BS: Striking teachers should lose pay

Subject: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 02:07 PM

I see absolutely no reason why any striking teacher should be paid. My wife has pleasure in teaching Thursday evening.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 02:09 PM

Striking teachers should get whatever compensation is accorded them in their contracts and by local law. Whether they enjoy it or not is beside the point.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST,999
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 02:12 PM

"I see absolutely no reason why any striking teacher should be paid."

I agree. Where is this happening, because I think you have your facts a bit screwed up!

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Joe Offer
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 02:16 PM

Well, it would be absurd for an employer to be forced to pay workers who are on strike and not working, but there are those who think striking workers shouldn't even get "strike pay" from their unions....
So, Bonzo, what are we talking about?

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Arthur_itus
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 02:21 PM

"but there are those who think striking workers shouldn't even get "strike pay" from their unions.... "

Maybe if they didn't get anything at all, they might think twice about striking.....

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST,999
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 02:27 PM

And maybe if they received fair compensation for their education and work they wouldn't go on strike to begin with. All depends whose dog is in the fight!

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 02:29 PM

Think of "Strike Pay" as a fund that the workers pay in to so that if they have to strike, they can partly afford to.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Arthur_itus
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 02:29 PM

Especially when they can't pay their bills like many people here in the UK, who don't have a job or earn low wages and salaries.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Herga Kitty
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 02:30 PM

Well, as far as I can see, they're striking now because the Government is planning for them (and lots of other people) to lose a lot more later...

Hutton specifically said he wasn't advocating a race to the bottom.

Kitty

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: catspaw49
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 02:43 PM

Ya' know Bonz.........It would be useful if we all had some idea of what the hell you're talking about without doing a web search. I assume you are talking about the UK strike but remember this is a worldwide site! When you start a thread, howabout a link to some info so we might be able to comment after reading more about it?

Initially, I'm with Jack. I loved teaching during the time I taught but you can't eat "pleasure."


Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 02:43 PM

It's absurd how little respect teachers seem to receive in the employment marketplace. Especially in the face of how many of their administrators have more robust salaries. The teachers are the point where the rubber meets the road - they do the heavy lifting.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST,999
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 02:52 PM

The government in England has--in its wisdom--decide to effect changes to teachers' (and other public workers) pensions. I can't see why teachers would be upset about that.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST,999
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 02:55 PM

I'd like to know where the info that if they strike they will be paid comes from.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: katlaughing
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 02:57 PM

Amen to that, SRS. If some people had their way, teachers wouldn't be paid at all. THAT is not a true American tradition. My ancestors, parents, and siblings all valued good teachers and education...and a lot of them were/are teachers. The day we honour those to whom we entrust our children and their young minds, with pay as much as a big league ballplayer or a ceo, or even a skilled, licensed professional, will be a great day for our nation, but it doesn't look very bright on that horizon.

And maybe if they received fair compensation for their education and work they wouldn't go on strike to begin with. All depends whose dog is in the fight!

Well said, Bruce!

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: katlaughing
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 02:57 PM

Forgot to say, if you can read this thank a teacher!

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 03:03 PM

after nearly 30 years of dedicated teaching my mrs is at near emotional breaking point..
..all the extra work pressures & stress heaped on in the last few years.

Although she agrees in principle with the strike,
fearful for our future financial wellbeing as we get older;

her school will stay open
because [unofficial] staffroom consensus is
too many of the parents are so thick and drug addled confrontational
it'll be too much potential risk trying to explain the reasons for striking
while they get aggressive
arguing why they can't dump their kids off for a day....

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 03:03 PM

I never belonged to a union. I never supported one. But they have a role to play. The law is the law and their contracts are contracts. What ever they legally do, its their right to do.

Public service unions have to consider public opinion. But their strike pay, as long as it is legal is a red herring.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: vectis
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 03:11 PM

The only pay they will get will be in the form of strike pay from their unions. The employers will not pay NI or pensions contributions for any day, or part day, when an employee is striking.

they paid in for their pension and the money should have been ring fenced and sensibly invested to provide their pensions, like the Gas Board did, not frittered away by government who have now decided they can't pay them what they reckon they have paid in for.

The average pension expected by most public sector workers is well below the £6,000 quoted, caretakers and cleaners would be rolling in it if they got that amount.

The buggers that have mismanaged the pension funds will get a ring fenced pension of about £30,000 a year even those that committed fraud and theft when they were in power. PLUS they avoided prosecution by the lily livered twats in charge of the CPS; when the rest of us would have been done and lost jobs and pensions even if we managed to avoid jail.

The government is trying to change their contracts half way through the job by lowering pensions and lengthening the work time needed to qualify for one.

No wonder they are striking.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: katlaughing
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 03:20 PM

Thanks for the explanation, vectis.

punkfolkrocker, good luck to you and you mrs. It is too high a toll to pay in the long run.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Joe Offer
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 03:22 PM

I suppose it's true that some teachers are lazy, incompetent, and overpaid. I put four children through school, served on a Catholic school board, and attended school myself for a good number of years. In all that time, I rarely encountered these "lazy, incompetent, overpaid" teachers that people complain so much about. Most of the time, I have been infinitely impressed by the dedication, hard work, wisdom, and love that teachers have given me and my children. It may well be the toughest job in the world.

But I'm still wondering about the original question about striking teachers being paid - how can anyone question union workers receiving strike pay from their union? Don't they have a right to that?

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Arthur_itus
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 03:25 PM

"The government is trying to change their contracts half way through the job by lowering pensions and lengthening the work time needed to qualify for one.
"

Just the same for people working in industry.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 03:25 PM

http://www.nebusiness.co.uk/business-news/business-comment/2011/06/27/taking-lawful-strike-action-is-a-human-right-51140-28946339/

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST,999
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 03:50 PM

'"The government is trying to change their contracts half way through the job by lowering pensions and lengthening the work time needed to qualify for one.
"

Just the same for people working in industry.'

Too true, and it's wrong there, too.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 03:50 PM

I was being called for dinner - what I meant to put was:

I see absolutely no reason why any teacher striking this Thursday should be paid for that day.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST,999
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 03:59 PM

Thanks for the clarification. I don't think anyone here would disagree with you.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 03:59 PM

"The government is trying to change their contracts half way through the job by lowering pensions and lengthening the work time needed to qualify for one.
"

Just the same for people working in industry.

State pension may be but occupational pension does not even seem to be the same for all public sector workers. To quote the BBC:

"The government wants public sector workers - bar the armed forces, police and fire service - to receive their occupational pension at the same time as the state pension in future. Many can currently receive a full pension at 60. The state pension age is due to rise to 66 for both men and women by April 2020"

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Arthur_itus
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 04:29 PM

From BBC News
"Business leaders have warned of the impact of the walkout on the economy.

The British Chambers of Commerce said many parents would lose pay for taking the day off work to look after their children, and productivity would be hit.

Labour leader Ed Miliband said the strikes would be a "mistake", and that both sides should get back round the negotiating table."

Even Labour don't agree with the strike.

Nobody is thinking about the time lost for children trying to learn (I am not talking about the plebs who do not want to learn).

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 04:53 PM

"The state pension age is due to rise to 66 for both men and women by April 2020."

Sick bastards! Why aren't people protesting in the streets en masse NOW? I thought the goal was a BETTER standard of living????

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Mrs.Duck
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 05:01 PM

In the course of my teaching career I have been involved in a couple of strikes and on no occasion have I been paid by either my employers or my union. Noone wants to strike but when the government refuse to see the consequences of their cuts it is sometimes necessary to make them sit up and think. The strike is not the fault of the teachers!

