Rant!!!

paulineb_2

Say_who? wrote: »

Good grief people do make assumptions! In answer to some questions. I don't want to give any more information about my husband in case he is recognised (the head is vaguely psychotic).

We haven't had a talk yet because we were busy all day Sunday, he slept in one day, didn't get home until 9.45 another day and isn't home yet.

As for discussing him handling his work load, the phrase regarding grandmothers and eggs comes to mind. We have danced that particular dance for years now. I wasn't angry because he was catching up on work. I was angry because he spent the time at work doing something we were supposed to do together.

I think from your posts, its a lot more than just him being at work doing something you were meant to be doing together.

pinkshoes

fluffnutter wrote: »

Rubbish. That's a workaholic's excuse if ever I've heard one. If you're prioritising work, work, work above your family then perhaps you need to rethink your priorities. Work should be a part of your life, ideally an enjoyable part that seamlessly segues into the rest. There shouldn't be conflict. But there is, mainly because people put the boss before the family.

Why should someone endlessly support someone who is distant, disengaged, absent or simply bad-tempered because of the amount of time they spend at work?

How about there's nothing worse than being the one keeping the family together whilst the person who should be supporting you is never there?

Wanted to reply to this, but was too busy working...!

I guess none of the 44 people who "thanked" this post have kids at school, who expect the school/teachers to care about their children's education then?

As a teacher, it actually really annoys me to see so many teachers who do the bear minimum to do their job, and never go beyond the basics, let alone the extra mile. They care more about the pension and benefits than the kids.

To be a good teacher and actually give a damn about the kids at the same time, you HAVE to work long hours - there is no way around it. I could reduce my workload, but then that would put me in the category of not caring what the kids get each year, and whether they make progress.

My husband may not get much attention from me during term time, but I don't do 50/60 hour weeks in holidays (although I do about 20 hours!).

SOMEONE has to educate the young, and as much as I would like Michael Gove to reduce teaching hours without reducing pay (teaching pay isn't great given the workload!) so I can focus even more on each class, he isn't going to, so I just do my best.

So before grumbling about living with a teacher that works stupidly long hours, just ask yourself this: Would you rather your own kids had teachers would were just there for the pension doing the bare minimum, or would you rather they were taught by someone who actually cared whether they did well?