiculous comment.

I didn't argue with your discussion on the Junior Cycle because although I have huge issues with it in my subject, I respected how clear you were in your decision to accept it.

The union doesn't want every teacher to earn the same. Nobody here wants every teacher to earn the same. Why are you even making that comment? You know fine well what equal pay for equal work means and stating otherwise is acting unnecessarily obtuse.

It's also a huge insult to those who do not receive equal pay for equal work. I have two colleagues who graduated on the same day, but because one taught in England for a year and didn't make the pre 2011 cut, she earns €8000 less. Stupid comments like yours are a kick in the teeth to people who are already down. The pay inequality deserves grown up discussion, without union members who clearly aren't team players slamming it.

I am just pointing out that the slogan being used is "equal pay for equal work" and to quote yourself "The union doesn't want every teacher to earn the same. Nobody here wants every teacher to earn the same". There's a difference bin what is being said and what is being meant

PureClareGold

deiseindublin wrote: »

Did you honestly get through your Degree and HDip - and still have difficulty in understanding the campaign?


Baffled.

I completely understand the campaign. It's the language being used that bus confusing. Although with all the different strands to the campaign "equal pay for equal work", S&S, Junior Cycle Reform, Croke Park hours, it is easy to get confused.
Why can't the union split them up and fight one step at the time

Moody_mona

PureClareGold wrote: »

Moody_mona wrote: »

This is just such a ridiculous comment.

I didn't argue with your discussion on the Junior Cycle because although I have huge issues with it in my subject, I respected how clear you were in your decision to accept it.

The union doesn't want every teacher to earn the same. Nobody here wants every teacher to earn the same. Why are you even making that comment? You know fine well what equal pay for equal work means and stating otherwise is acting unnecessarily obtuse.

It's also a huge insult to those who do not receive equal pay for equal work. I have two colleagues who graduated on the same day, but because one taught in England for a year and didn't make the pre 2011 cut, she earns €8000 less. Stupid comments like yours are a kick in the teeth to people who are already down. The pay inequality deserves grown up discussion, without union members who clearly aren't team players slamming it.

I am just pointing out that the slogan being used is "equal pay for equal work" and to quote yourself "The union doesn't want every teacher to earn the same. Nobody here wants every teacher to earn the same". There's a difference bin what is being said and what is being meant

I suggest you help to clear up any confusion then, rather than add to it.

MrJones1973

Reality check folks. Croke park hours won't go. Reformed yes ,go no. The new JC is here to stay but the assessment element is negotiable. Multiple pay scales - I believe a shorter time scale for ending this will be offered but they will want a sacrifice from all teachers for this.
The only way any of the above will change is a prolonged strike. Work to rule won't do it. In others words no immediate pay equality unless a massive strike happens.
As stated above s and s / redundancies are battlegrounds
As for arguments over slogans why bother arguing with what was a moronic point?

judeboy101

Mrwhite1970 wrote: »

Reality check folks. Croke park hours won't go. Reformed yes ,go no. The new JC is here to stay but the assessment element is negotiable. Multiple pay scales - I believe a shorter time scale for ending this will be offered but they will want a sacrifice from all teachers for this.
The only way any of the above will change is a prolonged strike. Work to rule won't do it. In others words no immediate pay equality unless a massive strike happens.
As stated above s and s / redundancies are battlegrounds
As for arguments over slogans why bother arguing with what was a moronic point?

Is it really a "new jc" without the new assessment model?

implausible

judeboy101 wrote:

Is it really a "new jc" without the new assessment model?

The curricula being rewritten for every subject, students studying a maximum of 10 subjects, short courses being introduced, all schools going to a minimum of 40 minutes and reducing teacher contact time by 40 minutes - I'd call that a new JC.

judeboy101

That's just the old jc with new new limits and a few changes in content. It's only "new" if you change how its assessed, otherwise its just "updating".

picturehangup

Exactly a week ago since the ballot results, and not a word on the ASTI website on the next move.

franktennis

picturehangup wrote: »

Exactly a week ago since the ballot results, and not a word on the ASTI website on the next move.

Standing committee meeting today and tomorrow

MrJones1973

Something should come from SC today. I hope they use s and s weapon but give them notice.

