Jump to content

Teacher’s pay dispute


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Shake me up Judy said:

Can't blame Cregeen. He wouldn't have had a clue what was going on and they'd have run rings around him. He wouldn't have made any decisions - not even one. You could certainly argue that he should've known what was going on but that's not how things work here.

Nutshell. And I fear the same scenario with Herself in DoI. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 692
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Unions seem to be getting rather irate that government haven’t got money to pay them an extra 9% plus £1.75m lump sums on top of 2.75% they have already had this year. personally I think they are

I agree with you. Offered a deal and refused it. That funding was used during the pandemic to pay people for not working, including some teachers and to prop up businesses. Now they complain that th

Teaching assistants are needed because the Island has no special schools for children with serious physical or cognitive impairments, and no pupil referral units for the most unruly. This means classe

Posted Images

2 hours ago, Banker said:

The buck stops with the minister in charge who was Cregeen who stated numerous times he was in constant contact with his executive 

The buck should stop with the CEO, he's the one responsible and the one most likely to be driving things. Putting a politician in the firing line just suits these useless bastards fine. No accountability, no consequences for the mess they make, there are quite a few of them who should be gone!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Max Power said:

The buck should stop with the CEO, he's the one responsible and the one most likely to be driving things. Putting a politician in the firing line just suits these useless bastards fine. No accountability, no consequences for the mess they make, there are quite a few of them who should be gone!

As I said minister & CEO should go 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Max Power said:

The buck should stop with the CEO, he's the one responsible and the one most likely to be driving things. Putting a politician in the firing line just suits these useless bastards fine. No accountability, no consequences for the mess they make, there are quite a few of them who should be gone!

Standard procedure here in the IOM. It's called 'SNAFU'.....Situation normal, all f.....d up!

NO accountability for any CS/PS's crazy ideas with  their 'ASSUMED KNOWLEDGE' of most situations that have gone very wrong, sometimes having  grave consequences for those on the ground, forced to actually carry out these 'halfwit plans' because CS/PS 'position snobery' does not involve even consulting frontline  staff, those with real common sense and REAL LIFE experience 'on the job'.

This lack of responsibility permeates almost ALL areas of CS/PS. Get it wrong and you may have to endure a move to another department (oh dear, how awful....sic).....on the same, or sometimes increased salary (AND RESULTANT PENSION!!) to continue your F..k ups, hence the abbreviation SNAFU!!

AND....I am not using 'ASSUMED KNOWLEDGE' for my opinions, I have had personal experience of this being an unfortunate reality in two entirely unrelated and completely different areas of IOMG.

Edited by Sentience
Clarification
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Banker said:

As I said minister & CEO should go 

The politician is the CEO's sacrificial lamb, I don't think they bear much responsibility for anything, other than being placed in crap situations by their departments of incompetence.   

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Sentience said:

Standard procedure here in the IOM. It's called 'SNAFU'.....Situation normal, all f.....d up!

NO accountability for any CS/PS's crazy ideas with  their 'ASSUMED KNOWLEDGE' of most situations that have gone very wrong, sometimes having  grave consequences for those on the ground, forced to actually carry out these 'halfwit plans' because CS/PS 'position snobery' does not involve even consulting frontline  staff, those with real common sense and REAL LIFE experience 'on the job'.

This lack of responsibility permeates almost ALL areas of CS/PS. Get it wrong and you may have to endure a move to another department (oh dear, how awful....sic).....on the same, or sometimes increased salary (AND RESULTANT PENSION!!) to continue your F..k ups, hence the abbreviation SNAFU!!

AND....I am not using 'ASSUMED KNOWLEDGE' for my opinions, I have had personal experience of this being an unfortunate reality in two entirely unrelated and completely different areas of IOMG.

Ditto here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To give some minor credit to IOMG, they have published this report into the rot in education.  Here is an extract from the exec summary.

"In short, there has been, and continues to be, a long-standing battle of wills particularly between the department and secondary school teachers as to ‘who’s in charge’. For too long the mindset of senior departmental staff and secondary school headteachers has been focused on levels of autonomy and control when both parties should have been working together to agree how their respective roles should complement and support one another, and not how one party should exercise control over the other.

In our view, this issue is the root cause of the cracked relationship between the department and schools which we believe is fractured and must be repaired."

Not sure that the proposed solution - an education board - will repair the fracture.  Will Ronald Barr walk?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Roger Mexico said:

It's an absolutely typical report for the Manx Government.  Rather than admit the main problem is that the CEO is incompetent and has been throwing his weight around to compensate (and that some of his underlings aren't much better) and that the obvious and quickest thing would be to get rid of them, the expert consultants had decided that what is needed is a long and complicated reorganisation involving the appointment of lots more senior civil servants and board members and no doubt all their appropriate hangers-on.

I don’t consider that the report proposes ‘lots more senior civil servants’ but I agree that it nudges and winks about the CEO but falls short of saying he, and indeed others, should be emptied - though you certainly pick up the vibe that the report’s author believes that. Perhaps it isn’t considered professional to say so explicitly in what has become a public report. And we don’t know what the report authors have said privately to Allinson and Quayle.