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 05:04 PM

>>>
'"The government is trying to change their contracts half way through the job by lowering pensions and lengthening the work time needed to qualify for one.
"

Just the same for people working in industry.'<<<

I don't think you can show me an example of that happening in industry. It would be against the law. But keep in mind that the contracts are limited to one or two year terms.

If the Conservative government is proposing breaking a contract before its term is up, then they are breaking the law. If they are proposing changing the terms when current contracts expire. They are abiding by the law and it becomes a collective but legal fight.

>Labour leader Ed Miliband said the strikes would be a "mistake", and that both sides should get back round the negotiating table." Even Labour don't agree with the strike.<

Are you serious? Do you thing that the so called Labour Party speaks for the unions? Did you sleep through Tony Blair's leadership?

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Greg F.
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 05:33 PM

I suppose it's true that some teachers are lazy, incompetent, and overpaid.

Now, Joe, if you'd said "Some people are lazy, incompetent, and overpaid" you'd be a lot nearer the truth.

Part of the worldwide - but especially vicious in the U.S.- to demonize public workers, public employee unions & etc as exemplified by Snyder in Michigan, Cuomo in NY & numerous other Koch brothers & Teabagger governors in states.

Its uncalled for, unfair, untrue and idiotic.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: The Sandman
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 05:43 PM

BONZO you are entitled to your opinion,I disagree with you. Bonzo I think you should cook your own dinner, what is the matter with you are you on strike, if you were cooking your own dinner you would not have time to post this.
you should not be allowed to not cook your dinner when you are on strike, neither should you be allowed to post your opinions when you are on strike, become a twenty first century man, and start cooking your own dinner

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 06:18 PM

Teachers in the UK do not get paid by their employers when they strike. If they get any money at all it comes from their union ~ if they are in one. They pay quite a lot annually to be in a union and strike rarely; I cannot see a problem with that.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 06:38 PM

Bozo doesn't care. He just wants to vilify workers trying to protect themselves from greedy bosses - for whom he works as accountant, the ultimate venal moneygrubber.


Wall, mofo

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 07:18 PM

I like the "cook your own dinner" tactic.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Bobert
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 07:50 PM

I think that state legislators and governors who spend tax payers dollars and time time bashing teachers should not be paid...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: ChanteyLass
Date: 29 Jun 11 - 11:19 PM

I taught for more than 30 years in a town in Rhode Island. When we had a strike, perhaps twice in my career, we had to make up the days we were on strike. So we were paid for the number of days in the school year which is set by the state. It didn't matter when those days were. Otherwise we would have been teaching on make-up days without being paid. I would call that slavery. The strikes in my school system were blessedly short. I think if we had been out for 10 school days we could have received "strike pay" from our union, but we would have had to pay it back when we resumed work. It's really a loan from a fund that we paid into with our union dues.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 02:33 AM

"Bozo doesn't care. He just wants to vilify workers trying to protect themselves from greedy bosses - for whom he works as accountant, the ultimate venal moneygrubber."

I have no intention of stopping work when I shortly receive my pensions - I like Business Class travel too much!!

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 02:51 AM

Teachers who choose to strike will have 1/365 of their salary deducted.
There is not to be union strike pay.
Teachers in their final years who stike will have a slightly reduced pension because it is calculated on the final years of salary.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Newport Boy
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 03:20 AM

This whole discussion should be unnecessary. The reason teachers and other public sector workers find it necessary to strike is that central government has failed to run an adequate pension scheme and now wants to reduce payments to balance the books.

This situation should not have arisen - other public sector pension schemes are healthy. Take my own case - a local government scheme. It's not a large scheme, currently 13,000 pensioners and 21,700 contributors. The income of the fund last year was £145 million and the expenditure £92 million. The market value of the fund was £1.5 billion, up from £0.885 billion in 2005.

This is real money - the investments actually exist and are managed by the LA treasurer (with financial advisers). So different from the teachers 'pension fund' which is a fiction in the government accounts. Contributions paid years ago were spent, and now the treasury is having to pay pensions from current taxation.

The position of my pension scheme in a turbulent period in the markets gives the lie to the proposition that we can't afford inflation-linked, final salary pension schemes. And to knock another fiction on the head, my pension and Anne's teachers pension are not 'gold-plated'.

Anne's pension is £10,360 (£9,600 after tax) and mine is £14,900 (£12,100 after tax). Multiply by 10 for MPs and 100 for bankers and company directors!

Phil

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Geoff the Duck
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 03:49 AM

What I see on News Programme discussions is that the teachers have already agreed to pay more than they once did and work longer and the result of this action which has already happened, there is NO SHORTFALL in what is available. The government is determinedly ignoring this fact, refusing to even discuss the reality or allow the teachers negotiators to see the real numbers, which would prove that the government does not have a leg to stand on.
Negotiation implies some form of discussing matters then trying to find points of agreement. What we have here is government sit at a table as a diversionary tactic while they tell the press that they are making unilateral changes that haven't even been under discussion. I don't call that Democracy. I call it Dictatorship.
Quack!
GtD

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Penny S.
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 04:03 AM

Richard, the remark about all accountants is uncalled for. There are, or at least have been, honourable accountants not involved in finding tax loopholes for their over-rich clients, who regarded their work as a service not only to their clients, but to the community. Rather like lawyers.
I remember one occasion when one of my colleagues was holding forth with your sort of remark. I pointed out, quietly, that my father was an accountant. She continued as if I had not spoken. I repeated what I had said. She continued. I got a bit louder and said I did not want to sit there and listen to her insulting my father, and thought she was rude. (Or something.) She drew herself up and said that now we knew what I was really like. I left the room.
I don't want to get louder here.
Thanks for sticking up for the teachers.
I remember getting my statement of pension, and there were the records of missed strike days back in the days of Thatcher. They remember. Teachers are prepared to damage their own pensions in the short term in order to protect them in the long. I really don't know where Bonzo gets his ideas from. And I remember the NUT saying it could not afford to fund single day strikes, when strike pay was really needed for longer strikes in particular cases, so I never had strike pay.
I feel that the argument by comparison with private pensions is specious. If business has made cuts to impoverish their employees, why should the government follow? Who makes the decisions on governance? Surely legislation to protect all workers is the answer, not the rush to the bottom. Ha ha.
Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 04:22 AM

Point taken Penny. I shall contact you for support when others go off about lawyers! (grin).

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 04:47 AM

Bonzo knows very well that people on strike don't get paid for strike days, he just never misses an opportunity to attack those who don't agree with the right wing ideals of him and his [ he thinks ] rich tory friends, they will shaft him as well if they get the chance, what plonker.

Dave H

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 05:31 AM

"for whom he works as accountant, the ultimate venal moneygrubber."

Aren't you a Legal Exec or somthing of the sort, Richard? My experience, and that of many others who have found the need to turn to the law, is that members of the legal profession are the real ultimate venal moneygrubbers.

I've never met a poor lawyer (although I've seen a few who try to look poor).

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 05:33 AM

You are forgetting that none of this would have been necessary had 13 years of labour disgrace.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: The Sandman
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 05:58 AM

Bonzo cook your own dinner.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Arthur_itus
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 06:15 AM

As a very honest ex Accountant, I thought I had better post something for Richard.

A group of professional men had finished a day's hunt and were relaxing around the fire. Their hunting dogs occupied a clearing nearby. One of the men observed that it was remarkable how the dogs had acquired the traits of their owners.

The musician's dog was softly howling strains of the Moonlight sonata. The engineer's dog was using his paw to perform calculations in the dust.