Icsics

Mrwhite1970 wrote: »

Something should come from SC today. I hope they use s and s weapon but give them notice.

Yes & hopefully whatever they decide will be carefully thought out...!

acequion

picturehangup wrote: »

Exactly a week ago since the ballot results, and not a word on the ASTI website on the next move.

Let's enjoy a bit of a break from it!

acequion

Mrwhite1970 wrote: »

Reality check folks. Croke park hours won't go. Reformed yes ,go no. The new JC is here to stay but the assessment element is negotiable. Multiple pay scales - I believe a shorter time scale for ending this will be offered but they will want a sacrifice from all teachers for this.
The only way any of the above will change is a prolonged strike. Work to rule won't do it. In others words no immediate pay equality unless a massive strike happens.
As stated above s and s / redundancies are battlegrounds
As for arguments over slogans why bother arguing with what was a moronic point?

There are so many issues,so many new "initiatives" so much deterioration in pay and conditions that it would be hard to get us all to agree on what we can and can't accept.

However here are my thoughts on a few of the points raised in this post:

SACRIFICE FROM ALL TEACHERS:My view there is that we have sacrificed enough, more than enough. The past eight years have been gruelling. I won't be presumptuous enough to say that they've been the hardest years ever for Irish teachers,but it's certainly close. Remember 47.5% of ASTI members were willing to wash their hands of the equal pay campaign last week. So I doubt you'll find teachers willing to sacrifice anything more for pay equality. And I don't think anybody should be asked for more. There should be a commitment to a timeline for the reintroduction of the common basic scale.And we should hold out for that.

CP HOURS: Seemingly Pat king said that in all his years he never saw any one element cause so much resentment among teachers as those dreadful hours. And that gentleman was around for a long time and saw a lot. I think it's time that the trade union as a whole was working towards winding down the straitjacket agreements as well as Fempi and with them,the extra hours. After all the emergency is well over. But I'm not holding my breath on that one. As long as we continue to have the ministry for public expenditure and reform,spawn of the economic crash and as long as Europe is keeping a beady eye on our public purse we're pretty doomed. However I would strongly agitate for limiting them to the necessary after school meetings and P/T meetings. And what about the over and above hours? they may ask.Well nowhere has it been mentioned that teachers also got saddled with an extra hour of S&S,up from three to five periods per week.And those not doing it paying for the privilege.So how come this extra is never mentioned?

JC: As someone else said we must hold out for external assessments and levels in all subjects.

And I agree that an aggressive policy will eventually have to be used such as all out strike and hitting the state exams. But will our members be willing to go that far?

As I said earlier,let's enjoy the bit of a break from it all while we have it.

MrJones1973

acequion wrote: »

There are so many issues,so many new "initiatives" so much deterioration in pay and conditions that it would be hard to get us all to agree on what we can and can't accept.

However here are my thoughts on a few of the points raised in this post:

SACRIFICE FROM ALL TEACHERS:My view there is that we have sacrificed enough, more than enough. The past eight years have been gruelling. I won't be presumptuous enough to say that they've been the hardest years ever for Irish teachers,but it's certainly close. Remember 47.5% of ASTI members were willing to wash their hands of the equal pay campaign last week. So I doubt you'll find teachers willing to sacrifice anything more for pay equality. And I don't think anybody should be asked for more. There should be a commitment to a timeline for the reintroduction of the common basic scale.And we should hold out for that.

CP HOURS: Seemingly Pat king said that in all his years he never saw any one element cause so much resentment among teachers as those dreadful hours. And that gentleman was around for a long time and saw a lot. I think it's time that the trade union as a whole was working towards winding down the straitjacket agreements as well as Fempi and with them,the extra hours. After all the emergency is well over. But I'm not holding my breath on that one. As long as we continue to have the ministry for public expenditure and reform,spawn of the economic crash and as long as Europe is keeping a beady eye on our public purse we're pretty doomed. However I would strongly agitate for limiting them to the necessary after school meetings and P/T meetings. And what about the over and above hours? they may ask.Well nowhere has it been mentioned that teachers also got saddled with an extra hour of S&S,up from three to five periods per week.And those not doing it paying for the privilege.So how come this extra is never mentioned?

JC: As someone else said we must hold out for external assessments and levels in all subjects.

