Teachers to strike - 30 June

[meditrina]

breaking now on SKY

Overwhelming vote by 2 teachers' unions (92%)

Guffaw @ 'the lifestyle it affords'. Not a teacher yourself then RobF?

Except change! I am sick to death with people feeling sorry for themselves. My husband has been paying into a pension since he was 14 and its worth nothing! When he retires (which he will never - then its worth about £1400 per annum) He's from a farming background and has worked 7 days a week long hours to feed this country and no way can he throw his toys of the pram. We employ people and make a big benefit to the community too. We have to accept that this is it and have to find other ways of making investments for the future.

Teachers has got to accept change like everyone else - life is tough out there and just because your a public worker doesnt make an once of difference.

Yes, teachers work hard and do a marvellous job. I have no problems with this at all but its a tough world and teachers should not be treated any different to anyone else. At the end of the day they get great holidays, some above average pay and can if want get an additional job in holiday times or weekends (like the rest of us). Like everyone else they can continue to work after retirement and the best can go on to do consultancy or other well worth jobs as they will be physically fit. As we are all going to live till 90's - 100 no one can expect these wonderful old pensions!

If they want to stike then do it in the summer holidays out of their own time as enough time taken out now by training days, election days already!!!

If they want to stike then do it in the summer holidays out of their own time as enough time taken out now by training days

I think that might miss the point of a strike...

Just because you signed up to a pension deal when you started a job does not mean you will be entitled to it throughout your working life. What about factors outside the employer's control such as longevity. That is quite a one-sided view. What about the State Pension going up to 68 for everybody? Did the unions bulk at that? This will also have an impact on teachers. That has an impact on everybody, not just one section of the community.

The changes to pensions will not affect pensions built up to date. I think teachers do a fantastic job but do feel that any pension changes that are brought about through longevity should be challenged but not to the point of refusing to accept any changes altogether. I have managed many final salary schemes in the private sector and I find the whole concept now of final salary promises to be a promise that should never have been offered to anyone. They caused problems in the motor industry that left many without jobs. Rover went insolvent because nobody would take on the company because of the unrealistic pension problems. For me it will be an inconvenience and I will lose a day's pay as will many teachers who would rather have the day's pay thank you. The only people who will be paid will be the union reps who will not lose their money. My friend who is in the other union is really worried that she will lose a day's pay if they vote to strike as well. She would rather have that than the pension.

It is my opinion that this strike will achieve little but cause disputes between the public and private sector whilst teachers will lose out financially. Many union members must have agreed because the turnout was so low at 40%. Whilst I support the right to vote, on this issue of pensions and with my experience I do not feel it is the right issue to strike on. Teachers pensions, even on a career-average will still be good as there is not the significant changes in salary that you see in other ares such as civil service or private sector.

I don't recall public sector people having much sympathy when private sector workers were being waged war upon by Labour, with working condiitons and wages plummetting due to increased use of immigrant labour. So how on earth do they expect us to have sympathy now the shoe is on the other foot?

For all those blaiming the private sector for this problem, think again. There was a global recession which is having an impact on many other countries, Greece, Ireland. The banks were to blaim admittedly but as far as I last saw, the FTSE 250 was not entirely made up of banks. Many private sector businesses have also been impacted and are making redundancies and have cut pensions as a result. That kind of comment does nothing to support the strike but only alienates the Public.

katz of course public sector workers pay taxes but if I give you a tenner and you give me three back, I've still got to find seven from somewhere haven't I?

The tax take to suppport the public sector has to come from the private sector..surely you can see that.

Is that really how you think Rob?: 'I perceive that you didnt give a stuff, so I don't give a stuff about you'.
how depressing.

Is that really how you think Rob?: 'I perceive that you didnt give a stuff, so I don't give a stuff about you'.
how depressing.

"Is that really how you think Rob?: 'I perceive that you didnt give a stuff, so I don't give a stuff about you'.
how depressing."
I have had enough of snobbish public sector people that treat normal hard-working people with utter contempt. They somehow think that they are in charge of us, when it is actually the other way round.

ok, interesting view point.

30% turnout and 90% voting for strike action.

The turnout was actually 40% NUT turnout (92% in favour) and 35% ATL (83% of voters in favour, in a union traditionally against striking) - around the same figures of people voting in the last general election. That kind of turnout was good enough to elect the present government in May 2010.

(That's what I tried to post using my Android before - sorry for the garbled nonsense.)

UCU (lecturers) are also striking on 30th June. The NAHT are balloting to strike (but on a different day) at the end of this week. The NASUWT have stated their intention to ballot for striking if their legal challenges fail.

That's a lot of determined people in one profession.

I would imagine that younger teachers make up a lot of the missing votes - it must seem a long way off when you are in your twenties.

The profession is unlikely to suffer because of pension changes. Teaching attracts the right people for the right reasons. Also considering the perks. I find it hard to believe that public workers get full pay on the sick for endless months while the rest have to survive on SSP. I have heard unbeleiveable stories of people being paid full sick leave for breaking limbs while on the piss - 6 months plus! months and months off after a family bereavement. It would be very interesting to see the amount of public money ploughed into sick pay (while I would consider a tiny percentage would be totally ligite).

My SIL is an infant teacher, best friend also teachers. I would say they love their jobs and have a pretty good standard of lifestyle. If they were to leave then they would have to take a pay cut and lose all the perks that dont exist in jobs in this area.