The lawyer's dog was screwing all the rest.


A famous lawyer found himself at heaven's gates confronting St. Peter. He protested that it was all a mistake: he was only 49 and far too young to be dead.

"That's odd," said St. Peter, "according to the hours you've billed you're 119 years old."


Did you hear about the new microwave lawyer?
You spend eight minutes in his office and get billed as if you'd been there eight hours.


Boom boom :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 06:36 AM

"Bonzo cook your own dinner."

You just don't like being reminded do you!!! I laugh.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST,kendall
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 06:51 AM

Teachers are in charge of our most precious resource, yet they are looked down upon as non producers. An over paid teacher? Where?

Now look at Mr. Blankenship, CEO of that coal company that kept two sets of books on safety and covered up countless violations which resulted in the deaths of 29 miners!
He just retired with an 80 million dollar bonus.Will he be held accountable for those deaths? Is the Pope a Bear?

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 07:13 AM

Of course they were getting something for nothing, but now they will get slightly less - that's tough isn't it!!

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Mrs.Duck
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 08:20 AM

Rather ironic that today I received my pension statement. When I am 65 I am entitled to £7000 per annum. Hardly a fortune to show for 18 years service.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 08:22 AM

Yes, I first heard that "billable hours" joke (better told) about Victor Mishcon. The demand for billable hours no matter the justifiability for the client was a major reason I got out of central London.

Bozo, what the relevant public sector workers have been getting were the pensions their contracts required.   For years they have been working and paying on the basis of those contracts. Now the Con-Dems (all of the MPs in which are rich bastards with never a pensions worry in the world) want to tear up those contracts and substitute worse ones.

Even the dimmest of the wannabee accountants to whom I teach business law could figure out that but for the power to make law in Parliament that would be a repudiatory breach of contract.

Mr Backwards - buy some spectacles.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 08:28 AM

PS - Bozo, check your money facts - the problems flow from the bankers stealing the money. They, not the public sector workers, poor and unwaged should pay it back.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: bbc
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 08:38 AM

kendall, thank you for your vote of confidence. I just took early retirement from teaching, after trying to do the job of 2 people for the past 2 years. I found that, no matter how I tried or how many hours I put in, I just couldn't do it. I finally burned out. When I realized that crying almost every day over the disrespect &/ apathy I met from my students wasn't normal/healthy, I actually took medical leave & quit 3 weeks before the end of the school year. After I filed for retirement, I was told that the district was cutting back further, from 2 library positions to 1, & that I would have lost my job at the end of the year, anyway. There is little administrative regard for the work of the teachers or the best interests of the students. American education is going, more & more, to the business model, to the detriment of our future. Most teachers I know are trying hard to meet the needs of their students, but they are feeling increasingly discouraged. They try to adapt to the changing needs of today's tech generation, but with decreasing success. Fewer & fewer students, each year, seem able to relate to 3D teachers. Add to that the lack of administrative support & we have a sorry situation. I, myself, feel I'm seeing the decline of traditional libraries. I didn't feel adequate to make the transition to the future. I hope someone else in my district will. I realize this post is somewhat off-topic, but, IMO, teachers work damn hard for their money & are so often bashed.

Barbara

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 08:58 AM

"Mr Backwards - buy some spectacles.

Mr. Richard Head - know your own limits, stick to conveyancing.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 09:12 AM

By all accounts the strike is a failure!!! I even got through to a peabrain at HM Revenue & Customs within 3 minutes this morning - it usually takes 20!!

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: kendall
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 09:14 AM

Definition of capitalism...legal greed.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 09:40 AM

There are several groups in the public sector whose work, by its nature, makes retirement at an age earlier than 65 very sensible indeed. Firefighters, Paramedics and Police Officers come immediately to mind, and I would include teachers in that cadre.

However, they do need to understand that the day of the defined benefit pension scheme is over, and that they need to move to a defined benefits structure which is, simply put, much more affordable.

The vast majority of workers in the private sector who are fortunate enough to be members of an employer-supported scheme (and remember than many are not) have had to face this truth - my own Final Salary scheme was closed several years ago by my then employers, and replaced with a Money-Purchase scheme. No ifs, no buts, it was a done deal - take it or leave it - and I didn't have a Union to fight for me.

Whilst I sympathise with the above groups regarding the retirement age issue, I think they need to join the real world where pension provision is concerned.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 09:45 AM

And I agree on the contract issue - if someone has paid into a scheme for many years based on a specific contract and scheme-type, they should benefit from the scheme they contracted in to. But there needs to be a new set-up for more recent scheme-members and new joiners, which more accurately mirrors the kind of scheme that the majority of private-sector workers are now stuck with.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 09:45 AM

I note that Lloyds are shedding 15,000 jobs as of today. That'll make it a lot easier for unions to explain to striking public sector bods that banking is not being affected by the recession and belt tighteninzzzzzzzzz

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 09:47 AM

"and that they need to move to a defined benefits structure"

defined CONTRIBUTIONS structure!! Duh!!

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: theleveller
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 11:06 AM

At the weekend my eldest son, who's a police officer, was telling me in no uncertain terms just how fed up and disillusioned many police officers are with what's happening to them. When he joined, he was expecting to work for 30 years, pay an 11% pension contribution and then retire with a modest but realistic pension. This is based on the dangerous, stressful and physical nature of the job and the antisocial shift pattern throughout his working life. Also on the rather disturbing fact that, on average, the life expectancy of a police officer after retirement is just 5 years. OK, no bleeding hearts – he assessed the advantages and disadvantages, and the remuneration and took the job.

Now the government is moving the goal posts (effectively changing his contract of employment with no process of redress). Now he's being told that he will have to work 35 or even 40 years and contribute in excess of 15% to his pension fund plus shift patterns are being changed and he'll now have to cover a much greater area with the Armed Response Unit.

He and his colleagues are also mightily pissed off that they will be expected to police demonstrations when they are in full agreement with the protesters. In fact, although the police aren't permitted to go on strike themselves, they are actually considering doing so.

His reaction? He's seriously thinking of emigrating to Canada where British police officers are much in demand and treated with respect. Others of his colleagues are simply leaving the force. Sick leave is increasing exponentially.

So, Bozo, when your smug little selfish world falls apart because you are mugged, burgled or held at gunpoint and no-one responds to your 999 call – just bear in mind that it is the fault of your government.

I doubt if you'll be laughing then.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 11:23 AM

Actually we have an excellent Safer Neighbourhood Team so I worry not the slightest. However, some dog handlers it seems leave a lot to be desired.

Firing on all guns are we Leveller - couldn't keep away!!

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: theleveller
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 11:32 AM

"Firing on all guns are we Leveller "

Rather an unfortunate turn of phrase given my post, Bozo. But then, a grasp of the argument and erudite expression were never your strong points. Obviously the hard work of your teachers made no dent on your unassailable ignorance!:0

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: theleveller
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 11:46 AM

Oh, and Bozo, you have my sympathy - I can see why you need personal protection, living a crappy place like Croydon. Personally, I wouldn't set foot there without full body armour and motorcycle outriders!

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: MikeL2
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 11:49 AM

Hi

Not being a teacher I do not know whether they get strike pay from their Unions or not.

What I do know is that in the Company I last worked for ( some years ago ) this situation occurred.

After much discussion and argument it was decided that any employees who went on strike would not be paid by the Company.

In fact what happened was that the cost of stopping the pay was much higher than paying them. So they got paid.....and to my knowledge still do if the same situation arises again..