And I agree that an aggressive policy will eventually have to be used such as all out strike and hitting the state exams. But will our members be willing to go that far?

As I said earlier,let's enjoy the bit of a break from it all while we have it.

Good post. I largely agree with you. I'm not encouraging more sacrifice. I'm just dealing with the fact that in the absence of strikes or exam disruption you can't hope for huge movement.
Personally I'm going into bunker mode next few years. No extra unpaid work. No going for bull**** management posts. No coordinator unpaid jobs for me. I do some extra curricular but just stuff I enjoy and gets me away for a few days. I have done my time in everything

joebloggs32

acequion wrote: »

There are so many issues,so many new "initiatives" so much deterioration in pay and conditions that it would be hard to get us all to agree on what we can and can't accept.

However here are my thoughts on a few of the points raised in this post:

SACRIFICE FROM ALL TEACHERS:My view there is that we have sacrificed enough, more than enough. The past eight years have been gruelling. I won't be presumptuous enough to say that they've been the hardest years ever for Irish teachers,but it's certainly close. Remember 47.5% of ASTI members were willing to wash their hands of the equal pay campaign last week. So I doubt you'll find teachers willing to sacrifice anything more for pay equality. And I don't think anybody should be asked for more. There should be a commitment to a timeline for the reintroduction of the common basic scale.And we should hold out for that.

CP HOURS: Seemingly Pat king said that in all his years he never saw any one element cause so much resentment among teachers as those dreadful hours. And that gentleman was around for a long time and saw a lot. I think it's time that the trade union as a whole was working towards winding down the straitjacket agreements as well as Fempi and with them,the extra hours. After all the emergency is well over. But I'm not holding my breath on that one. As long as we continue to have the ministry for public expenditure and reform,spawn of the economic crash and as long as Europe is keeping a beady eye on our public purse we're pretty doomed. However I would strongly agitate for limiting them to the necessary after school meetings and P/T meetings. And what about the over and above hours? they may ask.Well nowhere has it been mentioned that teachers also got saddled with an extra hour of S&S,up from three to five periods per week.And those not doing it paying for the privilege.So how come this extra is never mentioned?

JC: As someone else said we must hold out for external assessments and levels in all subjects.

And I agree that an aggressive policy will eventually have to be used such as all out strike and hitting the state exams. But will our members be willing to go that far?

As I said earlier,let's enjoy the bit of a break from it all while we have it.

It is a pity Europe didnt have their beady eye on our budgets 15 years ago

On S&S it is not accurate to say those not doing it are paying for it. Those of us who always did it were paid. We then as part of HRA agreed to do it for free for a few years, before restoration of payment in two phases, but this time as part of core salary. Those who do the extra work are getting paid a fee for it(TUI), and those who do not will not. The difference in salary will be almost identical to the previous S&S allowance by September.

Many give out here about the media spinning arguments, we should not stoop to their levels.

judeboy101

joebloggs32 wrote: »

It is a pity Europe didnt have their beady eye on our budgets 15 years ago

On S&S it is not accurate to say those not doing it are paying for it. Those of us who always did it were paid. We then as part of HRA agreed to do it for free for a few years, before restoration of payment in two phases, but this time as part of core salary. Those who do the extra work are getting paid a fee for it(TUI), and those who do not will not. The difference in salary will be almost identical to the previous S&S allowance by September.

Many give out here about the media spinning arguments, we should not stoop to their levels.

Have to disagree, before this s&s was a choice that you could opt into and out of as your circumstances changed. Now its in for life (unless the gov choose to kick you out of scheme) or out for life (unless the government changes the rules). How can a duty which Richard Burton deems core to a teachers job be considered optional? That's like saying to a surgeon you can work as a surgeon but opt out of surgery (btw i don't think its a core duty)

joebloggs32

judeboy101 wrote: »

Have to disagree, before this s&s was a choice that you could opt into and out of as your circumstances changed. Now its in for life (unless the gov choose to kick you out of scheme) or out for life (unless the government changes the rules). How can a duty which Richard Burton deems core to a teachers job be considered optional? That's like saying to a surgeon you can work as a surgeon but opt out of surgery (btw i don't think its a core duty)

But my point remains regardless of that. Its a separate issue to the point I made.
If you are doing it (notwithstanding the current situation for Asti members) you are being paid, if not doing it then your salary will be lower by the equivalent amount of the old allowance.

judeboy101

joebloggs32 wrote: »

But my point remains regardless of that. Its a separate issue to the point I made.
If you are doing it (notwithstanding the current situation for Asti members) you are being paid, if not doing it then your salary will be lower by the equivalent amount of the old allowance.

