What are you public sector lot up to on Weds then?

[bridge too far]

Good article on the Beeb website

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15925017

 

When people harp on about the taxpayer 'funding' public sector schemes, they forget a couple of things.

 

1. I, as a taxpayer, also subsidise private sector schemes in that people in higher tax brackets contributing to such schemes get tax relief at a higher rate than Mr or Mrs Average (as they do in the public sector of course, but 'we' are still subsidising these pensionsnonetheless). I'd suggest that there are probably more higher rate taxpayers getting this relief in the private sector (I'm thinking top level, truly gold-plates schemes enjoyed by the likes of FTSE 100 directors).

 

2. I, as a consumer, am paying for those private schemes where a private sector employer chooses to contribute to its employees' pensions by buying their goods and services. Sadly these employers are now few and far between to the detriment of their employees.

[Saintandy666]

How about dropping them off at 8:00 half dressed and having had no breakfast, ( and, please note, this is parents who are unemployed so it's not as if they are trying to get to work ), and then sending an 'auntie' or even a taxi round just before 17:00 to collect them. This is everyday behaviour at my wife's school.

 

Damn right. Parents thinking schools are there to raise their children 100% is not as rare as you think. It's not the majority(no where near), but it's a small but significant minority.

[CB Saint]

Good article on the Beeb website

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15925017

 

When people harp on about the taxpayer 'funding' public sector schemes, they forget a couple of things.

 

1. I, as a taxpayer, also subsidise private sector schemes in that people in higher tax brackets contributing to such schemes get tax relief at a higher rate than Mr or Mrs Average (as they do in the public sector of course, but 'we' are still subsidising these pensionsnonetheless). I'd suggest that there are probably more higher rate taxpayers getting this relief in the private sector (I'm thinking top level, truly gold-plates schemes enjoyed by the likes of FTSE 100 directors).

 

2. I, as a consumer, am paying for those private schemes where a private sector employer chooses to contribute to its employees' pensions by buying their goods and services. Sadly these employers are now few and far between to the detriment of their employees.

 

So if I give up my higher rate tax relief - will you agree that all public sector final salary schemes should be scrapped.

 

I'm willing if you are

[bridge too far]

So if I give up my higher rate tax relief - will you agree that all public sector final salary schemes should be scrapped.

 

I'm willing if you are

 

You miss the point, of course. I was talking about the cost of your tax relief at the higher level and how much it costs me as a taxpayer. However, if you abandoned your higher rate tax relief, there would be more money in the pot to fund the public sector schemes (although, the truth is that most of them are actually in credit).

 

As to your second sentence - as a public sector worker I never paid the higher rate of tax. And certainly, on a meagre £4k a year NHS pension, I never will.

[Special K]

I thought the vast majority of private sector employees were earning minimum wage, taken advantage of by nasty bosses?

[doddisalegend]

If by "crèche" you mean "a place where working families leave their children while they go out to work" then I'm guilty as charged m'lud.

 

What else do you suggest we do with school age children during the working week?

 

Sigh

 

Home school .... or as I heard the other day an aquatince is going to world school were they plan to take their children around the world putting them in schools all over the world to get a broader education......................

[trousers]

Damn right. Parents thinking schools are there to raise their children 100% is not as rare as you think. It's not the majority(no where near), but it's a small but significant minority.

 

How small (roughly)? 1%? 2%? 5%? 10%?

[Saintandy666]

How small (roughly)? 1%? 2%? 5%? 10%?

 

I can't answer that, but it doesn't invalidate my point.

[View From The Top]

Just found out that despite all of my staff coming in tomorrow the premises will be closed and we are to work from home.

 

Bonus.

[Saintandy666]

Just found out that despite all of my staff coming in tomorrow the premises will be closed and we are to work from home.

 

Bonus.

 

Why?

[View From The Top]

Why?

 

Not a clue.

[View From The Top]

Why?

 

Not a clue.

[Saint]

I really don't sympathise with people who claim they will be severely inconvenienced by this strike due to having to look after their own children for a day OR, heaven forbid, organise for them to spend the day with family/friends or to go and play with their friends for the day.

