TOPIC: Yet another fat cat strike looming........

So, yet another fat cat Militant Union leader is going to hold the Government to ransom over pay.

---

A militant union boss who crippled schools with a series of strikes has received an increase to her pay package making the total sum more than £160,000.
Christine Blower has led five national strikes since taking charge of the National Union of Teachers – with pay and conditions a key battleground.
The walkouts spelled disruption for millions of families, forcing them to shell out for childcare or take a day’s holiday off work to look after their children.
Miss Blower, who has boasted of leading more teaching strikes than at any time since Margaret Thatcher was in power, has also directed a programme of regional strikes and a work-to-rule in schools.
Accounts filed by the NUT weeks after the most recent national walkout – on July 10 – reveal Miss Blower was handed a total package of £160,443 in 2013.
This was up £2,288 on 2012 and £33,551 higher than her first year in the post.
The package is made up of £104,360 gross salary, £43,236 in pension contributions and £12,847 in employer’s national insurance contributions.
Miss Blower became the NUT’s acting general secretary in April 2008 following the death of her predecessor Steve Sinnott and led a walkout within weeks. That strike – over pay – was the union’s first national walkout for 20 years.
In May the following year she was elected the union’s first female general secretary.

Is it just me or is that a pretty one sided article?

And they're not striking over her pay are they?

She leads the biggest employer organisation for one of the country's foremost professions - she probably works 80 hour weeks, should she do it for free?

Most teachers are paid a decent salary. But those I know (4 or 5, so hardly a massive sample) work 10 or 11 hour days and at weekends to keep up with the form filling nonsense. So, whilst this 'article' (diatribe would be a better word) says these strikes are over 'pay' it's really about getting a fair wage for the amount of work the individual does. Can't see why anyone would take against that.

Oh, I forgot, it might inconvenience a few people. Oh diddums.

In all fairness what would be the point of striking if it had no effect? When it comes to striking these days, pretty much all other avenues have been explored and the dispute has not been resolved. What are teachers' pay increases going to be for the next 5 years?

Moorlad wrote:
Exactly Moorlad and Johnmc. Im sure most teachers decided to choose the profession so they could get on some kind of gravy train and go on strike willy nilly if they all fancy a day off. Im sure theres people on here who would have us all back in the workhouse.

Why be a teacher....
Competitive salary and great benefits
The job satisfaction that comes with a career in teaching is hard to beat, but the rewards don’t end there. As a teacher, you’ll benefit from a competitive starting salary, excellent opportunities for pay rises, and the second largest public sector pension scheme in the country.

The average starting salary for newly qualified teachers in England is £24,200, which is higher than the overall UK average for new graduates.
Wherever you are in England, you can expect to start on a minimum of £22,023 – or £27,543 in inner London – with lots of chances to achieve increases and promotions. Schools now also have more freedom to develop their own pay policies to attract and retain the teachers that have the greatest impact on their pupils’ learning.
So what you’re paid will be linked to performance and not length of service – meaning it’s possible for you to increase your salary more quickly than ever before.
The salary ranges shown in the table below are for 2014/2015, and are revised annually.
On average, a full-time qualified teacher earns £34,600 a year
As a leading practitioner, you could earn up to £65k
If you progress to headteacher, you could earn over £100,000
Get pay rises linked to your performance

THEY FORGOT TO SAY ABOUT THE FREE HOLIDAYS................Sorry days on strike !!

Source of the article? Daily Fail by any chance?

How are days on strike free holidays? Days on strike are deducted from wages so hardly a free holiday is it you utter clem.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

thesilentone wrote:
1. You don't get paid for strike days.

2. Are you seriously arguing against performance related pay, as used by every single private sector company in the entire world?

3. The average starting salary is <£5k less than Sellafield. I'm not dismissing what folk do 'on site' but it's a little less intense than teaching.

Do you think they shouldn't be well paid then?