Having said that, the report pulls no punches and when you read the description of the problems and their causes it has surely created an untenable position for the CEO. I also don’t buy this ‘It’s not Cregeen’s fault...how could he know what was happening?’ bollocks defence proffered by some on here. He was the sodding Minister; it’s his job to know what’s happening. He’s responsible to the people via Tynwald - that’s not the responsibility of the CEO. The fact that Cregeen is as thick as fucking mince is no excuse or mitigation.

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Uhtred said:

The fact that Cregeen is as thick as fucking mince is no excuse or mitigation.

Well no, but it explains why he was appointed.  And that has to be down to Quayle who put him there and kept him there for over three years despite him being a running joke.  Quayle is claiming credit for commissioning the report now, but I suspect he only reacted to the situation after Allinson insisted. 

I reckon that the trigger was that disastrous appearance before the PAC in June, when it was clear that not only was Barr a clueless bully whose only response was to blame other people for his cock-ups (no matter how implausibly) but that he didn't even have an idea about what his Department was for.  He certainly didn't think they had anything to do with providing education.

But I'm not sure that this report is the solution that is required.  Firstly because (like the Michael's Report it is modelled on) it requires an elaborate and complex bureaucracy (if you think there won't be many new civil servants, you obviously haven't seen the management chart on page 91) - or rather two of them, because there will still be a DESC one. 

Secondly it will take a long time to implement, which means it does nothing about all the existing problems.  Quayle is just repeating what he did when at the DHSC and bringing in Beamans to produce a report to say there should be a massive reorganisation.  But that is going to take five years from that point before it's implemented.  Like so much else in Quayle's administration, this report is just another expensive way of kicking the can down the road.

 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m sure there will be a number of tynwald questions next month asking Howie what he plans to do.

no doubt he will say staff matters are no the remit of Tynwald and he will ask chief secretary to consider that side and it will be quietly forgotten 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Roger Mexico said:

Well no, but it explains why he was appointed.  And that has to be down to Quayle who put him there and kept him there for over three years despite him being a running joke.  Quayle is claiming credit for commissioning the report now, but I suspect he only reacted to the situation after Allinson insisted. 

I reckon that the trigger was that disastrous appearance before the PAC in June, when it was clear that not only was Barr a clueless bully whose only response was to blame other people for his cock-ups (no matter how implausibly) but that he didn't even have an idea about what his Department was for.  He certainly didn't think they had anything to do with providing education.

But I'm not sure that this report is the solution that is required.  Firstly because (like the Michael's Report it is modelled on) it requires an elaborate and complex bureaucracy (if you think there won't be many new civil servants, you obviously haven't seen the management chart on page 91) - or rather two of them, because there will still be a DESC one. 

Secondly it will take a long time to implement, which means it does nothing about all the existing problems.  Quayle is just repeating what he did when at the DHSC and bringing in Beamans to produce a report to say there should be a massive reorganisation.  But that is going to take five years from that point before it's implemented.  Like so much else in Quayle's administration, this report is just another expensive way of kicking the can down the road.

 

Probably correct Roger. Setting aside speculation as to the likelihood, or not, of future structural changes, you’re on the money with the fact that Quayle fiddled while Cregeen and Rome burned. It was obvious literally years ago that Cregeen is unfit to hold Ministerial office and that DESC was crumbling around his ears. Quayle did exactly nothing. Indeed, this report should, but won’t, see Cregeen booted out of Home Affairs and relegated to the back benches.

As to who the real culprit is, well take your pick. Quayle is utterly and fundamentally useless. The cluless ‘leader’ of a COMIN of none of the talents. But who appointed him? That scandalous perversion of democracy with the block vote LegCo at its core and some very capricious interpretation of standing orders has ill-served this Island. And here’s yet another illustration.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Roger Mexico said:

But that is going to take five years from that point before it's implemented.  Like so much else in Quayle's administration, this report is just another expensive way of kicking the can down the road.

Just like the Health Service, look forward to the Manx Care Teaching Bill in the next administration,( if we can afford it by then). All going to plan I guess. Arms lengthth organisations to remove politicians from the direct firing line and any accountability to the public for the impacts of their 'Strategies'. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Uhtred said:

Probably correct Roger. Setting aside speculation as to the likelihood, or not, of future structural changes, you’re on the money with the fact that Quayle fiddled while Cregeen and Rome burned. It was obvious literally years ago that Cregeen is unfit to hold Ministerial office and that DESC was crumbling around his ears. Quayle did exactly nothing. Indeed, this report should, but won’t, see Cregeen booted out of Home Affairs and relegated to the back benches.

As to who the real culprit is, well take your pick. Quayle is utterly and fundamentally useless. The cluless ‘leader’ of a COMIN of none of the talents. But who appointed him? That scandalous perversion of democracy with the block vote LegCo at its core and some very capricious interpretation of standing orders has ill-served this Island. And here’s yet another illustration.

Like a lot of people on here, Mr Qualye is a sensitive sole, and doesn't take kindly to criticism.

It appears to me, that the two  MHK's with knowledge of Education have been totally ignored, to the Government and Departments cost.

Like all Doctors, Alison has had to take a second opinion to find out what is wrong with this body, but by that time it has spread to what could be

unmanageable damage.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...