 

Being a teacher myself it is amazing to hear the ignorant comments that people spew about the job I work hard at everyday. And yes, I mean everyday. The first thing people always say is,"Oh the holidays are good!" They would eat those words if they did the job themselves. I am sat in my classroom at half past seven every morning and I don't leave until 5.30-6.00 every night (besides Tuesdays which is my PPA afternoon). I then take my work home with me and work there as well. Saturdays and Sundays disappear and if I try and keep them to myself I just regret it as I'm then not prepared for Monday. This continues throughout the holidays as I am getting everything ready for next term/half term.

 

Now, I don't want to sound like I'm moaning.

 

"Yeah yeah, we all work hard. I'm on the train to London at 6.00am every blah blah blah......"

 

We all work hard and I'm not pretending that I know how hard your job is. But, that's the problems with teaching, people do genuinely think they know what my job entails. Everyone's been to school, it's a large part of everyone's lives and it seems that everyone then thinks they have a platform to form a opinion.

 

In my, obviously biased, opinion it is a very under appreciated job. I agree with what a previous poster said. Parents bring their kids in an hour late (parents still in pyjamas). It is then my responsibility to ensure that that child achieves the same as the rest who have had an extra hours input. A near impossible task, and all those missed hours add up. It is seen as free day care to a lot of parents who seem to think that reading with their children for 15 minutes a day is too much to ask.

 

I then miss my lunchtime to sorting out friendship problems and breaking up fights, sitting with children while they finish their work (and I explain it for the tenth time), attending meetings about the Christmas play plus making sure that my afternoon lesson is set up.

 

So yeah, we spend our lives looking after your children, academically and emotionally. So please don't be 'outraged' when we think that it's a little rich being asked to do all of the above until we're 68, all the while being asked to pay in more to receive less.

[Saintandy666]

I really don't sympathise with people who claim they will be severely inconvenienced by this strike due to having to look after their own children for a day OR, heaven forbid, organise for them to spend the day with family/friends or to go and play with their friends for the day.

 

Being a teacher myself it is amazing to hear the ignorant comments that people spew about the job I work hard at everyday. And yes, I mean everyday. The first thing people always say is,"Oh the holidays are good!" They would eat those words if they did the job themselves. I am sat in my classroom at half past seven every morning and I don't leave until 5.30-6.00 every night (besides Tuesdays which is my PPA afternoon). I then take my work home with me and work there as well. Saturdays and Sundays disappear and if I try and keep them to myself I just regret it as I'm then not prepared for Monday. This continues throughout the holidays as I am getting everything ready for next term/half term.

 

Now, I don't want to sound like I'm moaning.

 

"Yeah yeah, we all work hard. I'm on the train to London at 6.00am every blah blah blah......"

 

We all work hard and I'm not pretending that I know how hard your job is. But, that's the problems with teaching, people do genuinely think they know what my job entails. Everyone's been to school, it's a large part of everyone's lives and it seems that everyone then thinks they have a platform to form a opinion.

 

In my, obviously biased, opinion it is a very under appreciated job. I agree with what a previous poster said. Parents bring their kids in an hour late (parents still in pyjamas). It is then my responsibility to ensure that that child achieves the same as the rest who have had an extra hours input. A near impossible task, and all those missed hours add up. It is seen as free day care to a lot of parents who seem to think that reading with their children for 15 minutes a day is too much to ask.

 

I then miss my lunchtime to sorting out friendship problems and breaking up fights, sitting with children while they finish their work (and I explain it for the tenth time), attending meetings about the Christmas play plus making sure that my afternoon lesson is set up.

 

So yeah, we spend our lives looking after your children, academically and emotionally. So please don't be 'outraged' when we think that it's a little rich being asked to do all of the above until we're 68, all the while being asked to pay in more to receive less.

 

Here here.

[trousers]

I can't answer that, but it doesn't invalidate my point.

 

I may be missing something somewhere but you must have a rough ideas to know that it's a "significant minority"? Unless you're going on anecdotal evidence rather than stangible stats? (not saying that is an invalid stance to take)

 

To me, a "significant minority" of anything would be at least in teh double figures percentage wise.

[View From The Top]

Why?