Isn't the job of a teacher, shaping the minds of our youngsters, one of the most important jobs done by anybody in the country? Don't you think that deserves to be rewarded properly? Have teachers not also worked quite hard to get into the profession in the first place? They are educated to degree standard, at least. Most of them choose to teach, a lot could get work elsewhere if they wished, most likely at a higher salary. I don't think most teachers do it for the money, it is a vocation really, a bit like nursing.

thesilentone wrote:

So whats your point?. Are you kicking yourself because you didnt apply to be a teacher or do you think everyone should be on the minimum wage?. Either way you seem very bitter about a group of people who on the whole have chosen to do something that will help our kids.

johnmc wrote:

Hey dont bring me into it John im on your side for once

Salary is a red herring too. If you break it down into hourly rates teachers get a hell of a lot less than most people. I probably earn about 4 quid more an hour than a teacher who is on the same yearly salary as me if said teacher puts the same amount of graft in as my mother used to when she was a teacher.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

Dancingbear wrote:
Ha! My bro works there too. Nowt wrong with it, but it is pretty well paid. Can see why, and all. I'd rather do that for the pay than teach.

As dancingbear well knows, I have 3 brothers working there, all far better paid than any teacher, and not one of them capable of being a teacher.

johnmc wrote:
Exactly. Goes back to my point earlier that people get into teaching coz they are generally good people who want to help not doss about and go on strike for a laugh as the original poster seems to think. I suppose he was probably just looking for the bite that he definitely got.

Funnily enough, the people who think teaching 30 mouthy teenagers is a cushy job are the ones who would shit themselves if they saw three of the same kids hanging around outside the local shops

So why are they going on strike when the people most likely to be hurt by this action is not you or I, or the government or the teachers, but the single parent, or hourly paid worker on a zero hours contract who will need to take a day of work to look after the kids.

Really well thought through action eh ? or in the words of johnmc "Oh, I forgot, it might inconvenience a few people. Oh diddums"

Teachers can be selfish and Militant, just like the leader who is (along with the rest of the fat cat Union leaders) destroying the labour party.

thesilentone wrote:
If they don't take this action and pay isn't more appropriate we risk losing excellent current teachers and we endanger the recruitment of future teachers...

chesterviabothel wrote:
I understand, but why strike ???

thesilentone wrote:
As all other options have been exhausted?

chesterviabothel wrote:
The only had the budget last week, give it a rest will you.................

chesterviabothel wrote:
This. Believe it or not, the majority of unions (not counting PCS who are absolute clowns) go on strike with incredibly heavy hearts. Inconvenience, I'm afraid, is precisely the point of a strike - it's to say 'this has gone too far, I'm sorry if this gets in your way, but it's important we make you aware of the importance of this issue.'

For teachers, it's one day of irritation for parents to ensure the continued future excellence of their profession.

The budget was last week, you're right. There was also an announcement on public sector pay. This results in the whole of the public sector getting 1% rises for the rest of this parliament, and it is at a time when private sector rises are starting to move ahead of inflation. The governments inflation target remains at 2%, so effectively public sector workers are taking a cut in pay (except for MPs of course).

Is this the way to attract the best and brightest young people into the education sector? I don't really think so. Is it the way to retain the better performing teachers? Again I don't think it is. Couple that with the erosion of their work conditions over the years, and you should easily be able to see where they're coming from. It wasn't teachers, or any public sector workers, who caused the problems that the country is suffering from, so is it right that they should carry the can while the real cause gets off scot free?

Any sort of industrial action which interrupts childrens' education is absolutely the last thing teachers want to do, but it has got to the stage where perhaps they feel there is no choice. They may be the first public sector workers to react, but they certainly won't be the last.

thesilentone wrote: Am I missing something here? Has a strike actually been announced or are you just overreacting to the sensationalist article that you copied and pasted?

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

thesilentone wrote:

One thing is for sure teachers these days are certainly much more than just teachers.

