TheBigShort
Registered User
- Messages
- 2,789
That's incorrect and you know it is. Teachers are very well paid for the hours they work. It's just that they work far fewer hours than just about every other full time employee in the country. I accept that they prepare classes, correct homework etc but they get 17 to 19 weeks holidays a year. In the private sector most people get 4 weeks.Firstly, it should be noted, that according to the Dan O’Brien article upon which this topic is based, teachers appear to be the highest paid category of worker in the country. It therefore stands to reason, that in individual monetary terms, teachers pay more tax than all the other workers listed in the other sectors.
That's incorrect and you know it is. Teachers are very well paid for the hours they work. It's just that they work far fewer hours than just about every other full time employee in the country. I accept that they prepare classes, correct homework etc but they get 17 to 19 weeks holidays a year. In the private sector most people get 4 weeks.
I have to assume you are being deliberately obtuse.No I didn't know Dan O'Briens article was incorrect. Are you saying that that article, upon which this topic is based, is a waste of all our time?
GordonWhat’s required is real courage to deal with the systemic issues in the economy.
For example, use the current low interest rate environment to borrow at close to 0% with a view to offering existing public servants transfer values; this could form part of a broader plan to end the current defined benefit schemes. All public service defined benefit schemes should be shut down and converted to DC schemes with the State making generous employer contributions.
I have to assume you are being deliberately obtuse.
Dan O'Brien had a great article on it yesterday in the Indo,
I'm not. What is your issue?
Here is a quote from the OP
What part of the first two posts am I not understanding? It implies that teachers are already highly paid? Are you saying that they are not?
I pointed out that while teachers enjoy a very high hourly rate of pay (though not as high as Dan suggested given that they have lots of non-classroom work to do such as setting and correcting work) they also enjoy exceptionally long holidays so their overall income doesn't place them into an income bracket where they "pay more tax than all the other workers listed in the other sectors" because employees in those other sectors work 45% more weeks a year.It therefore stands to reason, that in individual monetary terms, teachers pay more tax than all the other workers listed in the other sectors.
Firstly, it should be noted, that according to the Dan O’Brien article upon which this topic is based, teachers appear to be the highest paid category of worker in the country. It therefore stands to reason, that in individual monetary terms, teachers pay more tax than all the other workers listed in the other sectors.
You suggested that as they were so well paid per hour that it followed that they also paid high levels of income tax;This is what I said, which you have already quoted;
I have not claimed that teachers are overpaid or underpaid. I am merely referencing an article upon which this topic is based that implies that teachers are better paid, on average per hour, that working people in all the other sectors listed.
The article is also lead by a headline "If teachers are so badly paid, why are more youngsters signing up?" The underlying assumption to me is that they are in fact very well paid.
I can only go with what is put in front of me. If you are saying that DOB has his figures wrong (which it appears you are) then there is no point in referencing his article is there?
How does it stand to reason that someone on a very high hourly rate who works short hours would pay high taxes?It therefore stands to reason, that in individual monetary terms, teachers pay more tax than all the other workers listed in the other sectors.
So if they worked the same amount of weeks as most people (50% more than they do now) then their pro rata rates would be €51,000 up to €93,000.Here are some secondary teacher pay scales
https://www.tui.ie/welcome-to-our-website/common-basic-scale-wef-1110.5776.html
Starting at €34,000 up to €62,000.
Third level
https://www.tui.ie/welcome-to-our-website/third-level-salary-scales-.2167.html
You suggested that as they were so well paid per hour that it followed that they also paid high levels of income tax;
Of course nobody stays on their basic rate; they get positions of responsibility, assistant principleships etc so in reality the rates are higher
If they are high paid, they pay high taxes, right?
If I work 5 hours a week and get €50 per hour am I a low paid worker?
If you work 48 hours a week and get €20 an hour are you a high paid worker?
Yes, they should do it by suspending increments for all teachers on the higher rates and using that money to increase pay levels for those on lower rates until everyone is on the same rate. Then, and only then, should increments be re-introduced.Is there any justification for them seeking better pay for new recruits on the basis of equality?
Yep, just give everyone everything they ask for. Sure Bertie did that and everything worked out just fine!I would suggest that in order to meet this “ justifiable “ demand the 200 million euro required will be funded from the monies available from the next budget .
The same argument that funds were not available did not wash when the Gardai situation was resolved .
As I previously stated the fact that the Labour Court have referred the equality of pay matter to the European Court of Justice must be of huge concern to this Government particularly when they require the support of parties that have come out strongly in favour of such equality.
The negotiations on a new contract for GP’s is also going to be very interesting.
You asked me a specific question and I gave you a specific answer with a method of funding that pay increase. How is that being obtuse?You are being obtuse now, and not even deliberately so.
Perhaps best you try answer the OP question "Who speaks for the taxpayer?" rather than bringing the topic down a rabbit hole about how teachers increments are to be paid and structured, which has nothing to do with the topic.
You asked me a specific question and I gave you a specific answer with a method of funding that pay increase. How is that being obtuse?
If teachers unions were really interested in lower paid young teachers they wouldn't have sold them down the river to start with. If older teachers were really interested in their younger colleagues they would give a tiny amount in order to level the pitch, content in the knowledge that they will still get a pension they never came close to paying for that their younger colleagues, and everyone else their age, will never enjoy.
And the teachers who are already very highly paid want more money.
Yep, just give everyone everything they ask for
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?