 

Not a clue.

[trousers]

Not a clue.

 

Why not?

[Saintandy666]

I may be missing something somewhere but you must have a rough ideas to know that it's a "significant minority"? Unless you're going on anecdotal evidence rather than stangible stats? (not saying that is an invalid stance to take)

 

To me, a "significant minority" of anything would be at least in teh double figures percentage wise.

 

A small, but significant minority for me would be anything over 5%... but I guess the definitions vary as it is just a phrase(I always think of significant minority as meaning, yes it's small, but it's significant it exists)! Obviously, I can only go by anecdotal evidence(retrospective look back to my time at school), and what I hear from relatives who are teachers. I imagine the attitude varies by area though.

[trousers]

I really don't sympathise with people who claim they will be severely inconvenienced by this strike due to having to look after their own children for a day OR, heaven forbid, organise for them to spend the day with family/friends or to go and play with their friends for the day.

 

I don't think parents' main gripe is about the "inconvenience" to them, indeed it will actually make my day a whole lot easier tomorrow as I will be working at home rather than traipsing up into London as per usual.

 

The main gripe (as I see it) is that it affects the children's education. Parents are forever being preached to about not taking kids out of school during term time for holidays etc but, all of a sudden it's OK to do it when the boot is on the other foot.

 

Ok, "It's only one day" I hear you say....but I would get the same inquisition if I took my child out for one day or two weeks.

 

It's either "OK" to disrupt the children's education or it's not. Surely?

Edited 29 November, 2011 by trousers

[Saint]

I don't think parent' main gripe is about the "inconvenience" to them, indeed it will actually make my day a whole lot easier tomorrow as I will be working at home rather than traipsing up into London as per usual.

 

The main gripe (as I see it) is that it affects the children's education. Parents are forever being preached to about not taking kids out of school during term time for holidays etc but, all of a sudden it's OK to do it when the boot is on the other foot.

 

Ok, "It's only one day" I hear you say....but I would get the same inquisition if I took my child out for one day or two weeks.

 

It's either "OK" to disrupt the children's education or it's not. Surely?

 

Almost all of the criticism I have heard (and received) from parents is about the inconvenience caused to them.

 

Yes, of course it is bad to disrupt a child's education. Even for a day. But it is frustrating when you receive criticism from parents of children in Year 3 (my year) who are working at a Year 1 level and below that it is disruptive when all evidence points to them having absolutely no interest in their child's education every other day of the year.

[Smirking_Saint]

I really don't sympathise with people who claim they will be severely inconvenienced by this strike due to having to look after their own children for a day OR, heaven forbid, organise for them to spend the day with family/friends or to go and play with their friends for the day.

 

Being a teacher myself it is amazing to hear the ignorant comments that people spew about the job I work hard at everyday. And yes, I mean everyday. The first thing people always say is,"Oh the holidays are good!" They would eat those words if they did the job themselves. I am sat in my classroom at half past seven every morning and I don't leave until 5.30-6.00 every night (besides Tuesdays which is my PPA afternoon). I then take my work home with me and work there as well. Saturdays and Sundays disappear and if I try and keep them to myself I just regret it as I'm then not prepared for Monday. This continues throughout the holidays as I am getting everything ready for next term/half term.

 

Now, I don't want to sound like I'm moaning.

 

"Yeah yeah, we all work hard. I'm on the train to London at 6.00am every blah blah blah......"

 

We all work hard and I'm not pretending that I know how hard your job is. But, that's the problems with teaching, people do genuinely think they know what my job entails. Everyone's been to school, it's a large part of everyone's lives and it seems that everyone then thinks they have a platform to form a opinion.

 

In my, obviously biased, opinion it is a very under appreciated job. I agree with what a previous poster said. Parents bring their kids in an hour late (parents still in pyjamas). It is then my responsibility to ensure that that child achieves the same as the rest who have had an extra hours input. A near impossible task, and all those missed hours add up. It is seen as free day care to a lot of parents who seem to think that reading with their children for 15 minutes a day is too much to ask.

 

I then miss my lunchtime to sorting out friendship problems and breaking up fights, sitting with children while they finish their work (and I explain it for the tenth time), attending meetings about the Christmas play plus making sure that my afternoon lesson is set up.