Ah but under the new des there is a two tier opt out system one for new opts and one for old. Plus during lock out I got paid same amount per day as opt in which counters you argument of ny pay being lower than opt in.

joebloggs32

judeboy101 wrote: »

Ah but under the new des there is a two tier opt out system one for new opts and one for old. Plus during lock out I got paid same amount per day as opt in which counters you argument of ny pay being lower than opt in.

The Asti action changed some of the details slightly, but its still the same principle, those who do it get more pay than those who dont. Its a very simple concept.
Im not trying to argue about the fairness or unfairness about access to opting in or out of the scheme.

implausible

judeboy101 wrote:

That's just the old jc with new new limits and a few changes in content. It's only "new" if you change how its assessed, otherwise its just "updating".

So the Junior Cert was just an updated Inter Cert then? Both assessed by terminal exam. New curricula for each subject in the JC = new JC.

acequion

joebloggs32 wrote: »

It is a pity Europe didnt have their beady eye on our budgets 15 years ago

On S&S it is not accurate to say those not doing it are paying for it. Those of us who always did it were paid. We then as part of HRA agreed to do it for free for a few years, before restoration of payment in two phases, but this time as part of core salary. Those who do the extra work are getting paid a fee for it(TUI), and those who do not will not. The difference in salary will be almost identical to the previous S&S allowance by September.

Many give out here about the media spinning arguments, we should not stoop to their levels.

Are you saying that I'm trying to spin an argument,joebloggs32? Because I'm not.

In the other sectors of the public service everybody had to do extra work. In most cases they just did more of what they were doing already,breaks included. They didn't and still don't like it but can live with it. They should no longer have to,in my view but that's another matter. Many teachers will say they'd have preferred an extra class or two a week but that was impossible as it would cut jobs. So we got the lovely CP hours,or one hour a week as Bruton was fond of telling the media.

But what about not only the imposition of S&S, but also the increase in it? Two extra periods per week is roughly one extra hour that teachers have to be available for. Granted they don't have to do all the periods but they still have to be on call. You say that the allowance come September will be almost identical to the old allowance. Yes,but with an extra hour's work thrown in! In fact it's a little more than an hour. So that's an extra hour a week of S&S plus an extra hour of CP for the same pay. So why is that never mentioned? And those not doing it pay or are docked pay,whichever way you want to look at it. I stand to be corrected but I'm almost certain that some other sector, perhaps nurses, but am not sure, also have a facility where they are able to buy out of their extra hours.

joebloggs32

acequion wrote: »

Are you saying that I'm trying to spin an argument,joebloggs32? Because I'm not.

In the other sectors of the public service everybody had to do extra work. In most cases they just did more of what they were doing already,breaks included. They didn't and still don't like it but can live with it. They should no longer have to,in my view but that's another matter. Many teachers will say they'd have preferred an extra class or two a week but that was impossible as it would cut jobs. So we got the lovely CP hours,or one hour a week as Bruton was fond of telling the media.

But what about not only the imposition of S&S, but also the increase in it? Two extra periods per week is roughly one extra hour that teachers have to be available for. Granted they don't have to do all the periods but they still have to be on call. You say that the allowance come September will be almost identical to the old allowance. Yes,but with an extra hour's work thrown in! In fact it's a little more than an hour. So that's an extra hour a week of S&S plus an extra hour of CP for the same pay. So why is that never mentioned? And those not doing it pay or are docked pay,whichever way you want to look at it. I stand to be corrected but I'm almost certain that some other sector, perhaps nurses, but am not sure, also have a facility where they are able to buy out of their extra hours.

Yes, we have increased our availability under the s&s scheme up to 43 hours and across 5 periods a week, but come September you cant honestly say someone is taking a pay cut by not doing it.

Nurses were given additional work, which if they didn't take on they then took a pay cut.