Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Education

Join the discussion on our Education forum.

Original poster

Teachers - are you voting yes for strike action

681 replies

sandgrounder · 18/05/2011 18:16

Went to NUT meeting at school yesterday re pension reform. Cannot see myself teaching until 68 and who wants their kids taught by oldies not wanting to be there.

OP posts:
Donki · 18/05/2011 22:25

Thankyou Feenie

I am not usually that feeble at finding info, honest.....

Now I just have to work out what it all means.

Grockle · 18/05/2011 22:26

Yes, you are probably right!

Panzee · 18/05/2011 22:28

I'm voting no.
I believe that pensions are important. But people are losing their jobs. I think that's much more important.
I didn't go into the profession for the pension, so I don't really buy into this 'deferred salary' theory.

OhYouBadBadKitten · 18/05/2011 22:29

ggb I think you are a genius!

Original poster
sandgrounder · 19/05/2011 06:17

GGB I agree many teachers will take actuarially reduced pensions and be left with a substantially reduced amount of a substantially reduced amount, but some just won't be able to afford to do so.

You are right re comments but hopefully many parents will be made aware of the long term impact on their children's and grandchildren's education and this may offset the inconvenience of finding two extra days of childcare.

After all if nobody noticed we were off, what would be the point?

OP posts:
NoelEdmondshair · 19/05/2011 13:10

If you strike you'll just piss people off. Every bugger else is going to have to work until they're nearly 70 - why should teachers be exempt?

Grockle · 19/05/2011 13:15

Working longer is fine. but we will also have to pay more in contributions (significantly more not just a couple of pounds a month) and then get less in the end. It's not what we signed up for.

I am, however, very grateful for the job I have and that it is ine I like doing.

Strix · 19/05/2011 13:30

What are the changes being proposed?

NoelEdmondshair · 19/05/2011 13:31

But the world has changed since you "signed up". Folk are living longer and longer therefore you need to contribute more so that there's enough money to support you through your old age. But you know that, don't you. You might not like it but it must be done.

missmapp · 19/05/2011 13:37

I have voted NO. I would of course rather have the pension unchanged, but I was at school in the 80's when the teachers were on strike and my parents hated teachers because of the distruption it caused me and them. I missed secondary exams, teaching in the run up to said exams and had to be off site at lunchtime everyday as teachers were refusing to cover, as both my parents worked this caused many problems. I do not think striking will do teachers any favours, i do not think it will change the policy and the children we teach will suffer, so I will not strike.

Grockle · 19/05/2011 16:42

Yes, the world has changed. Which is why I cannot afford to pay an extra £70 a month into my pension. If my pay is frozen, my outgoings need to be frozen too. And it's why I'm wavering - I don't believe that striking is the best way - I have NEVER supported it. But I can't afford the extra contributions.

fivecandles · 19/05/2011 17:21

The proposed strike is on June 30th, after the exam period. I think some people need to think about the reality of having 68 year old teachers in the classroom. They will be so far removed from the experiences and outlook of their students and they will be preventing young, fresh teachers from getting jobs. It's not a job like working at a checkout (not that there's anything wrong with that!) you need energy and enthusiasm. Teachers should be allowed to work until they're 68 if they want to but being forced to isn't good for anyone.

diabolo · 19/05/2011 17:47

Most teachers at my school are planning to strike.

Funnily enough, my private sector DH (on his 3rd year of pay freeze, no final salary pension, no bonus this year), isn't and wouldn't even if it was an option. He realises that there simply is no money left out there.

I am shortly to lose my Child Benefit (£80 odd per month) - but I'm not going on strike either.

The HT at the school says, privately, that he thinks teachers have had it far too good for far too long and that things need reform in this sector.

No-one likes the thought of losing money, or having to retire later, but thanks to the last Government and the mis-management of the banks, it what we are all going to have to do.

Teachers are some of the most ardent supporters of the Labour party, but even now, all they seem to want to do is blame the current Government, rather than admitting to some very spurious financial goings-on over the past 15 years.

rainbowinthesky · 19/05/2011 17:51

I might be wrong but I think that teacher pensions are self sustaining but the problem is not enough money across the public sector hence teachers paying more, working longer to make up for the short fall elsewhere.

