ASTI members vote for industrial action over Covid issues

awec

History Queen wrote: »

They don't have the option of PUP.

Well, if teachers want to argue for the right to PUP for the ones that can't / won't work, I'll support that 100%.

Donald Trump

Smacruairi wrote: »

Great questions. Why didn't you ask them of the DES in April like everyone else in the school community did, including the parent associations and advisory boards, only to be told, we are going ahead in Sept regardless.

I'm only responding to a person who seems to be unaware of any reasons why allowing some teachers to teach online for verified health reasons would not be workable.

History Queen

Donald Trump wrote: »

How about allowing all teachers a "free" sabbatical year? I mean in the sense if won't count towards their lifetime allowance of sabbaticals. Would that not work? Then if the can't work because of corona, they can claim the PUP.

Not sure what you mean by lifetime allowance of sabbaticals? Not sure if this is workable but for a teacher I know who is high risk , she would jump at this opportunity.

Smacruairi

There are actually several reasons why it could work in a school setting given appropriate use of SnS rosters, allocated PGDEs and Flipped Classroom mechanics supported by interdepartmental sharing, but I doubt you'd be interested.

Donald Trump

History Queen wrote: »

The Department of Education in their guidelines to schools envisage teachers teaching remotely (if say isolating due to close contact) with students supervised in school. I'd imagine ASTI envisage this working the same for high risk teachers.

Who is going to do this supervision? Will the other teachers give up some of their free time for free? That would be a nice idea for the unions to support that idea in support of the vulnerable at-risk people among their membership.


Instead of sitting in the staff canteen reading the paper for their off-time, they could sit at the top of the room while Mr. Ryan is teaching his maths.

awec

History Queen wrote: »

Not sure what you mean by lifetime allowance of sabbaticals? Not sure if this is workable but for a teacher I know who is high risk , she would jump at this opportunity.

I believe he means the career breaks that are available to teachers.

History Queen

Donald Trump wrote: »

Who is going to do this supervision? Will the other teachers give up some of their free time for free? That would be a nice idea for the unions to support that idea in support of the vulnerable at-risk people among their membership.


Instead of sitting in the staff canteen reading the paper for their off-time, they could sit at the top of the room while Mr. Ryan is teaching his maths.

We already provide supervision for absent colleagues under s&s scheme. I'm assuming that is what would be used for this supervision. You again display that you don't know what you are talking about.

History Queen

awec wrote: »

I believe he means the career breaks that are available to teachers.

Sorry, ya obviously, I didn't cop.

Donald Trump

History Queen wrote: »

Not sure what you mean by lifetime allowance of sabbaticals? Not sure if this is workable but for a teacher I know who is high risk , she would jump at this opportunity.

Teachers are allowed to take 2 sabbaticals during their career. (I think any civil servant can). Each one can be for up to 5 years - although it has to be extended each year.


You have to leave a certain amount between them though. I have a friend who used both of his by first working a few years -> 5 years sabbatical -> 5 years working -> 5 years sabbatical.


I don't know whether the rule for the in between is that it has to be five year, or that it has to be as long as the previous sabbatical. I know he had to do the 5 years when he went back before he could take the second one. He didn't really want to go back but he was on the old payscale and wanted to keep that.

History Queen

Donald Trump wrote: »

Teachers are allowed to take 2 sabbaticals during their career. (I think any civil servant can). Each one can be for up to 5 years - although it has to be extended each year.


You have to leave a certain amount between them though. I have a friend who used both of his by first working a few years -> 5 years sabbatical -> 5 years working -> 5 years sabbatical.


I don't know whether the rule for the in between is that it has to be five year, or that it has to be as long as the previous sabbatical. I know he had to do the 5 years when he went back before he could take the second one. He didn't really want to go back but he was on the old payscale and wanted to keep that.

Sorry ya, see my post above, understand what you meant now.

Smacruairi

or, you know with mostlong term illnesses that prevent you from working, the DES could just allocate the resources to hire a sub for the year. Redeploy the teacher into some sort of remote teaching for students are staying at home. What would be wrong with that as opposed to messing around with everything else?

Donald Trump

History Queen wrote: »

Sorry ya, see my post above, understand what you meant now.

I didn't see your post as I was typing my own. I might have used the wrong terminology.


But I think that that should be allowed as an option to any teacher. So that they can take a year out without losing anything. There might also be some that had used up their two already and they should be allowed to take another one "free" one now. and that could be offered again next year.

History Queen

Smacruairi wrote: »

or, you know with mostlong term illnesses that prevent you from working, the DES could just allocate the resources to hire a sub for the year. Redeploy the teacher into some sort of remote teaching for students are staying at home. What would be wrong with that as opposed to messing around with everything else?