Cheers

MikeL2

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 12:07 PM

Keith A:
Teachers who choose to strike will have 1/365 of their salary deducted.
There is not to be union strike pay.
Teachers in their final years who stike will have a slightly reduced pension because it is calculated on the final years of salary.
That hardly seems fair. They could strike for 200 (approx) days a year and be docked 200/365 of their salary and end up being paid almost half their salary for doing nowt.
Surely the money stopped should relate to the number of hours not worked, compared to the number of annual hours contracted for!

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST,kendall
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 12:34 PM

Yup, screw the working person, works every time.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 01:03 PM

Is bonzo planning to apologise for attempting to mislead people by falsely claiming that teachers are paid by their employers for any days they are on strike?

Of course not.
.........................

This is not a strike to get more money or better conditions, it is to defend existing pension rights which have been guaranteed by previously negotiated agreements, which were specifically underwritten by both the Conservatives and their LibDem allies before the last election.

When you are mugged it is reasonable to try to hold on to your possessions. That is effectively what the teachers are trying to do.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Darowyn
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 01:34 PM

As a Point of Information, Mr Threelegs, striking teachers will forfeit a day's pay today. Not only that, but they will also forfeit a whole years of entitlement to redundancy pay, since a day missed by strike action means that they will not have been in continuous employment for this academic year.
Can you begin to see that draconian regime to which this group of people who are entitled to professional status by virtue of their qualifications and responsibility for our future, are being subjected?
The thin end of the wedge passed by years ago- this is the thick end now. I'm supporting my children (teachers) and my grandchildren (at school) when I support the strike.
Dave
Retired Teacher, lucky enough to be too old to be in education now!

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Arthur_itus
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 01:39 PM

McGrath, I heard on the telly today, that Labour took 1 billion out of the pension coffers at some point.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 02:09 PM

So what? I suppose that arguably that might be of some marginal relevance if Labour were actually supportive of the strike, but they aren't.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 03:12 PM

Bonzo is firmly planted in the school of ' I'm alright Jack, screw you ' tory type politics.

Dave H

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 03:21 PM

"Bonzo is firmly planted in the school of ' I'm alright Jack, screw you ' tory type politics"

Really gets to you lefties!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Arthur_itus
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 03:35 PM

Yes, but WTF are they doing taking a billion out of the funds. No wonder there is a problem now.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 03:38 PM

Millions and millions of pounds have been wasted by labour on ofsted nonsence. I have former ofsted inspectors as clients who all agree that it has become little more than an excercise in labour induced political correctness - safeguarding humbug - that's where much of your pension money has gone.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 03:47 PM

I'll jump to the bottom here, after listening to news today about this unrest and various strikes. This thing with teachers, it is just another symptom of the bigger problem of not collecting enough revenues. The middle class are being asked to give up more and more while the rich GOP here in the US insist that the rich shouldn't pay as much because they create jobs. Well, they don't. They just hold onto that cash and watch everyone else scramble for diminishing funds for public services that the rich also use.

Look at the things subsidized in the U.S. - roads (those who can, drive), airports (those who can, fly), agriculture (agribusiness rakes most of this in for their investors), but things like railroads (rapid transit such as passenger trains, subways, light rail), health care, struggle for funding. Teachers struggle for funding. The rich send their kids to private schools, they drive, they fly, they can afford to pay for their health care out of their pockets. Scroll down to the bottom of this article for a Bureau of Labor Statistics and Tax Policy Center graph . It correlates the years of higher tax rates on the rich with the actual amount of job creation during those years in the last 60 years.

Instead of all of this bickering over the diminishing funding, it's time to raise taxes on the rich and stop pouring money into the coffers of rich corporations. That's what teachers need to start teaching their students, so they grow up to be responsible and thoughtful voters.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 05:22 PM

Is bonzo planning to apologise for attempting to mislead people by falsely claiming that teachers are paid by their employers for any days they are on strike? Of course not.

I was right, wasn't I?

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 05:33 PM

As for Ofsted - that was set up under John Major, who, as I recall, was some kind of Conservative Prime Minister. Reorganised in 2005 to cut down the long advance warning of inspections, which was seen as screwing-up schools, by encouraging them to fiddle their timetables and so-forth to get a better inspection result.

It's still a pretty crappy way of running an inspection system. One thing unites all parties - they think they know something about teaching, and they don't.

Those who can't teach inspect. Those who can't inspect tell inspectors what to do.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Penny S.
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 06:45 PM

Someone mentioned life expectancy. I well remember at a union do someone referring to research on retirement ages of male teachers. If they retired at 65, they could, on average, look forward to living two years before they died. If they retired at 60, they would live well past 67.

So, raising the retirement age above 65 should ensure that barely any pension would need to be paid, and perhaps some will actually die in harness, thus reducing the widows' pensions, since there will not be full service.

The Treasury undoubtedly has actuarial advice. So the government is not just playing fast and loose with contracts, it may be seeking to encompass the early death of public servants. I include the police, firefighters, and health workers in that, too.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 01 Jul 11 - 03:08 AM

http://falseeconomy.org.uk/blog/this-is-not-a-pension-reform-it-is-simply-a-pay-cut

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST,Tunesmith
Date: 01 Jul 11 - 03:17 AM

The Tories really are b******! Their divide and conquer approach to the private/public pension issue is despicable! But, of course, to be expected from that lot.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: theleveller
Date: 01 Jul 11 - 03:30 AM

Bozo rightly highlights the fact that the education system isn't perfect and never has been. There will always be those who fall through the net and finish their education as ignorant as when they started. Bozo demonstrates this failure every time he tries to string a coherent sentence together.

Don't despair, Bozo, remedial help is available (but be quick before the government axes that as well).

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: paula t
Date: 01 Jul 11 - 06:28 AM

The argument that our pension scheme is unaffordable is a non-starter. The National Audit Office reported recently that because of the changes we made a few years ago, our scheme is sustainable.

The government has always taken money out of our scheme, because it was started purely for that purpose.It was started and originally compulsory because the government needed more cash.

The government has decided it wants to save a certain amount of money and their changes have nothing whatsoever to do with making up a shortfall.There isn't one for our scheme.We have already put into place a safeguard against this.

If we don't do something now, then we will be finding it very hard to recruit young people into the teaching profession very soon.Many schools are already having to appoint executive headteachers to cover more than one school, because fewer and fewer people want the stress of doing that job. To attack the pension scheme will merely worsen the situation.

I would like the media to do a little more research before merely churning out the same old rubbish about, "Poor and lazy teachers,falling standards and generous pension schemes." I would like to see Mr.Gove shadow a teacher for a few months (although a week would probably be enough) to see what we actually do.Perhaps then he might be working from the point of a taste of reality before launching his ridiculous ideas and talking pure nonsense!

Sorry to sound so bitter and twisted - but many of us have had enough!

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: kendall
Date: 01 Jul 11 - 08:00 AM

Let them eat cake.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST,livelylass
Date: 01 Jul 11 - 08:14 AM

Bonzo will appreciate this story..
Striking teachers crush innocent schoolgirl to death with a tree!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2010193/Teachers-strike-Sophie-Howard-13-killed-falling-branch-school-closed.html

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 01 Jul 11 - 08:32 AM

No, Bozo will like it. TO "appreciate" something is to evaluate it for its true worth.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 01 Jul 11 - 09:03 AM

Despite the pressures from Govt most Head teachers are being subjected to,
I'm begining to suspect my wife's Head is actually a tory
and relishing her new sense of unrestrained post national election power ???

It would certainly account for any personal ethos and agenda
informing her recent inept unsympathetic and duplicitious negative management methods
to attempt to motivate her staff.

