Strikes to go ahead

ILW

What if due to variables, RPI starts falling behind CPI?

patrick_bs15

I think that would be our tough luck!

To be honest, I don't know how likely that would be...

LydiaJ

patrick_bs15 wrote: »

Some of us teachers DO understand that the era of final-salary pensions has gone forever and that we need to 'do our bit' to reduce the nation's debt.

So... if teachers have to pay a larger percentage towards their pension (in my case, approx. £75 a month more) and work longer, but the link to RPI was maintained, would that be a reasonable compromise? I think it would be. What do others think?

Sounds reasonable to me. I also think the TPS should remain open to teachers in all kinds of schools. It's good for education, for kids, and for the country's future if good teachers are able to move between jobs at different types of schools without worrying about how that will affect their pensions.

But the thing I'd like most at this stage is some proper information, followed by some genuine consultation.

chris73

I'm not going to get drawn into the debate about whether striking for the actual cause its a good or bad thing. But whether you support this action or not, one thing which does stand out to the majority of rational thinking public, is the fact that the party who are the most affected by this (and any further future) disruption will be the CHILDREN, and ironically they are also the party who are LEAST able to change, understand or influence the situation!. This is also followed by the parents, many of which have probably spent the last 24 hours running around organising last minute child care or taking the day off work, and again everyday people are not in a position to U-Turn these policies, even *IF* they actually support them.

I often read on here of Teachers stating that there is an ever growing void between Parents and the Teaching profession, and that many parents perhaps don't appreciate what they do and the hours they work. Okay, whether this point is valid or not, do you really think that this day of industrial action will endear more parents to your cause and grow the respect that you crave for your profession?. Or will the parents just see this for exactly what it is for them in real terms - i.e being an unpaid day off for them (Less money in their own pension fund) or the loss of a paid days holiday, which ultimately will be one less day of their own holiday allowance which was otherwise earmarked to spend as 'quality time' for the Family holiday in July / August.

Sure, we are all making sacrifices aren't we on 30th June?. The teachers, the children and the parents will all be affected in some way. But for those who made these decisions in the first place, and the only ones who can change it (The Government) it will be business as usual, most of them probably won't even notice whether even the local schools are open nor care and will have to pick up a paper to be even aware of it. Am I missing the point here? or should the targeted action be levied directly at those responsible and not 6 year old children and their hard working parents, who are of course the only ones directly affected.

Of course if the action does turn into long term and cause an adverse affect on the economy, it will just be more taxes to make up any shortfall, and we'll all be worse off......again.

never mind. a 1 day strike action isn't going to cripple childrens' education, but it may inconvenience parents who view school as childcare - that's the real grievance.

Sure, and the growing number of schools offering after school clubs and a variety of Easter and Summer Holiday 'Activity Schemes' (for the relevant daily fee naturally) are doing nothing to bolster and encourage this image are they??. You can't have it both ways surely??.

Plus, it won't end at one day will it?. Can you link to any report where a one day strike action has resulted in the party, taking the action getting exactly what they wanted?. If you really think that Friday will dawn all peachy with the matter settled, then I think you may have to brace yourself for disappointment.

Butterfly_Brain

Just remember that it is not just teachers, it is all public sector workers who are striking today.
And not all teachers are striking, the school where my husband works is open as normal because the staff are dedicated to the children. But saying that they are still very, very angry at the snotty posturing of Ca-moron and his scumbag cronies and as for that turncoat Milliband ........Labour had better start looking for a new leader or they will never win the next election

DervProf

If public sector workers aren't happy with the change to their pension arrangements, maybe they should join me in the private sector. My private pension hasn't exactly performed they way I was told it would when I started paying into it. My wages aren't paid by from everyone else's taxes, they come from people's pockets, and those pockets aren't very deep at the moment.

It may have escaped the attention of public sector workers, but "the good times" under New Labour were paid for with borrowed money. That borrowed money is costing the country a lot in interest payments.

I suppose public sector wages/pensions could be paid for by increasing taxes. I suspect that the loudest bleating about that would still come from public sector workers, despite them being the beneficiaries.

Really2

Butterfly_Brain wrote: »

and as for that turncoat Milliband ........Labour had better start looking for a new leader or they will never win the next election

Lets hope they keep him then.

StevieJ

Good to see people standing up for themselves, now all we need is a bit more life in the students of today. Strangely enough, the youth apathy was something mentioned by Tory Portillo on This Week. I remember the days of striking being known as the 'British disease' and we were all told if the strikers were put in their place the UK could ber great again well that didn't happen did it? they just shipped out all the jobs

vivatifosi

patrick_bs15 wrote: »

Some of us teachers DO understand that the era of final-salary pensions has gone forever and that we need to 'do our bit' to reduce the nation's debt.

So... if teachers have to pay a larger percentage towards their pension (in my case, approx. £75 a month more) and work longer, but the link to RPI was maintained, would that be a reasonable compromise? I think it would be. What do others think?

I don't think that with regard to the link to RPI people in the private sector realise that this could affect them too. If they are reading this and have ever paid into a defined benefit pension, whether final salary or career average, they can be affected. Even if their benefits are deferred and therefore seen as accrued, it could affect them. Even if they have letters saying they will get RPI going forward, it could affect them. There is a massive lack of knowledge around this. RPI has for years been the government measure of inflation. By changing to CPI the government is rewriting the definition of inflation. Many scheme docs did not call RPI that, even though that was what people got, they just referred to the government measure of inflation or words to that effect. So this change could affect everyone. The reason I'm so against it is I think that changing accrued benefits is a very dangerous precedent, no matter who it affects.

http://www.pitmans.com/news/cpi-pension-increases

Prudent

J_i_m wrote: »

It's also too easy to assume that teachers have more holiday time than most professions, yet I'm sure there's plenty of work for them to do during half terms and holidays, planning etc.

I am doing that just now. I have officially been on holiday all week (Scotland). I was in work all day Monday. I took most of Tuesay off other than ordering some material for my classroom. Shopped in store for classroom yesterday. I have just sat down at the computer with a huge box of files and will be sorting files and doing paperwork all day other than a walk and odd bits of house work.

A survey earlier in the year showed that teachers do the highest unpaid overtime of all workers, averaging 17 hours a week. In between shopping yesterday I went to a medical appointment. I have been very ill with a neurological condition this year and am being strongly advised to work to contract. That would give me a lovely long summer holiday to look forward to - just like the public assume we get The reality is I would be way behind at work because most of my colleagues are in work or working from home this week.