ThisisaSignofthetimes · 19/05/2011 18:01

Can I ask, what are the contribution rates into the teachers scheme?

manicinsomniac · 19/05/2011 18:18

^^
I have a feeling I only pay £49 a month but not actually all that sure - maybe it's £149 - I really should pay attention!! I'm at the lower end of the salary scale though, only been teaching 4 years and don't have many special responsibilities.

I agree with diabolo - it may not be ideal but that is life. If the public sector in general is going to have to face pay freezes and work till 68 why on earth should we be any different?

ilovesooty · 19/05/2011 18:21

had to be off site at lunchtime everyday as teachers were refusing to cover

Under their terms of employment teachers are not required to be on the premises at lunchtime now.

mrz · 19/05/2011 18:25

I pay over £200 a month with a proposed increase of £100 a month....

fivecandles · 19/05/2011 18:30

You're right, rainbow. The scheme is self-sustaining. It's not that we need to pay more to get the pension we're owed, it's that the Govt wants to use the money we pay to help plug the deficit. So, once again, it's the ordinary hard-working folk paying for the mess created by the banks.

gordongrumblebum · 19/05/2011 19:04

It's something like 6.5%, with a proposed increase to 9.8% (I may have the decimals wrong).

The reason for striking is that the government imposed the changes WITHOUT NEGOTIATION. The strike aims to get the government around the table - if they agree to do this on thethreat of a strike, then the stirke will be averted.

The changes to pensions are:
PAY MORE
As above - a 50% increase in contributions

WORK LONGER
Anyone born after 1979 to work until 68

GET LESS
The pension to be based on average salary rather than final salary. Taking into account that many teachers are female and have taken years out and have worked part-time, coming back into full-time work as their children have grown up, this is a real killer. 3/14 teachers at my school are seriously affected by this.

Teachers are also fed up because pay is frozen, and future payrises will be linked to the CPU rather than the RPI. Many are worried about the disintegration of local government support and are very nervous about propsed changes to SEN and the effect that will have on schools.

Saying that, I'm not sure that a strike will succeed in any of the aims of the unions, which, quite honestly seem to be living in the dark ages. I think they should be activating their PR departments and getting out to the public, to get people (i.e. parents) on-side. I thought it said it all when a union rep last night said that ATL had publicised the strike in that well-read newspaper..... the TES!!!!! What a waste of my money.Angry

diabolo · 19/05/2011 19:56

Final salary pensions are not viable, for anyone, wherever they work any more.

I'm sure teachers did not choose to teach because of the, frankly, immense pension perks, so it looks like they will just have to suck up the crap for the next few years along with the rest of the working population of this Country.

I don't understand why some teachers seem to feel that they are, or will become, worse off than any other workers? gordongrumblebum above says that "Teachers are also fed up because pay is frozen, and future payrises will be linked to the CPU rather than the RPI". I am at a loss to understand why this a valid reason to strike? I can't believe that you will get the support of parents who are facing the same, if not worse, circumstances in their jobs.

mrz · 19/05/2011 20:04

Teachers pensions were always highlighted as a reason for keeping salary increases low

gordongrumblebum · 19/05/2011 20:05

Diabolo - I said that the reason for striking was to give unions the opportunity to NEGOTIATE the changes to pensions.

Believe me, we are going to suck up a lot more crap when support services are cut and we have to become speech therapists, language and cognition specialists, behaviour modifiers.... In our authority, we already have to run a OT programme that used to be done externally.

I also said that I'm not sure whether to support the strike because I am quite aware that public opinion is largely against us, and I've got an idea we'll just end up with egg on our faces.

HarrietJones · 19/05/2011 20:05

Can I just ask a question? Dh is an ex teacher & will get a teachers pension which will be our main income when we are retired if we are ever allowed
Will existing pensions be affected? He's got 20 years contributions if that is relevant

mrz · 19/05/2011 20:06

Yes existing pensions will be affected

Swipe left for the next trending thread