Whatever results she imagines she will achieve for the school
is at the real cost of establishing a workplace environment
of anxiety and paranoia;
permanently undermining the confidence and self esteem of her teachers
and lowering staff moral to an all time low...

I can see the pernicious effect of this unnecessary extra stress
mounting up in my wife's increasing emotional fragility
and slowly deteriorating health
[sleepless nights, loss of appetite at mealtimes, comfort eating cakes & chocolate..]

It must obviously be affecting & destabilising her performance at work.

At what point would I need to risk everything
by making a formal complaint about this Head on my wife's behalf...
and what good would it do anyway with all the odds stacked
against her...???

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 01 Jul 11 - 09:45 AM

Dum de dum de dum de dum..................

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: jacqui.c
Date: 01 Jul 11 - 09:47 AM

If you can read this thank a teacher.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST,kendall
Date: 01 Jul 11 - 09:47 AM

If you can read this, thank a teacher.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST,Cats
Date: 01 Jul 11 - 09:56 AM

Teachers do not get paid if they are on strike. If they are in financial hardship caused being an continual strike they can apply for benevolence but it is never assured
the point about teachers pensions is that they are expected to pay another £100 per month towards their pensions work longer and get less pension at the end of it. The teachers pensions would be self financing if it had been invested but it is a notional fund. For every £ I that taxpayer put in to public service pensions as a top up, we put £2.50 in to the private sector top up .Remember, teachers are also tax payers. teachers pensions are not 'gold plated'. when I retire after 40 years my pension will be just under £10, 000 per year. Don't get taken in by the governments spin. they have just awarded themselves a minimum pension of about £28,000 after just one term in office.
It also needs reinforcing that not all teaching unions were on strike yesterday. My union has a mandate from our members to negotiate with the Government until we have totally exhausted that avenue before we ballot for industrial action up to and including strike action which was a motion passed at our 2010 and 2011 National Conferences. But, if we have to, we will . mean while we will do nothing to under mine the legitimate industrial action of another TUC affiliated trade union.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 01 Jul 11 - 11:02 AM

"If you can read this thank a teacher."

I can read that, for which I thank my mother. She taught me to read before I entered kindergarten. Likewise, I taught my son to read early.

Bumper sticker slogans are really silly.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: pdq
Date: 01 Jul 11 - 11:17 AM

"If you can read this thank a teacher."

What bunk.

My sister could read a newspaper at age 3.

The families I know that home-schooled their children had scholastic aptitude test scores that humiliated the average public school kids.

That is not a knock on teachers. They work hard and often teach in dangerous school conditions with kids who are forced to be there and don't even try to learn.

Our educational system forces and perpetuates mediocrity and makes us pay top dollar for that service.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 01 Jul 11 - 03:32 PM

"Our educational system forces and perpetuates mediocrity and makes us pay top dollar for that service"

And who do we have to thank for that?? Yes you've got it...the labour government.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 01 Jul 11 - 03:38 PM

And who do we have to thank for that?? Yes you've got it...the labour government.

For education in the US, boko?

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 01 Jul 11 - 03:53 PM

Where, I wonder, were the unions when Gordon Brown was ripping off five billion from our pension funds, or do they only object to us being robbed by Tories or LibDems?

On the subject of strike pay, I am certain that no striking teacher will receive salary for that period on strike (however long), and anybody who believes otherwise is misinformed.

Strike pay from their unions, however, is part of what they pay dues for, and is nobody else's business. Nor should it be!

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 Jul 11 - 04:03 PM

On the subject of strike pay, I am certain that no striking teacher will receive salary for that period on strike (however long), and anybody who believes otherwise is misinformed.

So bonzo, were you misinformed, or merely attempting to misinform?

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Cats
Date: 01 Jul 11 - 06:31 PM

Some unions have a political fund which they use to fund industrial action of whatever kind. It ids very rare for any union to pay workers to gom on strike. as I said before in the previous post, if you are put at hardship after being out on strike for a continual period then you can apply fpr benevolence which is not assured but not for m ad hoc 'pay' from the union. It just doesn't happen. Believe me, I know. Today I have been in an all day meeting at my unions hq first sitting on the Education Committee then on the National Executive. My union is still talking to the government but we are in for a long haul.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 01 Jul 11 - 07:32 PM

""And I agree on the contract issue - if someone has paid into a scheme for many years based on a specific contract and scheme-type, they should benefit from the scheme they contracted in to. But there needs to be a new set-up for more recent scheme-members and new joiners, which more accurately mirrors the kind of scheme that the majority of private-sector workers are now stuck with.""

As far as I know BW the existing pension pots are being ring fenced and guaranteed pensions will be honoured.

All changes should, I agree, be applied to new joiners only, but the trouble is that there is already a shortfall of about nine billion, rising by almost four billion a year if changes are not made.

I remember, in 1971, overhearing a conversation between two elderly ladies about decimalisation of money.

"It's all very well dear" said one "But I do think they might have waited till all us old 'uns have died before doing it".

If only real life worked that way...........

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 01 Jul 11 - 09:39 PM

See Paula T's post above:

"The National Audit Office reported recently that because of the changes we made a few years ago, our scheme is sustainable."

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 02 Jul 11 - 01:53 AM

"As far as I know BW the existing pension pots are being ring fenced and guaranteed pensions will be honoured."

I thought I'd heard/read that, Don, but I wasn't sure - my memory is starting to play tricks on me in my advancing years. If so, that's good and I'm glad for them.

"All changes should, I agree, be applied to new joiners only, but the trouble is that there is already a shortfall of about nine billion, rising by almost four billion a year if changes are not made."

That's precisely the reason for my comment in my earlier post that "they do need to understand that the day of the defined benefit pension scheme is over, and that they need to move to a defined benefits structure which is, simply put, much more affordable",/i> and "Whilst I sympathise with the above groups regarding the retirement age issue, I think they need to join the real world where pension provision is concerned".

Despite someone in a later post claiming that these pensions are more-than-adquately funded, the fact is that they clearly are not and, in an age of increasing longevity, they need to be modernised in order to ensure their sustainability for future generations.

Public Sector workers should remember also that they have traditionally been in a very privileged position of having employer-supported-and co-funded pension schemes - many in the Private Sector didn't until the introduction of Stakeholder Pension Schemes five years or so ago.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST,999
Date: 02 Jul 11 - 09:18 AM

One of the problems with many teacher pension plans is that the plans were originally intended to be financed by a 50/50 split wherein teachers contributed x dollars and that money would be matched by government. HOWEVER, governments were NOT matching, choosing rather to put 'their' money in when people retired. Any interest from investments was lower because the government's part of the money was missing. Of course, come payout time the government then has to scramble for cash, and when LOTS of teachers retire near the same time, guess what? Yeah. The gov't needs money. What better place to get the money than from the damned people who caused the problem--the TEACHERS. At least governments would like you to believe that.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 02 Jul 11 - 10:28 AM

And what about the millions of treasury money squandered by the labour governments on totally unnecessary CRB checks!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 02 Jul 11 - 10:55 AM

yeah.. New Labour definitely lost direction and sold out its soul & ethos
when Blair's cabal determined they should follow the advice and theories
of ultra conservative accountants and insurance industry consultants...

