Strikes

Well said Goldengirl.

Just because teachers are not physically at work doesn't mean they can't be effective by their actions. I'm afraid I don't see how disrupting and alienating parents who have to give up their own precious holiday entitlement unexpectedly [perhaps around 25-30 days per annum in total] to provide cover for their children can possibly help the cause. As I've said before strikes, especially teachers' strikes, give a bad example to young people. Many years ago I was a teacher so I have had hands on experience. And no, I didn't go on strike, but I did go on marches in my own time.

Excuse me but how can you strike on a day when you're not at work

They didn't need to strike, but they could have had a demonstration on a day during half term when I'm sure they would have gained more support and respect from the general public.

Excuse me but how can you strike on a day when you're not at work [although teachers do actually work through half term and other holidays, doing the work they don't have time to do in term time]?

I agree with Poppygran. I feel that if the teachers had used a day during half term they might have gained more support from others outside the profession. As I said in an earlier comment, taking this particular strike action does not hit the right target

Yes, the majority of us are really all in it together.

Time to think about those whose position or whose money are on the outside and concentrate on how to bring them under control. They never strike because they never need to.

Don't really see the connection with the Bombardier redundancies and the teachers strike. What has happened is that when the Bombardier tender was rejected no one factored in the cost to this country of making so many people redundant; I don't know where these men are going to find jobs, so they will probably be on benefits. I know people who work for companies who supply parts to Bombardier.. they will probably go down with them. Derby is a train making town; if ever Rolls Royce went as well I don't know what would happen to the area. Just because one group of workers is being badly treated it doesn't justify another group being shafted in a different way. And, from what I've heard, teachers are being made redundant at the moment so don't for any minute think the job is as safe as everyone believes.As a family we work in train manufacturing, development and maintenance, teaching and the nhs. None of us are looking over our shoulders at how well or badly other members are being treated; what we are trying to do is survive. We're in amess in this country, and one faction turning against another isn't going to help matters..and, as I've said before, there will still be people making money out of all this.

On the news today, it was announced that over 1,400 jobs were to go at a British company manufacturing trains. Last week Lloyds Banking Group announced ANOTHER 1,000 jobs are to disappear from the Bank, but do the victims have any rights to strike against the decisions - no, they have to live with it. As for teachers leaving to go to other jobs, I would say to them, what jobs out there offer security and a good pension - not many. They are only being asked to contribute a little extra towards their pension, which seems to be right, because as I understand it, they only pay 3% and the government pays 11%. They are now being asked to double their contribution to 6%. I would say that is not a bad deal. The union leaders who bring them out on strike are all earning well over £140,000 per year.

Ever wondered why employees of private sector companies don't have the same rights as public sector workers? Does the name Thatcher remind you of anything? Everyone had striking rights once.

In the news today, the only company making trains in Britain, is laying off over a thousand people. Last week Lloyds Banking Group said they had to sack another 1,500. What rights, do they have to strike against those decisions - none whatsoever. The public sector are the lucky ones in this crises. They pay a very small amount towards their pensions, compared to what the government puts in, something like 3% against 11%. The union leaders who bring them out on strike, all earn over £100,000 per year, and all their jobs are pretty secure!

I wonder why there is a rather bitter tone to Poppygran's post. Is there rather more to the statement that she worked in a school but not as a teacher? Did something happen there to produce this unsympathetic attitude?
Teachers are not actually saying that they want to keep their long-promised pension rights at the expense of others or because they are 'better' than anyone else. Rather they are reiterating that everyone has a right to protest against perceived unfairness. It does seem as if you had to take over baby-sitting duties on Thursday but I sincerely hope that your son and DiL see the role of teacher as a bit more than that.

Once upon a time teachers were critiscised for taking strike action because the childrens' education suffered. Now all that matters is that their parents might have to miss a day at work. That is where education stands in the pecking order of priority these days. I fear for the future. Especially one where it is now frowned upon for a group of people to stand up as say that are being treated badly. Feel sorry for the bank employees being made redundant now, at a time when the higher eschelons of their profession are still getting huge bonuses.

Yes I was one of the many grandparents who had to step in on Thursday to let my son and d-i-l go to work as taking a day off in their jobs would not have gone down well with their employers.

I have no sympathy whatsoever with these striking teachers. I have two grown children who I saw through school, and three grandchildren who are in the school system now, plus I have worked in a school though not as a teacher.

Of course there are good teachers but there are 'good' people in every profession and what on earth makes these teachers think they are a special case. Not in my eyes.

Precisely!

Spot on, jangran! It's the divide and rule principle, isn't it?

This is a brilliant debate - the points made are so interesting, well-informed and thought through. I wish younger people were affiliated to Gransnet!