Agreed, I was just thinking if it were to be agreed DES would probably want it in line with what they habe already set out for working from home. What you suggest makes more sense which makes it unlikely that DES would do it...

Bananaleaf

Donald Trump wrote: »

I'd love to hear your great idea on how to make that workable.



9am Irish class with Mrs. Murphy in room 11. 9:40am online maths class with Mr. Ryan. 10:20am Geography class in room 15 with Mrs. Reilly.


Where are the students for the online class? Left sitting in a classroom unsupervised with their laptops?

Maybe they have to travel home, log in, do the class and get back for the next class all within the 40 minutes? ...would have been a bit difficult for me as I lived about 8 miles from the school and travelled on a dedicated school bus...but how and ever

There are currently teachers in our school who are working from home due to being close contacts. In the scenario you raised above, Mr Ryan would log on from home and teach the class through video link. The class would be where Mr Ryan is timetabled to be at that time and there would be a sub teacher in the room so the class are not supervised. There are no laptops needed as the teacher is being streamed through the teacher laptop which is plugged into the overhead projector.

Just showing how it would work - not having a go.

awec

Smacruairi wrote: »

or, you know with mostlong term illnesses that prevent you from working, the DES could just allocate the resources to hire a sub for the year. Redeploy the teacher into some sort of remote teaching for students are staying at home. What would be wrong with that as opposed to messing around with everything else?

If someone has a long term illness that prevents them from working, then they don't work.

They don't get redeployed into some other role so they can sort of work a little bit, and expect to get paid for it.

History Queen

awec wrote: »

If someone has a long term illness that prevents them from working, then they don't work.

They don't get redeployed into some other role so they can sort of work a little bit, and expect to get paid for it.

But these are illnesses or conditions that ordinarily wouldn't be an issue in a classroom. They are high risk due to covid.

Bananaleaf

Donald Trump wrote: »

Instead of sitting in the staff canteen reading the paper for their off-time, they could sit at the top of the room while Mr. Ryan is teaching his maths.

Nobody would be doing it for free. Funding has been provided to schools for this purpose - those 'extra teachers' we were getting - this is what they were talking about when they gave us that.

I know it is besides the point really and I know nobody cares, but I want to mention it anyway .... there are quite a few schools that no longer have staff canteens, either because they've had to turn it into a classroom or because they've decided not to risk potential close contact

awec

History Queen wrote: »

But these are illnesses or conditions that ordinarily wouldn't be an issue in a classroom. They are high risk due to covid.

But they are an issue now. If they cannot or will not work due to Covid, then they should not work, and PUP should be available to them. If it's not, then that's wrong, and seems like something that should be argued for. Replace them with someone who can work.

If you have a teacher teaching remotely (let's imagine for a moment that this isn't total nonsense), and someone else sitting in the classroom doing the physical stuff (we may hope these people aren't ASTI members), then you've got to pay 2 people to do the job of 1.

Smacruairi

You know you can't sack someone for a medical illness right?

And i'll ask again for the 4th time, what about students who are high risk who can't attend class. they are being totally ignored by the DES at the moment, is it tough **** for them?

You seem to mention PUP a lot, are you sure it's not you who is obsessed with the money side of thigns here? You've ignroed allthe points ive made about improving conditions for students in terms of raising the R number. WHy is that?

History Queen

awec wrote: »

But they are an issue now. If they cannot or will not work due to Covid, then they should not work, and PUP should be available to them. If it's not, then that's wrong, and seems like something that should be argued for. Replace them with someone who can work.

If you have a teacher teaching remotely (let's imagine for a moment that this isn't total nonsense), and someone else sitting in the classroom doing the physical stuff, then you've got to pay 2 people to do the job of 1.

But look at the amount of teachers we might lose over what is (jesus i hope!) a temporary situation. We already have a serious shortage of teachers. Also i don't agree that remote teaching (in a structured way,not the mess we had last March) is nonsense, how are our third level institutions managing?

awec

History Queen wrote: »

But look at the amount of teachers we might lose over what is (jesus i hope!) a temporary situation. We already have a serious shortage of teachers. Also i don't agree that remote teaching (in a structured way,not the mess we had last March) is nonsense, how are our third level institutions managing?

Third level education is for motivated adults. Primary and secondary is children.

Surely you see the difference.

History Queen

awec wrote: »

Third level education is for motivated adults. Primary and secondary is children.

Surely you see the difference.

Im primarily talking about second level, it is a second level dispute. I'm also not familiar enough with the primary curriculum to know if it would work or not. I suspect not.

Surely you understand that the students will be sitting in a classroom, supervised, with their regular teacher projected or projecting on the board. How is lack of motivation coming into it (anymore than it usually does with teenagers)?

Donald Trump

Smacruairi wrote: »

You know you can't sack someone for a medical illness right?