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Cats
Date: 02 Jul 11 - 11:06 AM

'Public Sector workers should remember also that they have traditionally been in a very privileged position of having employer-supported-and co-funded pension schemes - many in the Private Sector didn't until the introduction of Stakeholder Pension Schemes five years or so ago'. I would hardly claim that I am privileged. Pensions contributions are no more than deferred salary. Public sector are now having to prop up the stakeholder pension schemes at the rate of £1 per public sector and £2.50 per private sector, which means the tax payers are paying MORE to prop up Private pensions than public pensions. Our pensions are NOT gold plated, final salary does not mean we get the same as we did when we were working which is something else I heard a memebr of the public say this week. as I said before, the Hutton enquiry said our pensions are self funding and had successive goevernments of all colours either ringfenced or invested them there would not be this problem. What they did do was when the private pensions haemorraged a few years ago because employers and government were not manging them they took the money to prop them up and bail them out from the public sector pernsions and never put it back which is why we are in this mess now. And if we are all in this together WHY has the government just awarded itself a masive hike in their ringfenced pensions to £28,000 per year after only one term in office, increasing after each term. If that is being all in this toggether I am happy to take it. That's nearly 3 times my pension.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Jul 11 - 11:14 AM

I've never understood why "pension holidays" by employers are not classed as fraud and theft.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST,strad
Date: 02 Jul 11 - 04:19 PM

I honestly don't see the advantage of going on strike. But I do see great advantages in "Working to Rule" You get paid but don't do a lot because eg there's no qualified first aider on site, or the fire extinguishers are due a check...etc,etc.

Imagine the effect on (especially) the UK if truck drivers stuck rigidly to the speed limits. Chaos would ensue!

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jul 11 - 05:08 PM

As a member of the National Union of Teachers, I can assure everyone that no striking teacher was paid any money by the Union for walking out on Thursday.

The teaching unions negotiated, reluctantly, a worsening of their pension provisions in 2007, in which they accepted, among other things, that they would have to wait until 65 before drawing their full pensions (instead of 60). Now, the coalition is proposing to impose an increase to 68, to make teachers contribute 50% more than they do now into their pensions, and for them to receive far less when they retire by dint of their pensions being tied to the consumer prices index instead of the far more realistic retail prices index, as now. None of this is on the negotiating table, in spite of what the ConDems, Miliband and the Daily F*cking Mail are insinuating. And all this guff about how unfair it is that the public sector should have better pensions (the average is £4000) than the private sector. The truth is that the private sector, when times were good, took pensions holidays instead of paying into the funds, and the beneficiaries of that were the shareholders with their inflated dividends, not the workers. Then when times got hard the good pension schemes all collapsed, courtesy of the gross mismanagement that was the routine order of the day. What should really be happening now is the private sector workers should be out out there on the streets, demanding that their pension schemes be reinstated to equal status with the public sector.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Jul 11 - 05:19 PM

I'm in favour of working to rule generally. If that causes a problem, the rules need changing.

If you wait until the "negotiations" are over, and the terms that management have intended all along are imposed on you, before showing a bit of muscle, you're a damn fool. That's the point of a one-day strike and demonstration like this.

Our local swimming pool was crammed with kids on Thursday, and they were playing all over the place. They were having a great time, and I am sure their appreciation of the value of unions has greatly increased as a consequence of this.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 02 Jul 11 - 05:44 PM

A new client of ours is a maths consultant from Serbia - plenty more where he came from I'd wager!!

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 02 Jul 11 - 07:34 PM

So fucking what Bozo?

McGrath.   Lord Denning had a view about that.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: kendall
Date: 02 Jul 11 - 07:50 PM

pdq could your sister read and understand the constitution at three?

John, I learned a lot from my Mother too, in her role as a teacher.

Some people's attention span doesn't reach beyond a bumper sticker.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST,999
Date: 03 Jul 11 - 12:54 PM

When the only tool ya have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 03 Jul 11 - 02:31 PM

"So fucking what Bozo?"

Does that get under his British National Partship's skin??? He can speak English properly as well!!

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 03 Jul 11 - 03:45 PM

how many teacher do you have to strike before you get paid?

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 08:04 AM

But public sector pensions are paid out of taxation are they not?

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Penny S.
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 09:11 AM

If you call all the contributions deducted from the public sector workers payslips in addition to income tax taxation. Which I suppose you could, since it all stays in the treasury money box with the rest.

Two points to help unravel those sentences.

1. Public sector workers pay tax.
2. Public sector workers pay contributions to their pensions.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 10:18 AM

"1. Public sector workers pay tax.
2. Public sector workers pay contributions to their pensions"

OK:-

1) Private sector workers pay tax.
2) Private sector workers pay contributions to their pensions.
3) Private sector workers also pay contributions, through taxation, to public sector workers' pensions.
4) Public sector workers do not contribute, through taxation or by any other means, to private sector workers' pensions.

What's your point, Penny?

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Mayet
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 10:49 AM

After private-sector recklessness, greed and incompetence plunged us into financial crisis and recession, Tory politicians and right-wing newspapers have attempted, with some success, to deflect popular anger on to public-sector workers such as teachers and civil servants although those other public sector workers involved, such as fire fighters, armed forces and doctors are seldom identified in these attacks on 'gold plated' pensions
I guess teachers are just an easy target for the Bonzos and other loonies of this world.

Recruitment publicity stresses that "The Army's pension scheme is one of the best there is and you won't have any of your salary deducted to pay into it, making you better off in the long run. The pension you get will be based on your final salary and how long you've served for. You could be entitled to payments and a tax-free lump sum after 18 years' Regular service."
The armed forces pension scheme costs the government more than £3bn annually.

At 11% of salary, firefighters, along with the police, already pay some of highest contribution rates of any scheme in the public sector. The Government's proposed changes to the Firefighters Pensions Scheme (FPS) aim to save £73 million by 2014 is based on assuming only 1% would opt out of the FPS, by far the largest pension scheme for fire crews although a YouGov survey of nearly 8,000 firefighters found that as many as 27% would consider opting out of the pension scheme.
If such was the case it is estimated that the changes would cost the Government £283.5 million in lost contributions by 2014 (£94.5 million a year) and additionally undermine the viability of the pension scheme as the scheme is unfounded and relies heavily on the contributions coming in to pay the pensions going out, meaning the impact of the loss of contributions would be immediate.

[Hutton recognised that setting too high a level could prompt some lower-paid workers to quit pension schemes altogether resulting in even greater costs in the long term.]

Hutton is also quoted as saying
"….it it is wrong to say that public service pensions are gold-plated. …..these pensions provide a modest - not an excessive - level of retirement income……
I also reject the argument that the downward drift of pensions in the private sector is justification that pensions in the public sector must follow the same course. I have rejected a race for the bottom."

An independent financial on line guide points out
"Many critics say the problem with public sector pensions is that they are unfunded by investment returns and are paid direct by taxpayers. However, switching from unfunded to funded status could cost £20 billion a year as employer contributions would be invested in the stock market, requiring the government to find fresh money for existing pensioners."

Pension obligations, of course, are the biggest barrier to more privatising and outsourcing of public-sector services.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 11:32 AM

So, what's YOUR point, Backwoodsman?

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 11:48 AM

4) Public sector workers do not contribute, through taxation or by any other means, to private sector workers' pensions.

What utter bollocks. Everyone who ever spends money contributes to private sector pensions (not to speak of shareholder dividends, big bonuses and overseas jollies, business-class travel of course) when they pay for goods and services. Right, we don't call it "tax," but the obstinate fact is that it is still money paid out by you, me and everybody else. Just like tax. Maybe you just didn't notice it because it isn't itemised on your pay-slip. Sheesh.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 11:50 AM

His point is quite clear and elaborates on mine - put up or shut up!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 11:59 AM

The thing that is quite clear about his point, bonzo, is that it is completely deluded.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 12:14 PM

Some otherwise intelligent folks are getting too caught up in the trap of 'divide and rule' tribalist political manipulation..