 

So yeah, we spend our lives looking after your children, academically and emotionally. So please don't be 'outraged' when we think that it's a little rich being asked to do all of the above until we're 68, all the while being asked to pay in more to receive less.

 

You knew what the job entailed when you applied TBF ?

 

I certainly did, and I certainly 'work' pretty much every hour of every day, be it answering phone calls or carrying out some sort of engineering task, even dragging myself out of bed at the early hours to arrange for some sort of repairs to be arranged as I am moaned at by the general public for;

 

A. The fact repairs have to be carried out

 

B. The fact that we may be jackhammering in the early hours.

 

Now, what gets my goat, is the fact that the public sector simply must have golden pensions, and it is obviously someone elses problem to sort out the economic downturn, 'were all right jack' mentality. Of course it is also the banks fault, but it is also the fault of the burden placed on us by things such as the benefits culture and also the fat and swollen public sector made greedy by a boom period.

 

In one hand you moan about a slash and burn mentality by the government, and then moan about keeping public spending high and benefits within the public sector to be at a gross and unsubstatiated rate, for me it must be one or the other surely ??

 

As for what I said about the strikes, what I do not like is the whole guerilla tactics of them, there is not commitment, in fact, I would suspect if people were excpected to commit to a proper walk out on a larger scale we would be seeing far less of a turnout.

[Smirking_Saint]

Here here.

 

Aren't you actually still a student ?

[Lord Duckhunter]

Almost all of the criticism I have heard (and received) from parents is about the inconvenience caused to them.

 

 

It's a bit rich complaining about parents only being concerned about themselves and the disruption to their lives, when the strike is purely about you. Sod the rest of us, who would love the pension that outrages you so much.

[trousers]

Almost all of the criticism I have heard (and received) from parents is about the inconvenience caused to them.

 

Yes, of course it is bad to disrupt a child's education. Even for a day. But it is frustrating when you receive criticism from parents of children in Year 3 (my year) who are working at a Year 1 level and below that it is disruptive when all evidence points to them having absolutely no interest in their child's education every other day of the year.

 

That sounds like parental "Facebook-esque bluster" to me. You're right, the inconvenience level pales into insignificance compared to the affect this has on the children.

 

Talking of the "inconvenience factor" though, isn't there a slight paradox here in that you (teachers) probably need to start causing a significant amount of inconvenience if you're going to get anywhere with your protest? If no-one is seriously inconvenienced then the status quo is likely to prevail. It's a fine balance between not wanting to seriously inconvenience parents and needing to do so to get your message heard....

Edited 29 November, 2011 by trousers

[Saint]

Unfortunately this is my last post available to me.

 

It's sad, yet not unsurprising to see that people seem to have missed my point entirely. People don't appreciate the service we provide. I'm not saying that teaching is unique in that sense. I'm just merely saying that everyone thinks we've got it so easy when we really don't. Sorry if you can't see it from my perspective, and sorry if I can't see it from yours. I just feel like I need to stand up for the job I do when so many people think it's a piece of cake.

 

Never mind. I'm going to concentrate on tonights game.

[anothersaintinsouthsea]

It's a bit rich complaining about parents only being concerned about themselves and the disruption to their lives, when the strike is purely about you. Sod the rest of us, who would love the pension that outrages you so much.

 

if being a teacher is so enviable why don't you become one?

[anothersaintinsouthsea]

That sounds like "Facebook-esque bluster" to me. You're right, the inconvenience level pales into insignificance compared to the affect this has on the children.

 

Talking of the "inconvenience factor" though, isn't there a slight paradox here in that you (teachers) probably need to start causing a significant amount of inconvenience if you're going to get anywhere with your protest? If no-one is seriously inconvenienced then the statuus quo is likely to win the day. It's a fine balance between not wanting to seriously inconvenience parents and needing to do so to get your message heard....

 

A strike during the holidays wouldn't really work.

[trousers]

A strike during the holidays wouldn't really work.