Teaching isn't attracting anyone at present. Nearly half of all newly qualified teachers leave the profession within five years as it is.

Interestingly auto-enrolment is being introduced for all employees from 2012. Currently most employees believe that at least 25% of the enrolled employees will opt out because they cannot afford the 1% that will be required or they have no faith in DC pensions. Paying 14% for anybody would be too much as a basic level but surely if the cost is going up you cannot expect to have the same pension. My idea would be to offer alternatives to public sector workers.

1 Full final salary but at higher levels of contributions, accepting longevity
2 Career average but at similar levels to current contributions, especially where salary progression is not signficant.
3 DC pension with a contribution that is matched potentially by 1.5 or 2 times by the employer.

All of these options would still be higher than the average private sector scheme, and therefore still a reason to join the industry but will accept the issue of increased cost of providing a pension promise. All this about teachers having to work till 68 is a red herring. Teachers will be able to retire earlier just on a slightly reduced pension. Many teachers retire earlier now and I have no problems with a 68 year old teacher. My old Maths teacher is still at my DS school and he was teaching me 40 years ago. He chooses to carry on because he still offers a valuable contribution that he wants to give.

I'm a public sector worker on a non-contributory pension.

Now this is the pension I signed up when I took the job, when I signed the contract. So I understand people's anger at it being whipped away. They must have know 10, 20, 30 even years ago that they couldn't be sustained, yet they just kept inticining people through the door on a free pension. It stinks, it really does.

However, I would actually be prepared to pay into a pension, but I'd want more pay to cover it, not frozen pay. Tbh my pay rises have lagged behind the private sector for years.

I don't agree with the private/public sector comparison. You should get the pension you were promised when you joined.

Oh so yes I agree witht the teachers.

Rob - 'snobbish public sector people'

What on earth does that mean?

Do you think your binman, nurse, teaching assistant, the woman who sorts out your housing benefit etc, etc aren't normal hardworking people? Public sector workers aren't all civil servants in ivory towers with gold plated pensions you know.

Changebags, on that basis I want to keep the state pension at 65 because i signed up for NI on that basis. It is totally unrealistic that a pension arrangement cannot change and evolve during your working life, maternity pay has increased, sick pay changes, salary changes, why should the pension stay the same. There are other factors that come into play, regulatory, financial, economic and longeivity. It is slightly unrealistic.

changes things change in life, I'm afraid.

There's a couple of points that I really wanted to comment on:

I think it's silly to try to compare your salary and conditions as a teacher with what you would/might have been doing in "the private sector". The private sector is massive and complex and employs vast numbers of people in an enormous number of capacities. Assuming that you wouldn't have been a teacher, what would you have been doing? There are people out there with the same qualifications as teachers who are earning considerably less, and some earning considerably more. How can there possibly be a meaningful comparison? I think the public sector fosters this perception because it has quite rigid pay structures, making comparisons easy across sectors and professions, but you can't apply the same comparison to the private sector.

Having said that, there was recently a report from the Policy Exchange which compared people with the same job qualificaitons and experience across the public and private sector and found that public sector workers earned at least 2 per cent more.

The private sector simply doesn't offer employer pension provision to anyone under 35. There are a few rare exceptions, but, in all my working life - across large corporations, small businesses and charities - I've only had access to contributory, defined contributions schemes, with a minimal input from my employer which tended to depend upon how much contribution I was making.

Currently, with all the childcare costs I have to meet (which will double next year......) I'm making next to no contributions at all and my employer makes none. Once my children are older I plan to boost my contributions by as much as I can. One advantage of having a personal scheme is that I can choose how much to contribute at any time in my life. From what I've read, it seems that public sector contributions are mandatory - which must make things a lot more difficult. Having said that, if the benefits are contractual, then they have to be paid for. I think you'd be better off campaigning for a more flexible system - a variety of pension schemes that you can choose from, depending on how much control you want over the level of your contributions.

Finally - yes public sector workers are also taxpayers, but those taxes are paid for out of public funds - you're still a net cost to the public purse, where private sector workers are net contributors.

Like I said, I'm fully prepared to pay into a pension. But then, I want my pay unfrozen. I want large pay rises when the private sector get large increases too. We have tended to get small increases even in the good times.

My husband's pay started off way behind mine. I've had very good end of year appraisals, he's happy to do what's required while I like to go further. He now earns a lot more than me. A lot.

I haven't read every post because I will start to get very if I read many more "they only work 6 months of the year and get paid loads, blah, bla, blah" That is bollocks and surely only said by people who don't teach.

For what it's worth I think teacher's pay is ok but compared to other jobs where you need a degree and a post-grad qualification, it's not that great. I am in a lucky position where my student loan is only about £15k. There are NQTs at my school who have debts of over £60k, obviously more than average having done an extra year.

I am in the NUT (just because I joined them as a student and never bothered to change) and over the last 8 years have had lots of letters asking me to vote to strike. I've binned every one of them except this one. I have voted yes to the strike action. We can't just let ourselves be walked all over as then we wouldn't be able to moan (and we allknow teacher's like a good moan )
Paying £70 a month more to have to work to 68 and then get over £200k less over a 20 year retirement does not add up.

And as a few people have said, it might not be the best for the students if I ahve to teach until I'm 68 but if this goes through I won't be able to afford not to.

Oh and teacher's jobs are not secure anymore (someone said that earlier). My school is making redundancies this year and they are not the only one.