To think teachers are actually better off than those in the private sector

[coco44]

(Mumsnet Bosses
Please may I rephrase the debate in a more measured way)

You'retoastmildred- round of applause for your posts.
You are absolutely right... Why should the fact that some people might appear to have a better deal, be a reason to begrudge and resent and bitch and complain. Because the chances are, their are other aspects of their situation which are tough.

Many teachers entered the profession not expecting the kind of salary they could command in other sectors, but with the trade off of a better pension deal. Then the goalposts get moved... Of course they are going to complain about their t and c

And you are spot on in your recognition that people living in different times and places will get different deals. No point bemoaning that fact- lets get on and work towards a better future for all.

I had 12 weeks maternity leave with my babies- that was what was on offer then. Did I bitch and moan that its not fair when 6 months, then 9 months and then a whole year were brought in? Of course not. Just because it didn't personally benefit me, doesn't mean I have a god given right to complain. I think it's great that times have moved on and mums (and dads) get better parental rights.

These threads just highlight the self serving nature of some individuals. It they aren't personally going to benefit from something, they sure as hell don't want anyone else to. And if someone is taking some last resort action which will affect their child or which they disagree with, they just get nasty about it.

I think probably 95% of working people deserve better than they're currently getting in the UK. We are a first world country fgs. It's outrageous that so many working people are suffering crap wages, pay freezes or cuts, changes to the pension that they pay hundreds into every month, and now expected to work til they drop too.
It's not something to be divided on- we should all be aiming for something better, surely ?

there

"They just get nasty about it" there you go again.

Posters not agreeing doesn't equal getting nasty.

There are also a lot of contradictions in your post.

Maybe just respond to the thread rather than constantly naming me as if on some personal vendetta (you see I do know what that means!)
This is about issues not a chance to stalk individuals around the boards

Retro maybe your friends would strike - but wouldn't tell you about it! In my school only one person was against the strike, can't quite believe all of your teacher friends could be so happy with the changes ....

Ditto Janey

Purple it's not they're happy but some don't believe in striking and some just think it's moving the focus from the important stuff eg the sillier measures(some of which I agree with and some incidentally I don't).In the news you hear nothing re the educational decisions but only t&c so they're kind of right imvho.

Wasn't there only a tiny turn out anyway to vote on said strike anyway?

The unions can only strike about t and c.

They are not responsible for what the media chooses to report.

If a majority of the vote goes for the strike, then they strike. People who don't vote don't have more of a voice than those who do.

Nope but didn't only 27% or something vote?

This will have moved on from first page but I don't have time to read all until later.

Yeah teaching is a piece of piss OP. Why don't you come and give it a go if it is so easy? Then you too can be underperforming, have loads of holidays, the kind of salary others can only dream about and that wonderful pension?? However, don't forget the copious unpaid overtime (I average 15 hrs unpaid a week. Holidays don't sound so great now do they?), the assaults and the never ending worry of how, in less than 12 months, you can reach those kids who have fallen through the cracks. And don't forget contributing (11%) to your pension which you will probably never claim fully as,hand on heart, how the hell are you still going to be doing this job at 67+?

It's not a race to the bottom.

And don't forget contributing (11%) to your pension which you will probably never claim fully as, hand on heart, how the hell are you still going to be doing this job at 67+?

To be fair, just because you take it early, it doesn't mean you won't claim it fully. The reduction is just to reflect the longer period it'll be paid for. So you would get 100% for an estimated 25 years or 75% for 32 years (for example). It's just spreading the pension you've paid for over a longer retirement. Retiring early is cost neutral, it's not supposed to be punitive (in terms of the what you put in and what you get out ratio).

The pension offer the unions have renegotiated isn't bad tbh and reflects what's happening in the pensions industry as a whole wrt the changes that have been made. I think it's a bit of a red herring and it's a shame that people don't understand it better. But I get that it comes under the pay & conditions umbrella and can't be separated out. Also the MP's pension scheme is significantly better and I think it's a bloody cheek! Not sure why people aren't telling them they're not allowed theirs!

As you were.

Retropear
"Nope but didn't only 27% or something vote?"

Didn't a similar number vote for the current government and gove?

How long is it since you taught retro?

A lot of old ex teachers that I know think the same way that you do.

the problem that I have with the pensions is that it goes against what the last government research says.

I don't know about that as I haven't seen the results of the latest valuation or even if it needs one being a state funded scheme. Do you have a link to something?

All I know is that the pensions industry is changing due to the change in life expectancy. It's not a 'the private sector all has DC schemes' comment at all (because they don't), but just noting that the reforms are a reflection of what's happening in the wider context of the industry, rather than an attack on public sector pensions. But I work in occupational DB schemes and understand the reforms to the pension scheme and the whole picture quite well.