 

Exactly. 'Saint' was saying that parents were exagerating the level of inconvenience they would experience tomorrow, but my point is, surely you have to get to a level of inconvenience that the parents would be justified in complaining about if you're going to stand any chance of getting the government to change their stance? However, I got the feeling 'Saint' was against significantly inconveniencing people, which is where my catch-22 observation comes in....

Edited 29 November, 2011 by trousers

[anothersaintinsouthsea]

Exactly. 'Saint' was saying that parents were exagerating the level of inconvenience they were experience but my point is, surely you have to get to a level of inconvenience that the parents would be justified in complaining about if you're going to stand any chance of getting the government to change their stance? I got the feeling 'Saint' was against significanlty inconveniencing people, which is where my catch-22 observation comes in....

 

Yep, which is why the tube drivers have got good pay rises recently.

[Smirking_Saint]

Unfortunately this is my last post available to me.

 

It's sad, yet not unsurprising to see that people seem to have missed my point entirely. People don't appreciate the service we provide. I'm not saying that teaching is unique in that sense. I'm just merely saying that everyone thinks we've got it so easy when we really don't. Sorry if you can't see it from my perspective, and sorry if I can't see it from yours. I just feel like I need to stand up for the job I do when so many people think it's a piece of cake.

 

Never mind. I'm going to concentrate on tonights game.

 

I don't think anyone has denied that teachers do a decent enough job, and that they provide a decent service, my arguement is that do you really think that you provide a much better service than anyone else ??

 

Christ, the water board, SEB, Train service, even Vodafone and Macdonalds provide a service of some sort, and all will be rewarded as an individual worker if they do a better job in their industry, I am sure if you are as good as you say you are then your management will realise and put into place increments in pay etc.

 

My arguement is that the public sector seem to find themselves somewhat excluded from what the rest of the country are going through ATM, for every one of you that is moaning about pension contrubutions REGARDLESS of the fact that you will now be drawing a pension longer then yesteryear (if we take into account living longer etc) there are those in certain industries currently either out of a job or scraping for a low paid job to keep them affloat, and I am sorry, but saying that it is their fault they are not in the public sector etc is a horrifyingly shortsighted view of your fellow man.

 

I would love to see how many would 'stand up for their jobs' if they were asked to stand on the picket line for a couple of weeks. Still, IMHO the public sector is onto a loser, even if you win this arguement I can only see your precious pensions being propped up by deeper cuts or further damaging any effective escape from the economic downturn.

[um pahars]

Another two years of an effective pay freeze for teachers and other public sector workers, on top of the two year pay freeze we've just had. Effectively 4 years without a pay rise and with inflation running at around 5%, that will be like a 20%+ reduction in salary come 2013.

 

Unless redressed at some point in the future it's likely to cost me well over £300,000 over the rest of my working life.

 

I think the Public Sector is doing its bit and those who remain in their jobs after hundreds of thousands have been culled are certainly not excluded from what the rest of the country is going through..

Edited 29 November, 2011 by um pahars

[badgerx16]

Well, as Lancaster Royal Grammar School is open tomorrow, I don't have to worry about what to do with my son

[dune]

Another two years of an effective pay freeze for teachers and other public sector workers, on top of the two year pay freeze we've just had. Effectively 4 years without a pay rise and with inflation running at around 5%, that will be like a 20%+ reduction in salary come 2013.

 

Unless redressed at some point in the future it's likely to cost me well over £300,000 over the rest of my working life.

 

I think the Public Sector is doing its bit and those who remain in their jobs after hundreds of thousands have been culled are certainly not excluded from what the rest of the country is going through..

 

Get a real job then.

[Gingeletiss]

Another two years of an effective pay freeze for teachers and other public sector workers, on top of the two year pay freeze we've just had. Effectively 4 years without a pay rise and with inflation running at around 5%, that will be like a 20%+ reduction in salary come 2013.

 

Unless redressed at some point in the future it's likely to cost me well over £300,000 over the rest of my working life.

 

I think the Public Sector is doing its bit and those who remain in their jobs after hundreds of thousands have been culled are certainly not excluded from what the rest of the country is going through..