And i'll ask again for the 4th time, what about students who are high risk who can't attend class. they are being totally ignored by the DES at the moment, is it tough **** for them?

You seem to mention PUP a lot, are you sure it's not you who is obsessed with the money side of thigns here? You've ignroed allthe points ive made about improving conditions for students in terms of raising the R number. WHy is that?

They might not need to be sacked but they don't have to be paid once their sick leave runs out.


I am not suggesting it as a tactic. I am simply stating the system. I have a friend in the public sector who has a serious long term illness. When she used up her sick leave allowance she had to go on illness benefit. After , I think, 2 years of that, she had to go onto disability benefit. She obviously can't go back at the minute. But she's not entitled to the PUP.

awec

Smacruairi wrote: »

You know you can't sack someone for a medical illness right?

And i'll ask again for the 4th time, what about students who are high risk who can't attend class. they are being totally ignored by the DES at the moment, is it tough **** for them?

You seem to mention PUP a lot, are you sure it's not you who is obsessed with the money side of thigns here? You've ignroed allthe points ive made about improving conditions for students in terms of raising the R number. WHy is that?

They're being ignored by ASTI too. Nothing in the proposed strike actions was geared toward them.

I think the teachers, particularly ASTI, need put back in their box a bit. I have a great deal of sympathy toward teachers who are high risk, and actually would like to see them looked after, but unfortunately the rest of their colleagues saw fit to vote for strike action with unrealistic demands on covid issues, and demands for a pay rise during unprecedented uncertainty in society and the economy.

What was it the teachers said? Crisis opportunism? Indeed.

awec

History Queen wrote: »

Im primarily talking about second level, it is a second level dispute. I'm also not familiar enough with the primary curriculum to know if it would work or not. I suspect not.

Surely you understand that the students will be sitting in a classroom, supervised, with their regular teacher projected or projecting on the board. How is lack of motivation coming into it (anymore than it usually does with teenagers)?

Supervised by who?

The suggestion here is that we pay more people to work in our schools, so the people that we already pay to work in our schools can work at home instead.

Smacruairi

Sorry you actually said nothing substantative there again, and didnt answer one of my queries other than the usual deflection back to your opinion of the ASTI and going attack attack attack. I would have thought the idea of engage with the post, not the poster woudl be your bible at this stage.

A comprehensive contact tracking and testing scheme would see safer classes for those at risk, simple as. It would nip outbreaks in the bud, and improved measures in the classroom keeps the R number down, which means society can open back up slowly,which helps the ecnomy,

Or you know, you can sack teachers like you want during a time when teacher shortage is in existence.

Who would supervise? I dont know, maybe those on PUP could be redployed like contact tracers were. Maybe community volunteers to don the green jerseys and help out our schools. I'm sure you would volunteer?

History Queen

awec wrote: »

Supervised by who?

The suggestion here is that we pay more people to work in our schools, so the people that we already pay to work in our schools can work at home instead.

S&S scheme where possible and substitution. Agree it'll cost more to have substitution.

Or.... we could do what was suggested above and have at risk teachers teach at risk pupils remotely. Both at home, both safer and with their needs being catered for. No extra costs.

Bananaleaf

awec wrote: »

Supervised by who?

The suggestion here is that we pay more people to work in our schools, so the people that we already pay to work in our schools can work at home instead.

But who is paying for them if they are at home on PUP?

I've already given an answer to your supervisor question

awec

Smacruairi wrote: »

Sorry you actually said nothing substantative there again, and didnt answer one of my queries other than the usual deflection back to your opinion of the ASTI and going attack attack attack. I would have thought the idea of engage with the post, not the poster woudl be your bible at this stage.

A comprehensive contact tracking and testing scheme would see safer classes for those at risk, simple as. It would nip outbreaks in the bud, and improved measures in the classroom keeps the R number down, which means society can open back up slowly,which helps the ecnomy,

Or you know, you can sack teachers like you want during a time when teacher shortage is in existence.

Who would supervise? I dont know, maybe those on PUP could be redployed like contact tracers were. Maybe community volunteers to don the green jerseys and help out our schools. I'm sure you would volunteer?

Comprehensive tracking and testing would see safety increase everywhere. This is not unique to schools. But it's complete pie in the sky.

We do not have the resources to just go round schools testing everyone all the time. We will never have the resources to go around schools testing everyone all the time.

Purplewaters

awec wrote: »

Comprehensive tracking and testing would see safety increase everywhere. This is not unique to schools. But it's complete pie in the sky.

We do not have the resources to just go round schools testing everyone all the time. We will never have the resources to go around schools testing everyone all the time.

When you say online teaching doesn't work, do you mean that its not childcare and that you don't feel its your job to help with any aspect of educating your own kids? Just to be clear, because it could work otherwise.