They are careers advisors, behavioural specialists, class co-ordinators, personal tutors, english and maths specialists, additional learning support specialists etc the list could go on.

A lot of the extra jobs in schools and colleges that were done by other staff have been cut leaving these areas to be picked up by teachers again. One of the most difficult things going on in eduction is that administration time is being cut and people are being asked to teach more and more without the time to plan, organise and asses work, basically trying to squeeze the role as much as possible.

The whole point of strike action is to get the attention of the general public , Silent one. After the Tories virtually killed off the unions' power after the Miners' strike they've been left with little choice than to withdraw their labour and good will and go out on strike. It's the last resort and is never done because they fancy a day off. You'll probably find most of them doing lesson planning at home on their "strike holiday"
I think you really need to think before you say anything in the future as your initial comment was one-sided Tory propaganda written to demonize the teachers (as well as being clearly copied and pasted)
Support the teachers , cos I believe children are our future.........................

I'm assuming that opening post was copied from something like the Daily Mail, and it fails badly to recognise what is actually going on at the "coal face". But what would anybody expect from that sort of right wing rag. One of the major problems we have in this country is that the press is almost exclusively right wing, or certainly leans that way. This can be clearly seen by the idiotic reporting of the budget last week, where most of the papers headlined it as being a pay rise for the whole country. The reality of it is that it was very far from that, it was a shift of responsibility from government on to small business owners. The scrapping of tax credits (perhaps they haven't done what they should have, but that's beside the point) is now going to be funded by small business owners having to increase the minimum wage, while the government can say they've wiped that cost off the welfare budget. But in most cases the wage increase (if people manage to keep their jobs, or hours) is less than they'll lose in tax credits. As usual with a tory government it is the least well off who will suffer. The sweetener for this, well obviously an increase in the inheritance tax threshold to £1m, correct me if I'm wrong, but there won't be many ordinary families in Cumbria doing well out of that.

On top of that the public sector pay freeze again mainly hits those furthest down the scale, those who were getting tax credits as well. I imagine that, in the main, teachers do not have to rely on tax credits to make ends meet, but they're still seeing that same gradual erosion of their take home pay, while having to do more work. What the union is doing is striving for a fair deal for it's members, as is it's duty, they would be remiss if they did not openly challenge the government on this. And as it seems the government is unwilling to open any dialogue, let alone make any concessions the union feels they have little option but to look at industrial action.

So why would the leader of the union's wage have anything to do with anything? Should the union have somebody leading it who works for £20k? Would that level of pay attract any sort of decent applicants do you think? Should the members of the union not want to have the best representative they can get? Who pays her wages in any case? I suspect it is the members themselves out of their subscriptions. So why does that have anything to do with the Mail (if that's who it was) except perhaps they're a little envious, or want to stir some sort of envious reaction.

Resident Blue wrote:
Ill bite. I thought garlic bread was?

Hope the strikes go ahead tbh the more damage trade unions do to public support the better its win win as it fucks the Labour Party up too

Moorlad wrote: to be fair the public sector was hugely protected from pay reductions that many private sector workers had to accept... My company reduced my salary in my position by 20%... In real terms public sector wages have outstripped those of most private sector industries, who are only now getting back to pre-recession levels.

I told my company to stick their 20% pay cut and found another job by the way. Cheeky f&@kers

chesterviabothel wrote:
Oh yea, where are they going ?

They are retraining as tube drivers...

thesilentone wrote:
As someone who works within postgraduate marketing and recruitment do you want the long answer or the short answer?

Basically, recruitment to teacher training courses has dropped in recent years, to the point that the Government offers up to £20k in training bursaries for people with certain undergraduate degrees to take a PGCE to train to teach secondary subjects like Maths and Science... do you think they'd be handing these out if there was no problem recruiting decent graduates from undergraduate degrees?