 

Get over yourself.. no pay rise in three years, a loss two years ago of £50 a week and holiday, and no pay rise next year, to be sure. Your 'pay cap' is at 1%, at least it's something ffs. This hundreds of thousands, they wouldn't be the ones the Labour government invented by chance?

[um pahars]

Get over yourself.. no pay rise in three years, a loss two years ago of £50 a week and holiday, and no pay rise next year, to be sure. Your 'pay cap' is at 1%, at least it's something ffs. This hundreds of thousands, they wouldn't be the ones the Labour government invented by chance?

 

Nowhere in that post was I looking for sympathy, merely demonstrating how the Public Sector is taking a significant hit, and is certainly not excluded from the tightening of the nation's belt as has been claimed by some on here.

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

I trust you aren't being paid for this!

 

Course not!

 

A lot of the work I do I don't get paid for, so they're certainly not going to pay me when I do a bit of extra work when on strike.

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

Will you have one of those whingey left wing placards?

 

No, I'll just go around shouting "I am ****ing great, stop being ****s!"

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

Unfortunately this is my last post available to me.

 

It's sad, yet not unsurprising to see that people seem to have missed my point entirely. People don't appreciate the service we provide. I'm not saying that teaching is unique in that sense. I'm just merely saying that everyone thinks we've got it so easy when we really don't. Sorry if you can't see it from my perspective, and sorry if I can't see it from yours. I just feel like I need to stand up for the job I do when so many people think it's a piece of cake.

 

Never mind. I'm going to concentrate on tonights game.

 

Well said that man.

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

Get over yourself.. no pay rise in three years, a loss two years ago of £50 a week and holiday, and no pay rise next year, to be sure. Your 'pay cap' is at 1%, at least it's something ffs. This hundreds of thousands, they wouldn't be the ones the Labour government invented by chance?

 

I must admit, I was surpised when I saw we were getting any rise whatsoever. I would happily take another two year pay freeze (so in total 4 years) if it meant out pensions were secured.

 

Once again however I'll raise this point: Can any of the die-hard Tories on here explain to me why their government REFUSES POINT BLANK to carry out another audit on the affordability of these pensions?

[andysstuff]

Another two years of an effective pay freeze for teachers and other public sector workers, on top of the two year pay freeze we've just had. Effectively 4 years without a pay rise and with inflation running at around 5%, that will be like a 20%+ reduction in salary come 2013.

 

Unless redressed at some point in the future it's likely to cost me well over £300,000 over the rest of my working life.

 

I think the Public Sector is doing its bit and those who remain in their jobs after hundreds of thousands have been culled are certainly not excluded from what the rest of the country is going through..

 

Don't forget the 5% pf take home wage extra I've got to pay into my pension for the privilege of working 7 years more for less pension.

[pap]

Just read that 771,000 jobs are going to disappear from the public sector by 2017. Millions will be affected, whether they are current employees, families losing a bread-winner or businesses that benefit from public sector income. Like most of their policies, I suspect that the Conservatives believe that it'll be cheaper to give these people benefits than pay them a wage.

 

It'll be interesting to see how easy it'll be for the newly unemployed to find new jobs, particularly as the Government is supplying free labour to major corporations, such as the teenagers who have to stack shelves or lose their benefits.

 

So who are we going to give money to? To the banks, who'll then give it out to businesses that they were previously refusing to lend to. That's a brilliant use of public money. That whole concept, banks lending to people who they previously wouldn't lend to, worked so well for the housing market, didn't it?

 

All power to the public sector. In the main, they do a fantastic job and should be treasured. They make a massive contribution to society which goes largely unnoticed.

 

Unfortunately, our Governments have a nasty habit of not putting all the options on the table. There are plenty of ways to boost the economy that are just not being pursued for political reasons. I'd rather consider those than lose the valuable work of the public sector.

[Jonnyboy]

The very same Fred Goodwin that was revered and knighted by the union funded Labour Party...?

 

I must have missed the strikes and protests on the streets that week...

 

Sigh

 

I dont vote Labour

 

Sigh

 

Sigh

 

Sigh

[bridge too far]

Pap, don't worry - the private sector will pick up on all the services decimated by the reduction in the public sector.

 

You know, like the Winterbourne View hospital for people with learning difficulties, run by the private sector and now closed because of abuse.