"Private v Public" Sector ???

Just remind yourselves what the 'Public' sector is actually established for,
and for just 'who' these mostly hard pressed under esteemed Public workers
are employed to provide life long benefit and value ...

Aside from the higher echelons of the most independently wealthy;
all of us at some points in our lives
will gain substantial value for our tax money
as the Public Sector variously meets our individual personal needs..

Of course the Public Sector is far from perfect:
seriously flawed and destabilised by constant contrary
contradictory Govt interference;
and unjustly maligned by extreme crackpot tory theoreticians
and unenlightened "Daily Mail" reading 'I'm alright Jack, f@ck you' yahoos...

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Teribus
Date: 05 Jul 11 - 10:47 AM

"If you can read this thank a teacher."

Not unless the teacher is in inverted commas - By the time I arrived at Primary School aged four my mother had taught me to both read and write.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST,999
Date: 05 Jul 11 - 11:12 AM

Teribus, it's too bad more kids didn't have your mom.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Penny S.
Date: 05 Jul 11 - 12:25 PM

My point was that the argument before was structured, as is a lot of the reporting in the press, to imply that the pensions of public servants are ONLY paid for from taxation, and that said public servants do not themselves pay tax. It may not state that openly, but that is the impression that people are being given, when "taxpayers" are written about as opposed to "public sector workers".

As for private sector workers not receiving money from taxes paid for by public servants, I understand that people with inadequate pensions receive extra benefits from the public purse to which all have contributed. And where are those inadequate pensions found?

I have used the word servants this time rather than "sector workers", because that is what used to be used, reminding everyone that the jobs done by these people were a service to the community. To all the community, regardless of who employs them.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Cats
Date: 05 Jul 11 - 01:04 PM

'Public sector workers do not contribute, through taxation or by any other means, to private sector workers' pensions.' WRONG. Taxpayers pay £2.50 towards Private sector pensions as opposed to £1 towards Public sector pensions. I have said this 3 times now. Is anybody actually listening?

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 05 Jul 11 - 01:17 PM

That's good because I draw my private pension very soon.......the tax free lump sum is on the way!!!!!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: The Sandman
Date: 05 Jul 11 - 02:08 PM

Bonzo, have you cooked your own dinner yet.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Jul 11 - 02:24 PM

By the time I arrived at Primary School aged four my mother had taught me to both read and write.

Good enuf, Teezer, but did you still wet the bed and sleep with the light on?

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 02:44 AM

"I see absolutely no reason why any striking teacher should be paid."
Fine - if those who milked the country dry and brought about the present situation lose their massive bonuses - backdated, and the politicians who backed them were prohibited from holding office, and all politicians who dishonestly claimed expenses faced legal proceedings..... ain't gonna happen though.
It seems that there are those among us who are happy that those who played no part in the mess we are in should pay for it to be cleared up and be prepared to bend over and be shafted - again - isn't it always the way?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 05:38 AM

If anyone is still deluded enough to think that we don't, by buying goods and services, all contribute to private sector pension pots, it's also worth remembering that contributions into pensions are exempt from tax. That means money that would otherwise have been taxed not being taxed (that's what "exempt" means). That's a hell of a good deal. If I invest in an ISA or some other "tax-free" savings scheme, the money I invest has been taxed before I invest it, unlike pensions contributions which are removed from consideration before tax is calculated on the residual income. That means that, if the government wants to maintain its income, it has to charge higher rates of tax on everyone to make up the shortfall. When it comes to paying for people's pensions, whatever sector they work in, we truly are all in it together. Incidentally, if anyone can provide an instance of a striking teacher being paid whilst on strike, please let's have it. Never in the history of mankind...

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 05:52 AM

What is clear from this thread is that Bozo, as well as being a reactionary and selfish lunatic, is entirely happy to mislead and even lie in the pursuit of his neocon agenda. Now there's a surprise.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 06:17 AM

"When it comes to paying for people's pensions, whatever sector they work in, we truly are all in it together."

Absolutely, Steve, couldn't agree more.

Now, please explain why you believe that public sector workers should continue to have a pension regime of a type which has been taken away, in my case long ago, from the majority of private sector workers - namely the (rather inaptly named, but we all know what it means) 'Final Salary' scheme. The vast majority of private sector workers who had a 'Final Salary' scheme (more aptly termed 'Defined Benefits' scheme) found it withdrawn and replaced with a 'Defined Contributions' scheme, because the latter is more affordable (and the downside, of course, is its unpredictability in terms of the benefits provided on retirement).

If "we truly are all in it together", why do you support a structure in which one group is entitled to something that the rest are not?

I'm not suggesting that long-term members of the existing public sector scheme(s) should lose benefits - I said earlier that they should get what they've contracted and paid in for - but, going forward, there needs to be a harmonisation between public and private sector provision. After all, "we truly are all in it together", aren't we?

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Penny S.
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 07:19 AM

So where business decides to provide a lesser good, those who have, hitherto, expected to be provided with a better good should have that better not applied to them.

When I studied history, there was a narrative of things being improved, usually by imposing regulations on business to better their practices. Had we then accepted business practice as the arbiter of what is done, we would still have child workers in unsafe mines. (No unions, no closures.) Why can't we look at private pensions and improve them? Where jobs are plentiful, pensions would be part of the enticement for employees, and people could vote with their feet as to where they worked. I gather this works at the top.

The cleaners should have as good a package as the boss, should they not? In proportion.

Private is bad, yes. The unfairness is not with the comparison with the public. It is in the comparison between the bottom and the top, and that applies within both public and private sectors. What about MP's packages?

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 07:39 AM

No, the point is that Defined Benefits schemes are largely unsustainable - they cost too much. What's so difficult to understand about that simple fact?

If you want to continue with the same scheme regime, be prepared to pay more.

Simples.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Penny S.
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 07:48 AM

That argument is reasonable. The ones which simply state it isn't fair for one group of people to have something others don't isn't. Unless the ones who have are the ones at the top with enormous bonuses while their footsoldiers are on very little or nothing.

Wasn't the report on public pensions saying that they were sustainable?

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Penny S.
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 07:49 AM

Argh. Grammar error. The one isn't. The ones aren't.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 08:22 AM

To be honest, they've been ripping off the public secctor pension funds for years - the wilson and heath governments did it. We had some foreign teachers over from Germany and they couldn't understand why the unions were letting them get away with it back then. i think some things just get seen as an easy option to raise more government money.

I can't really understand how things have got like this and why governments are allowed to welsh on contracts entered into, in a way that private insurance companies or private individuals wouldn't be allowed to. But i do know its been going on a long time. its nothing new.

I suspect nothing much can be done about it. i wish i could decide that I didn't have to pay the bills that I had contracted to pay, because I was a bit short.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 08:40 AM

Al, I'm not saying that anyone should welch on anything - read my posts FFS! I'm saying that current members of schemes should get what they contracted for when they joined - that's fair and reasonable. However, going forward the structure needs to change to a more sustainable format for new members.

Penny, it's not about fairness especially - it's about reality and peoples' grasp on it. The reality that I had to face when it was realised that my F/S pension scheme was unsustainable without a considerable increase in contributions from both employees and employer is the self-same reality that public sector workers need to face.

But I guess we'll not agree and, as I'm not about to get embroiled in the kind of trench-warfare that goes on on this forum, I've said what I believe and that's it - I'm off.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 09:38 AM

...please explain why ... public sector workers should continue to have a pension regime of a type which has been taken away from the majority of private sector workers...

