Custom and practice cuts both ways.
If a private sector company gave 4 uncertified sick days for 80 years but suddenly stopped giving them with the excuse that it was not in the contract would the unions be OK with that?
Points of information:
Supervision/Substitution by teachers was always voluntary. It was never a duty. So, for about 80 years (the figure given) teachers provided this service gratis.
Many teachers have not opted for the scheme that provides payment for supervision/substitution.
Marion
Fair point; it should have been flagged in advance.No idea, but the particular unfairness of this cut was that a new scheme was announced as applying for 2008/2009, so those who planned to avail of the scheme in 2009 suddenly find the rug pulled out from under there feet. They could easily have gone in 2008 if they were aware that the scheme was going to be limited. The net result is that people won't trust dates promised for future schemes.
I have three children, one with special needs. I find your tactic of introducing emotive sound bites that do nothing to support your arguments (since their root cause can be attributed to either side of the debate) deeply offensive as they imply that those who do not support the “bottomless pit” model of state funding are somehow heartless and not concerned for the children of the nation.This is offensive. I've no problem with robust debate, but referring to my views as empty-headed and ill-thought, simply because you disagree with them is not acceptable. You don't have a monopoly on thinking. You might like to edit your post on mature reflection.
Agreed.We may actually agree on something. I think it is a big mistake for those concerned about these fundamental attacks on the public education system to let the teachers' unions lead the response, as there is an obvious conflict of interest. In the early days, the Boards of Management associations and the parents associations were leading from the front, and I'd prefer to see them back in front.
There you go again. We both agree that services are being cut, that’s not the issue. I am of the opinion that in a shrinking economy facing what is possible the biggest downturn in its history it is not reasonable or logical to expect big spending increases in public services. I therefore find it reasonable and logical to ask state employees (and those paid by the state) to forego some of their pay increases rather than cut services.I've no problem with taking reality into account. How about the reality of services for students with visual impairments being cut. How about the reality of services for students with poor English being cut. How about the reality of cancelling the roll-out of the EPSEN Act (Education for people with Special Educational Needs), which was just starting to give students with disablities a fair chance. How about the cancellation of the personal advocacy service for people with disabilities and the 'death by a thousand cuts' to the Equality Authority which ensure that the Govt does get a hard time for discriminating against those who need the most support. That is the reality for many schools and students.
My bank manager has called me on Saturday and Sunday. He’s at his desk ‘till at least 6.00 every evening and starts at 8.00am. That’s not to say that I think school principals are overpaid; it always struck me that they have all of the downside of being a teacher with few of the up-sides (and they are in charge of a group of highly unionised subordinates over which they have almost no sanction).Try comparing the salary of the average school principal with the average bank manager. I don't get phone calls from my bank manager at 9.30 pm at night, but I have got calls from the principal at that time.
I have no source other than my own observations and contacts with other SME’s on a day-to-day basis, the massive increase in CV’s that we get and the customers, competitors and suppliers who have gone out of business.Do have a source for this 'pay cuts and pay freezes across the board' claim. I'm not suggesting that some organisations are having severe financial difficulities, but I really don't believe the IBEC 'shock doctrine' spin that the world is collapsing. Maybe those who caused the current economic crisis should pay the price for recovering, and not the public servants who work hard with poor supports and resources to provide a fair service to all.
Any competent professional will ensure that they get fair remuneration for the job in hand. It is unprofessional and unsustainable to rollover to every request for additional services for no extra fee.
I don't do 'implications'. You are attacking me for views that you have 'implied' from my posts, rather than anything I have actually said. This is unacceptable to me, and I would suggest once more that you review your use of 'empty-headed' and 'ill-thought out' in last night's post.I have three children, one with special needs. I find your tactic of introducing emotive sound bites that do nothing to support your arguments (since their root cause can be attributed to either side of the debate) deeply offensive as they imply that those who do not support the “bottomless pit” model of state funding are somehow heartless and not concerned for the children of the nation.
Yes you do, your posts are full of them. Otherwise what was the point of your comment that your 5 year old deserves the best junior infants she can get?I don't do 'implications'.
I've just added you to my ignore list. I don't take that kind of personal abuse from anyone. I won't see any of your future posts. Bye now.Yes you do, your posts are full of them.
I've just added you to my ignore list. Bye now.