 

Like Southern Cross who provide private care homes for the elderly and who blatantly asset-stripped itself and then went bust.

 

Yep, the private sector does it so much better.

[JackanorySFC]

Well I'm working late whilst my missus and my sis in law (middle management public sector worker - can't be specific as her job is "sensitive" but pays enough to keep her twice weekly Ocado deliveries arriving) are out getting p***ed up due to not having work tomorrow, a lay in followed by Christmas shopping awaits them tomorrow!

 

Oh and all those banker bashers out there, I had an Oyster lunch at Scotts in Mayfair today with my 2 banker mates (1 a broker, one something far more complicated I don't fully understand) and they both speculated correctly last week about Thomas Cooks shares increasing dramatically on Monday knowing they'd be spending the weekend working with the banks to secure investment. They both made their clients and banks big money but also a big wedge themselves,one over £20k profit for himself, £12k of which his missus has just used to book a top end skiing holiday in Val de Sare (sp) through - yep you guessed it - Thomas Cook, he added she'll probably do at least a grand in snow and rock on gear beforehand as they've never been before and want to buy all their stuff in the UK rather than hire abroad. He also doesn't know if he'll ski or board so is buying stuff for both. Fair play, if him and his colleagues stop spending their money this country is in serious trouble!

[CB Saint]

I must admit, I was surpised when I saw we were getting any rise whatsoever. I would happily take another two year pay freeze (so in total 4 years) if it meant out pensions were secured.

 

Once again however I'll raise this point: Can any of the die-hard Tories on here explain to me why their government REFUSES POINT BLANK to carry out another audit on the affordability of these pensions?

 

Probably can' t afford it

[Redondo Saint]

I really don't sympathise with people who claim they will be severely inconvenienced by this strike due to having to look after their own children for a day OR, heaven forbid, organise for them to spend the day with family/friends or to go and play with their friends for the day.

 

Being a teacher myself it is amazing to hear the ignorant comments that people spew about the job I work hard at everyday. And yes, I mean everyday. The first thing people always say is,"Oh the holidays are good!" They would eat those words if they did the job themselves. I am sat in my classroom at half past seven every morning and I don't leave until 5.30-6.00 every night (besides Tuesdays which is my PPA afternoon). I then take my work home with me and work there as well. Saturdays and Sundays disappear and if I try and keep them to myself I just regret it as I'm then not prepared for Monday. This continues throughout the holidays as I am getting everything ready for next term/half term.

 

Now, I don't want to sound like I'm moaning.

 

"Yeah yeah, we all work hard. I'm on the train to London at 6.00am every blah blah blah......"

 

We all work hard and I'm not pretending that I know how hard your job is. But, that's the problems with teaching, people do genuinely think they know what my job entails. Everyone's been to school, it's a large part of everyone's lives and it seems that everyone then thinks they have a platform to form a opinion.

 

In my, obviously biased, opinion it is a very under appreciated job. I agree with what a previous poster said. Parents bring their kids in an hour late (parents still in pyjamas). It is then my responsibility to ensure that that child achieves the same as the rest who have had an extra hours input. A near impossible task, and all those missed hours add up. It is seen as free day care to a lot of parents who seem to think that reading with their children for 15 minutes a day is too much to ask.

 

I then miss my lunchtime to sorting out friendship problems and breaking up fights, sitting with children while they finish their work (and I explain it for the tenth time), attending meetings about the Christmas play plus making sure that my afternoon lesson is set up.

 

So yeah, we spend our lives looking after your children, academically and emotionally. So please don't be 'outraged' when we think that it's a little rich being asked to do all of the above until we're 68, all the while being asked to pay in more to receive less.

 

You make some good points.

However, the world economy has taken a battering, the previous government were financially and socially inept, leaving the working population to pick up the tab.

Virtually all private sector employees have had pay/benefits cut in order to keep their businesses viable - surely the public sector should not be exempt from the financial meltdown?

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

Well I'm working late whilst my missus and my sis in law (middle management public sector worker - can't be specific as her job is "sensitive" but pays enough to keep her twice weekly Ocado deliveries arriving) are out getting p***ed up due to not having work tomorrow, a lay in followed by Christmas shopping awaits them tomorrow!