Woodsman, you're looking in the wrong end of the telescope.

If you and other private sector workers have been fu$ked over by management, suggest you organize and take it up with mamagement, rather than insisting that public workers be as badly screwed as you have been.

Management could probably survive with 3 million dollar a year salaries instead of four million and an extra couple of million in bonuses.

*

Bent out of shape from society's pliers
Cares not to come up any higher
But rather get you down in the hole
That he's in.

            -- Bob Dylan

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 09:48 AM

Now, please explain why you believe that public sector workers should continue to have a pension regime of a type which has been taken away, in my case long ago, from the majority of private sector workers - namely the (rather inaptly named, but we all know what it means) 'Final Salary' scheme. The vast majority of private sector workers who had a 'Final Salary' scheme (more aptly termed 'Defined Benefits' scheme) found it withdrawn and replaced with a 'Defined Contributions' scheme, because the latter is more affordable (and the downside, of course, is its unpredictability in terms of the benefits provided on retirement).

If "we truly are all in it together", why do you support a structure in which one group is entitled to something that the rest are not?

Final salary schemes in the private sector were withdrawn because of gross mismanagement. When times were good and profits were huge, companies took pension holidays in order to inflate profits even more. And guess where those extra goodies went. Not to future pensioners, that's for sure, but to shareholders in dividends and to top executives in bonuses. So when times get hard and investment returns go down, big holes appear in the pension funds. Duh. So what you want now is for the public sector to join the race to the bottom, all because capitalism screwed it up once again. Well we've already baled out capitalism once, thank you. Leave our bloody pensions alone!

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 09:54 AM

I'm not sure 'should' comes into it. Theres no moral imperatives here. No entrenched positions.

The government has had a change of heart over the years. I was paying a third of my wages and half my wifes in deductions throughout the 60's and seventies. Than came the Thatch, with her promises that we would have more of our own money to do as we wished with. free collective bargaining - that was her number one hit from 1978.

We gave the government a mandate after the war, in the cradle to grave deal. They took as much as they wanted and fiddled the books to the satisfaction of whoever needed to be satisfied. Wilson's critics called it 'galloping pragmatism' - I guess finally they couldn't gallop fast enough.

No moral imperatives, but my god! what a mess! theres only Jeremy Paxman who thinks we've been ruled by the wisest (naturally Oxbridge educated) brains in the country.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 10:20 AM

"So what you want now is for the public sector to join the race to the bottom, all because capitalism screwed it up once again. Well we've already baled out capitalism once, thank you. Leave our bloody pensions alone!"

Just as I suspected, Steve, your true colours now on public display. What happened to "We're all in it together, aren't we"? You're all high-and-mighty-principles and "we're all in it together" when you seek to benefit, but when it comes down to it, and you're OK, it's "Fuck you Jack, I'm alright".

You should hand in your Union card.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Penny S.
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 12:12 PM

BWM, it wasn't you so much, I do see your argument was carefully structured. But I have heard people using the "It's not fair" one, and seen it on the press front pages.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 01:11 PM

Just as I suspected, Steve, your true colours now on public display. What happened to "We're all in it together, aren't we"? You're all high-and-mighty-principles and "we're all in it together" when you seek to benefit, but when it comes down to it, and you're OK, it's "Fuck you Jack, I'm alright".
What a load of old bollocks. This country has just baled out the miserable failure which is capitalism. The only people "not all in this together" appear to be bankers and their fellow-travellers who are carrying on just as they were before. The teaching and other public sector unions acted extremely responsibly, and in the best interests of the country, in 2007 when they accepted that full pensions would have to be deferred for five years beyond the then retirement age. Not one voice has been raised to say that that was not a good, long-term, sustainable deal. Not one. Yet this benighted lot have torn up that deal. A teacher presently in his or her mid-30s will have to work till 68. Anybody who has ever been in a modern classroom knows that that is a recipe for disaster. Already, without negotiation, the measure on which pension increases are calculated has been downgraded from the RPI to the CPI. Cheating bastards. On top of that, teachers will have to contribute 9.6% of salary into the scheme, up from 6.4%, no negotiation on that little gem either. And, on top of that, teachers have had a two-year pay freeze imposed, at a time when inflation is running at 5%. Work that lot out. In one year an effective pay cut of 8%-plus and the same the following year, worse if inflation keeps rising. No overtime, no perks, no bonuses in teaching! The teachers' scheme as it now stands is sustainable. The government has refused to audit the scheme, something that is now two years overdue, and they won't do it because they know the outcome will be embarrassing. If you think that someone who is blameless in the present mess in that position is "all right Jack" then you've got another think coming. Choose your target with a bit more thought. Leave our bloody pensions alone. They are affordable, sustainable and not that good.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 02:44 PM

Not impressed, I've had no pay rise for 4 years.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 03:07 PM

I didn't want you to be "impressed," I wanted to apprise the aptly-named correspondent above you that the teachers have behaved responsibly apropos of their pension scheme whereas the present bunch of clowns running the country have not. And I have no idea why you've been deprived of a pay rise for so long. My mind is positively racing.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 04:33 PM

"I've had no pay rise for 4 years."
Then point the finger at those responsible for the mess we're in instead of kicking those in the same boat as yourself.
That's why the bastards remain unaffected by the consequences of their own greed and incompetence.
They really love people like you doing their dirty work for them.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 04:41 PM

Bozo doesn't kick those like him. He kicks the smallest and weakest and least able to defend themselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST,999
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 04:54 PM

"Not impressed, I've had no pay rise for 4 years."

Ever think maybe you should belong to a union?

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Dave MacKenzie
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 05:14 PM

One of my favourite words is

kak·is·toc·ra·cy n. pl. kak·is·toc·ra·cies
Government by the least qualified or most unprincipled citizens.

[Greek kakistos, worst, superlative of kakos, bad; see caco- + -cracy.]

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 06:17 PM

"Pension holidays" means that money which should have been paid by companies towards pensions have been diverted into the pockets of shareholders.

What I can't understand is, how that can possibly be any more legal than doing the same process of diversion from money in the bank accounts of employees? Either way it is theft.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 06:33 PM

Yep. And can anyone explain to me why public sector workers, with properly negotiated, demonstrably sustainable pension schemes should be punished for that theft?

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 07 Jul 11 - 03:08 PM

You are but half a dozen whingers among thousands who do not aree with you!!

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST,999
Date: 07 Jul 11 - 03:16 PM

I was a right whinger in hockey as a youth. Hope you are having a lovely day.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 07 Jul 11 - 03:18 PM

yes, sadly a predictable byproduct of Thatcher's glorious campaign to dismantle society
was a festering new generation of thousands upon thousands of ignorant under-educated people
who simply cannot understand the complex true socioeconomic factors that cause their miserable living conditions..


but as for intelligent educated professional people
falling for tory propaganda..

who know's why they are so gullible ??????

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Greg F.
Date: 07 Jul 11 - 04:13 PM

Well, they gotta hate somebody. Might as well be firefighters, police, teachers, road maintenence workers - and all the rest of them damn good-for-nuthin' public employees.

Until they need their services, that is.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 08 Jul 11 - 02:59 AM

Quote from a Ewan McColl song,

They may be gallant heroes when they're saving peoples lives,
But they're just a bunch of layabouts when they're asking for a rise.

Dave H

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Jul 11 - 08:17 AM

Or as Kipling expressed more or less the same thought:

...For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Chuck him out, the brute!"
But it's "Saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.