I teach in HE, and I was on strike on 30 June. For me, that meant that I did what I was going to do anyway - worked from home, and yes, I work from home, all through the so-called "generous" vacation - but sacrificed a day's pay. I didn't mind. I get fairly well paid, and teaching in a university is much easier (in terms of discipline, anyway) than teaching in a school.

I know that because I was a school governor for many years, and I often went in to do voluntary work in the schools.

But surely the three main points here are:
a. Public sector pensions, according to the Hutton report, are not going through the roof. They are set to decline in future years.

b. Private pensions may be worse than public ones, but, if they are, that is because of the mess that Thatcher made of them - encouraging people to opt out and buy even more private pensions that then crashed. And, if private pensions are lower than public ones, that is an argument for increasing them, not reducing public sector pensions.

c. Why can't people see (some do, I know) that the whole issue is not about public versus private. It is a smokescreen to get us hating each other whilst letting wealthy bankers and their political mates (from all three parties) off the hook.

Whether it is immigrants; women; public sector employees or whatever, the government (of whatever colour) is always a dab hand at getting people to blame those that are in a similar position to themselves. It is time to blame the real culprits.

jess, could you point me at the source of the info about the shortage of teachers of English, please? Thanks in advance.

I think there are far more arts graduates than pure science graduates these days but i cant find the numbers. Oddly, English teachers area in short supply these days. No one sure why.

It is obvious that those who are good at physics and maths will get far more opportunities in a private sector than the ones who took english and geography at uni or college.
So we are left with the ones who see teaching as the job most people do with those sort of qualifications.
Somehow teachers never did get the respect they get in other parts of Europe where the profession is highly respected and renumerated. In the good old days male teachers wore brogues and tweed jackets with leather elbows, hardly high powered business dressing.
Still if they stick to it for 40 years then they are worth their pensions.

Who are these people getting massive pension payouts? I keep hearing/reading about them, but no-one I know gets anything like the sums quoted. Even em receives significantly more than I will. I had a first career as a children's and families social worker and remember coming across a former colleague a few years ago who was working on the checkout of a big supermarket. She explained that she was earning only a little less money, the perks were brilliant and she could sleep at night. More recently I had a feeling of déjà vu when exactly the same thing happened with a former teaching colleague. Both of these people were really good at their jobs, but just couldn't take the responsibility any more.
helshea cleaning toilets and working in a factory might be hard work or mind-numbingly boring, but in terms of the weight of responsibility carried there is no comparison.

Teaching is just a little bit more skillful than cleaning toilets. You have to put more into the job and the job takes more out of you. Why shouldn't skills be rewarded reasonably? I am not decrying jobs such as cleaning toilets but a lot more people are able to do that job than teach. This is not elitism; it's just reality. I don't see much screeching about doctors' pay. Why do people find it so hard to accept that teachers are professionals and should be treated as such? Yes, there are bad teachers. There are bad doctors too. There are bad toilet cleaners. There are bad everythings. So that isn't an argument.

I agree helshea and am very happy that I could retire when I did because I know that, as things are, I am not worried about my relatively minor ailments. However I know that I would not now be as effective in a classroom as I was.
The point I wanted to make is that my pension is more or less adequate - yes better than some - but certainly not generous or gold-plated. If I'd been a bit younger and was watching this modest pension being threatened then I would have been on strike too. I am so glad that bright and enthusiastic young people are still willing to be teachers. My son plans to do just that, carrying teaching into the 3rd generation of our family.

I also agree that teaching is a hard job, as are other public sector jobs, but it's not exactly a doddle cleaning toilets all day, or working in a factory ten hours a day, there are plenty of people out their working for the minimum wage, because they have to, and they have no benefits at all. So let's count our blessings. People are dying out there at young ages, so anyone that actually gets a pension at all should be happy they lived to receive it... Better any pension, than no pension at all..

Your figures sound almost identical to mine, em. But I was in FE and the powers that be made me redundant when I was 58.5. I would have been happy to go on longer as it was a lovely job with great students but they thought they could do without me, even though they took me on part-time for a term after I was officially redundant. If I had known more about employment law I might have challenged this more strongly but my union was useless. As it happens, I couldn't have gone on to 66 or more because I began to fall apart (arthritis) which is one reason I am dubious about the increased retirement ages. People may be living longer but they are needing more and more support to do so in terms of medical, surgical and social care and very often it's in one's 60s that the slippery slope starts. I foresee a plethora of constructive dismissal cases or early retirements on health grounds when workers physically or mentally cannot carry on.

So, if the retirement package is so great (well and bravely said, em), why is there a shortage of teachers, especially for maths and physics? Doesn't add up, does it?