Could I suggest that the problem with recruitment into the teaching profession has absolutely nothing to do with pay and personal conditions, but the bureaucracy and the working environment. However, my issue is with fat cat Union Leaders abusing there position.

thesilentone wrote:
All part of the same issue as far as I am aware. Good quality graduates that are interested in teaching do other things because of the lower pay, as well as the bureaucracy and working environment.

In what way has she abused her position?

I don't think I've ever seen a thread on this board or the old one with such little support for the original poster.

Your point is ill thought out and obviously shows very little knowledge or understanding of the subject which you talk about.

I advise you in future to do as your username suggests. It's better to be thought of as a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

I think fat cat Militant Union leaders who take members out on strike for there own political and personal gain is an abuse of power and will inevitably end up with the reduction of unionism and the Labour party, anything wrong with that ?

So the whole strike is down to one person? No teacher agrees with it? All teachers simply do as the union says, no dialogue? Everything is hunky dory in the teaching profession? They are being forced out against their will? The strike is about pay is it?

Like I said, ill thought out and little knowledge of the subject in question

No, but how is being done for her own gain?

franksidebottom wrote:
Given that teachers are on a higher than average pay, and one of the best public sector pensions (average pension around 15k and 50k lump sum, higher end 25k and 75k lump sum) why do you assume this about pay ??

thesilentone wrote:
Do you think everyone should be paid the same whatever job they do or summat? Teaching is a bloody hard stressful and time consuming career. They deserve everything they get in my opinion.

I can't help feeling that Unions are shooting themselves in the foot at the moment. We have a Conservative government who are just looking for an excuse to tackle union power and the Unions are effectively building a case to change regulations and reduce their influence. If you overuse your bargaining position you have nobody else but yourself to blame when the goalposts are moved. We will just end up with a much higher level of support required for a strike to be legal... and the tube drivers will end up being replaced by automated trains. In order to have real power to resist this kind of change the Union's need a high level of public support... they currently don't have that due to their actions. It's all a bit short sighted and brainless by the Union leadership.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-electio...the-Tube-strike.html

Have you met this crew of bruisers franksidebottom, another bunch of paid up members of the Militant fat cat club, just about to go on strike.........again.

However, I am sure they are all prefect Gentlemen really only looking after their poor members interests, what is it a Tube driver gets again, oh yes £26.00 hr after a long hard education or apprenticeship.........

The forefathers of Unions will be turning in there graves................

thesilentone wrote:
What you waffling on about? What makes you think I assume the strike is about pay? Do you understand the meaning of a question mark?

thesilentone wrote:
Why bring the tube strike into a discussion about teaching? I know absolutely nothing about the tube strike so I'm not is a position to talk about it, I suggest you do the same about the teaching strike because it's plainly obvious you know absolutely nothing about that

thesilentone wrote:
If I was a teacher I'd be very tempted to correct that and make you write it out correctly 100 times.

Do you want anybody who challenges the government to be put to death or something? You are sounding a bit like Thatcher at her absolute worst. Is it the pay of teachers and tube drivers you object to, or is it that you feel they shouldn't stand up for their rights? You and some of the foolish Tory voting sheep who follow the sun and the mail would do well to remember that those of us in work have the decent working conditions we have because of unions. If certain employers had their way we'd still be sending kids of 10 or 11 up chimneys to clean them. All of our rights in the workplace have been fought for for decades, and the unions have managed to make work a much more pleasant experience for most people. However if a workforce feels they are being treated unjustly or unfairly they have the right to withdraw their labour, would you prefer that right was to be taken away? Where do you think that might lead?

My son will be 4 in august and weve just had his new teacher round to visit us 10 mins ago. Shes just informed us theres gonna be 23 in her class next year. Now two of us struggle to look after him so shes definitaly gonna have her work cut out and ill reiterate shes worth every penny she gets paid. Theres no way i could handle that job whatever i was paid.

This is NOT about teachers, but fat cat Militant Union Leaders, who abuse power.................

Why are they abusing power by representing their members?