That's not to say I support what the government is doing and the push back the government has had on the pension changes has made them improve on their original proposals. But I think the unions would be better representing their members if they concentrated more on a) ensuring the performance reviews were not an opportunity for HTs to reduce overheads when their budgets are being slashed each year and b)improving working conditions so the teachers don't all just up and leave one day and leave our state education in tatters.

Retropear Both NUT and NASUWT had a 40% turnout. The NUT had 90% of that turn out in favour of action. ALT was 83 % in favour of strike action.

2012 Police and Crime Commissioner electoral turnout = 14.9%
Local Election average turnout 2012 = 31.3%
By-elections 2012 average turnout = 21.9%
London Mayor 2012 = 37.4%

HTH.

Surely anybody who goes on strike for better pay and conditions could, if you wanted, be said to be "striking for themselves"? Where they are in a job serving the public it's surely rather more than that. Do we not want good, happy, motivated, inspiring teachers?

To be scrupulously fair, no government post-war has had a 50% majority - it's just the way our system works - and it's difficult to see what outcome was possible this time other than a hung parliament. But that's old news. Agree that union members need to exercise their right to vote. Some teachers have chosen not to strike, which is up to them.

I don't think teaching is a particularly difficult or skilled job.

Coco44 - that is a very ignorant statement to make. An appalling attitude, and a real insult to the majority of teachers working their socks off to give your children (if you have any) the best start in life!

I don't think teaching is a particularly difficult or skilled job

I used to get that particular comment a lot from the newly redundant bankers I used to mentor through their first teaching placement. None of them lasted the course because, in the main, it was too damn difficult and required too much effort for the (in their eyes) pittance of a pay.

It is ridiculous that people can seriously say that.

1. On mn we hear all the time about how tiring and stressful it is to look after your children in Improving ways (anyone can put the TV on or let them slope off with a tablet, but everyone gets tired organising Improving activities). that is for about 2 or 3 children.

1. It is a truth universally acknowledged that big presentations, where you have to present complex material to a not-necessarily-engaged audience are tricky. Many people have to do these sometimes, and have lots of time to prepare for them.

Now take No. 1 + No. 2 + ALL THE TIME and = a whole world of pain

I don't exactly like teachers. But any idiot can see this.

I dont believe teachers should strike. On one thread I was flaming (presumably because I didnt agree with the majority of the posters who I strongly suspect were teachers!)

I was asked what I knew about it. My DM was a teacher for 40 years. She still does 2 days as a volunteer at her old school. I have two DS's in full time education. But I was told 'no, I still dont know the real story'!

I suspect the only right answer was that I was a teacher myself and I agreed with everything everyone else was saying!

It's the swan syndrome. Everyone knows what teachers do, they've all been in classrooms at one point in their lives. It looks simple enough on the surface. What you don't see is the frantic paddling going on beneath the water and the meticulous engineering of time and resources that makes it look so effortless. The same thing happens with nurses. How often do you hear people complaining that they seem to spend their whole time at the nurses station instead of doing the physical work without realising that that is where the endless paperwork and admin is being done?

Slug - not all teachers are like this tbh. We all know the bad teachers, the ones who get pay rises just for being in a profession for x number of years. That definitely should change and I know is. Some teachers dont want this. Wonder why?

My DS is at a private school. He is doing his A levels. He has two teachers for each subject. He knows the bad ones. One subject he wanted to do had a terrible teacher and having met him I can see why but he trudges on, luckily my DS didnt get him. If he had I would have stepped in.

Lots of us work hard. Some go for the money (and pay taxes accordingly), some go for a job they love even though it doesnt pay that well, some choose not to work at all and look to others to provide for them. There are just too many occuptions now wanting to be seen as exceptions. They want to retire early (on Final Salary Schemes) because they are different.

Well, their not.

Well, look on the bright side, if you're making it look easy, you're obviously doing it very well.

In terms of striking, the idea is that it inconveniences parents and that's supposed to motivate them to look at the reasons why and put pressure on the government to support their DC's state education. Instead, the parents (not all) just start whining, the precise thing they're complaining about the teachers doing.

The reason why the majority of the parents don't look to the government to resolve this is because the government spends £1,000s of our money on spin telling us that it's the teachers' fault, not theirs! And the gullible and uneducated among us don't even question it!

When the BA cabin crew went on strike and ruined loads of people's holidays, I thought it made BA look like a poor employer and caring more about their company than the service it was providing. So why aren't people looking at the government and asking:

What kind of way is this to manage our education system?
You were elected so why aren't you doing a better job?
Why are our DC missing a day of school?
Why didn't you do everything in your power to avoid a strike?

Instead, they just resort to the easy option and slag off the workers.