 

Oh and all those banker bashers out there, I had an Oyster lunch at Scotts in Mayfair today with my 2 banker mates (1 a broker, one something far more complicated I don't fully understand) and they both speculated correctly last week about Thomas Cooks shares increasing dramatically on Monday knowing they'd be spending the weekend working with the banks to secure investment. They both made their clients and banks big money but also a big wedge themselves,one over £20k profit for himself, £12k of which his missus has just used to book a top end skiing holiday in Val de Sare (sp) through - yep you guessed it - Thomas Cook, he added she'll probably do at least a grand in snow and rock on gear beforehand as they've never been before and want to buy all their stuff in the UK rather than hire abroad. He also doesn't know if he'll ski or board so is buying stuff for both. Fair play, if him and his colleagues stop spending their money this country is in serious trouble!

 

...and if they didn't **** it up the wall on speculative gambles then we wouldn't be in this mess. I'm afraid it is all swings and roundabouts.

 

Haven't we alreday established that your wife/girlfriend isn't representative? The fact that she isn't going on a demo tomorrow already demonstrates to me that she doesn't give one shiny ****e about the cause. If she isn't convinced enough to protest she should be in work. For me it is a political/ideological/financial decision to strike tomorrow. Anyone who either doesn't understand the issue or doesn't really care about it should go into work - much like my fiance, the English teacher, who is in work tomorrow along with about 15 others who are nor striking for various reasons.

[Viking Warrior]

Saint. It's acknowledged that there are some very good conscientious teachers such as yourself equally there are some bad ones . Teachers sickness rates are high for a multitude of reasons but there are those that are not cut out for the rigours of modern day education and the attitudes of some kids and parents . Back to the strikes I have my reason for not supporting it a lot to do with the discriminatory practices some union reps have against fellow workers. some schools will not open tomorrow not because teachers want to strike but the opposite. It's because the head teacher and school janitors will be are on strike and they are the key holders and will not be there to let teachers into the school. .

[Jonnyboy]

Well I'm working late whilst my missus and my sis in law (middle management public sector worker - can't be specific as her job is "sensitive" but pays enough to keep her twice weekly Ocado deliveries arriving) are out getting p***ed up due to not having work tomorrow, a lay in followed by Christmas shopping awaits them tomorrow!

 

Oh and all those banker bashers out there, I had an Oyster lunch at Scotts in Mayfair today with my 2 banker mates (1 a broker, one something far more complicated I don't fully understand) and they both speculated correctly last week about Thomas Cooks shares increasing dramatically on Monday knowing they'd be spending the weekend working with the banks to secure investment. They both made their clients and banks big money but also a big wedge themselves,one over £20k profit for himself, £12k of which his missus has just used to book a top end skiing holiday in Val de Sare (sp) through - yep you guessed it - Thomas Cook, he added she'll probably do at least a grand in snow and rock on gear beforehand as they've never been before and want to buy all their stuff in the UK rather than hire abroad. He also doesn't know if he'll ski or board so is buying stuff for both. Fair play, if him and his colleagues stop spending their money this country is in serious trouble!

 

you dont really think to a very deep level do you

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

You make some good points.

However, the world economy has taken a battering, the previous government were financially and socially inept, leaving the working population to pick up the tab.

Virtually all private sector employees have had pay/benefits cut in order to keep their businesses viable - surely the public sector should not be exempt from the financial meltdown?

 

The point I think he is trying to make is that in an office-type private sector job you are 'done' at 68. Teaching is such an emotional, mental and physical strain that staff are more often than not done by '55'. Now I'm not suggesting we should retire at 55 before dunce et al jump in, I'm simply saying expecting us to keep up the same energy levels that late in to life is ridiculous. You are on stage for 6 hours a days at full throttle and if you slip up and have a bad hour you are eaten alive. It is only before and after the day that you get to sit down and do administrative work.

 

Are the Thatcherites out there able to tell me yet why the government has REFUSED to carry out an audit on the cost of these pensions? Helllooooo?

Edited 29 November, 2011 by Thorpe-le-Saint