Jump to content

Please Sir can I have more!!


Banker
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, HeliX said:

The article does show that of 614 full-time teachers, almost 500 are on under 35k takehome. If I've added the numbers correctly. Which I might not have done, Thursday is the new Friday and all that.

Nope, mostly 30y/o+ with 5-10y experience. The ones that haven't quit to do something else anyway.

It also shows that only about a hundred are on an actual salary of less than 30k

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, P.K. said:

The question I asked was who decides and by what measurements are used to define what would constitute a "decent wage" or whatever.

"Outputs" or "contribution" or whatever are measurable in the private sector because there is a bottom line, markets, products and services to sell etc and everyone knows who is doing well and who isn't.

This simply does not exist in the public sector. As to teachers I very much doubt if the curriculum changes drastically from year to year that would need a drastic overhaul of what they are going to teach. I would certainly like to know how much time teachers take in a classes every day and what they do the rest of the time?

You would probably be surprised just how often the curriculum can change.  

2 hours ago, P.K. said:

So some get in at 8:00 am. Big deal. Maybe they take that time to mark homework from the previous day? Leaving at 5:00 pm - yes please....

I know it does not seem horrendous but most people seem to think teachers work 9.00 to 15.30 with an hour for lunch which is total BS.  Some teachers will stay beyond those hours.

2 hours ago, P.K. said:

The "holidays at the most expensive time of the year" is the most facile argument I have heard on here for a long time. If teachers have kids, a likely assumption, then they are forced to take their holidays at the same time of year as the rest of us. Dear me....

It wasn't intended as an argument.  It was merely an observation and of course teachers without children themselves cannot take holiday at any other time of year to get cheaper holidays as a comparator in the private sector would be able to do. 

I think the bottom line in all this is if you think teachers are shit now then the only way to address this is to make teaching a more attractive career and that means addressing the underlying issues or making sure that you pay enough for people to ignore those issues.  

Clearly some people posting here are willing to ignore terrible working conditions and expectations because they are paid well.  Personally I work in a private sector company which offers a good overall package, doesn't demand ridiculous hours and actively seeks to ensure employees have a good work/life balance.  In fact they are going so far as making additional payments to lower paid staff members to help with the cost of living crisis (those on lower pay are all above national minimum wage by the way).

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Asthehills said:

It also shows that only about a hundred are on an actual salary of less than 30k

That's likely due to experience and a shortage of new teachers - the pay is restrictively banded and with minor uplifts for extra responsibility. The only way for it to go up is time served, it's not like these teachers started at higher spine points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, HeliX said:

That's likely due to experience and a shortage of new teachers - the pay is restrictively banded and with minor uplifts for extra responsibility. The only way for it to go up is time served, it's not like these teachers started at higher spine points.

That is a strange post from someone who half an hour thought the “average” was 32k 😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Asthehills said:

That is a strange post from someone who half an hour thought the “average” was 32k 😂

I posted what Indeed said the average was. And labelled it as such.

The fact is still that we don't have enough teachers, and don't have people who want to be teachers coming through either. Because the pay and conditions aren't worth it. I suggest we fix that, given we need the next generation to be educated else we'll be even more fucked than we are with the non economically active making up half the population.

If you'd rather not fix that because of your imaginary belief that most of the private sector is doing 50h weeks for no money, it's still the same end result. We'll be knackered.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, AcousticallyChallenged said:

Just because the US makes two weeks the norm, does that have any bearing on what we do several thousand miles away?

In your example, you cite generous rewards making the poor conditions worthwhile. Is that, at its simplest, not what the teachers are also striving for?

They weren't poor conditions at all. Quite the reverse. Yes to use a terrible US made up word we were "incentivized" by serious $ rewards. But we were also motivated by doing a difficult job and doing it well for personal satisfaction. There was never peer pressure either but there was peer admiration which was quite a driver.

As I'm sure you realise none of this could possibly port itself across to the public sector...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, HeliX said:

Only if you're happy to assume that for each of the ranges the average salary is slap bang in the middle. The calculation could be quite wrong if they're not. You'd also have to make complete guesses on the average under 20k and over 75k salaries.

I think that's a bit ridiculous, the information is reasonably complete. Even if you assume closer to 30 than 32.5 (which distribution might support) it would only make 1-2k difference and does not change the overall conclusion.

 

Under 20k and over 75k does not affect the median, only the amount within each bracket.

 

To say self reported information on Indeed is a better source than the complete data provided by the paymasters is absurd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Roxanne said:

Would you use this language if a man was at the helm?

 

I would, she’s a vindictive argumentative person who clearly wants children & education brought to its knees & stuff the consequences!!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, x-in-man said:

Can imagine what it would have been like if she did actually become and MHK?

Manx Radio Moaning Line would have exploded.

She’s awful. Just listened to her aggressive bleating on Manx Radio. I don’t know what it is about an aggressive Northern Irish accent that makes you want to instantly punch people but she’s got it. A horrible, menacing, aggressive big mouth in the typical Union mold. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Wavey Davey said:

The latest from the militant sour faced old bag as the NASUWT

1A01A1E7-DF69-42C6-BB66-54733B45B3CC.jpeg

How many are in the union, and how many actually voted?

Without those figures it’s meaningless because the last I heard an awful lot weren’t voting as they didn’t want to be associated with it.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Asthehills said:

How many are in the union, and how many actually voted?

Without those figures it’s meaningless because the last I heard an awful lot weren’t voting as they didn’t want to be associated with it.

Absolutely this!!! the key wording is OF THOSE WHO VOTED.....

Unless they provide the total amount of union members, the percentages are totally misleading.

Maybe there are 300 union members but only 100 voted, 92 in favour, hey ho it's 92% in favour of those who voted, but actually only 31% of the total membership, so how would that be a mandate for action???

I'm sure there has to be a minimum amount of overall members that vote before anything can be said to be a mandate for action. (i.e. 75% of overall members) - is that in Manx Trade Union Legislation or some such?

 

eta (it's 50% of members in UK Trade Union Act 2006)

Edited by b4mbi
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

..and I still think it’s odd that it’s 2022 and a union still has a name that has obvious gender identity conflicts.  National Association of Schoolmasters and Union of Woman Teachers.  They should rename immediately to -NALBGQ+TLSACSS

Link to comment
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...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×
×
  • Create New...