It is very disappointing for me to see the conduct of the Queensland teachers union and members over their pay dispute, and today's report of the union being "furious" at receiving a 4% payrise is the icing on the cake.

Some perspective in difficult financial times may quell some of this anger and belief that they are "entitled" to receive more.

In my company, since this time last year there has been 20% staff reductions across the board. Obviously that work has now been distributed among the remaining 80%.
Pay reviews (which incidently are usually much lower than 4%) are frozen for this financial year. As are bonuses, despite achieving performance measures.
And I'll get one argument out of the way, staff here are paid slightly below market rates, with the incentive of bonuses that can lift you above market rates for good performance.
My wife has a team of three workers in her job. She has had a full time employee go on maternity leave and she will not be replaced while she is off. There is no less workload, just less people to do it.
And this situation is repeated over and over among the majority of workplaces and businesses across Australia.

Yet, open the paper and you can see Qld teachers "furious" over their 4% pay rise. Perhaps the teachers could get in contact with the 20% of people who have lost their jobs from my company and explain to them how furious they are.

I think teachers should be made to get some perspective and work in industry for a few of their 12 weeks leave per year, most logically the industry they teach in. A little slice of reality may help them to understand that outside their world of teaching, everyone else also takes work home and works on weekends.
But the rest of Australia has a base of 48 weeks work/yr and 40 hrs/wk. Where teacher have 40 weeks work/yr and 30hrs/wk.

All government jobs should now be locked at max $52,000 a year.
Then give the benefits that can go with it (permancy.super,house,car etc)
Not much else I can or would say it is just pure greed.
Thanks have a good life from Dave

burbs

<< But the rest of Australia has a base of 48 weeks work/yr and 40 hrs/wk. Where teacher have 40 weeks work/yr and 30hrs/wk. >>

I agree with your assessment that this isn't the time to be pushing for unrealistic pay rises, but I must point out your ignorance on the hours worked by teachers. Unless you've worked in schools yourself or have a close relationship with someone who does, you're not qualified to cast the aspersions you have here.

I for one am a teacher who chooses to work on a casual basis, with all the disadvantages that entails, purely because I could not manage the relentless workload of full-time teaching, along with the demands of a family and running a household and all the while staying sane. A lot of teachers of course do manage, but for many others it comes at a cost somewhere along the line.

Few full-time teachers would work as little as 30 hours a week. Most work near double that, and more at times of reports and school camps etc.

The ten-week term might look appealing to an outsider, but for anyone who works in the system and experiences the constant rigour of working with large numbers of children, the need for an end-of-term break and recharge is obvious, and essential to coping with the demands of the job. A good proportion of those 'holiday' weeks is spent catching up on the myriad of tasks that don't get done during term and on preparations for the next school term or year. For most teachers, a large part of their break times are 'holidays' in name only.

<< .. everyone else also takes work home and works on weekends. >>

I know many others work long hours too, but not many take work home on the regular and consistent basis that teachers do. Lots of workers leave their job at the door. Few teachers have that luxury. For every hour of face to face teaching, there are two more spent in preparation, correction and miscellaneous associated tasks, much of that done at home.

Bronwyn,

Since you ask, both of my parents and my father-in-law have been teachers and I have 4 close friends currently teaching.

I am not suggesting that teachers don't do extra time. What I am suggesting is that so does the rest of the workforce, and I think a lot of teachers lack that perspective.

From your comments, substitute "constant rigour of working with large numbers of children" with "constant rigour of working with large number of customers or patients or cases"

You mention that few teachers do 30hrs/wk and most do double. That's true of the rest of the professional workforce as well. Some do the minimum. Most do more than that. Except other professions start at a much higher base hours.

To give you a comparion, if a teacher did the minimum, and worked 30hrs/wk, 40 wks/yr, they would work 1200 hours in a year. If an engineer did the minimum and worked 40hrs/wk, 48wk/yr they would work 1920 hours. That's a big gap.

I do wonder whether there would be less need to take work home and work in holidays if teachers attended school for a standard 8am-5pm day, plus longer when required, 48 weeks per year. This would align them more closely with other professions, but I am sure the unions and teachers would never let this happen.

Bronwyn
Amen!
While there are duds in every occupation I would remind Rehctub that most teacher have lengthy University training many have multiple qualification. School heads often have Doctorates plus.
Many of these additional qualification are achieved in their own time.

In many cases teachers have as much if not more qualification than the average GP.

My eldest has a masters and is a subject coordinator while on more than the minimum.
Has a home class of 35 year 10 (practising thuglets).
extensive class time,
co-ordination, curriculum and research duties.
administrative work,
on the school council and two other sub committees
open days, review meetings with often abusive/aggressive parents over their equally obnoxious more belligerent devil spawn.
camps, outings.
Did I mention the additional legal restrictions she faces that you don't?
Oh yes, by the way she can't fire anyone but is responsible for 10 teachers on her subject.

All in an suburban area that I avoid certainly at the times she goes home.

One teacher at that school was recently attacked. Another's home was vandalised by an disgruntled ex student. Despite all this she still tries to teach these ungrateful irks the basics they'll need to live. To her and most of her colleagues (she is by no means unique), like nurses its a vocation more than a job. Her time school time are effectively meaningless I guess she works close to 60 hrs a week.

BTW As an ex senior manager I wouldn't contemplate that much responsibility and agro for twice what she earns.

In short I think your uninformed generalised rant is well misplaced if only because you are lumping all teachers in the same smelly bucket.

Having said that, perhaps now isn't the best time to gain parity with other states...If these same teachers followed the money Qld Educational system would be in deep do do for teachers.

Examinator,

As I said to Bronwyn. I don't think teachers aren't doing extra time, just that the rest of the professional workforce is doing the same.

Actually I have university training. I am doing a Masters degree in my own time. And I work in an area with beligerent, abusive, potentially aggressive customers and a highly legislated environment, so I am very familiar with these challenges, as is the majority of the rest of the professional workforce.

The difference is I don't believe mine to be the only profession in that boat.

Happy to hear specifically where you think my comments are uninformed and generalised, but by voting as a majority to push for pay rises and go on strike, it's the teachers who have lumped "all teachers in the same smelly bucket."

If the teachers don't agree with the actions of the union, perhaps they could stand up and as the majority, tell the union how they want their interests handled. It is their union after all.

Examinator is at it again. Notice he's the ony one who has any knowledge, everyone else is uninformed, & ranting.

For hevens sake mate, go out into the yard, & empty some of the grass out of your stuffed shirt.

I have been a committee nember of one or another P&C for 15 years.

My wife worked in one school, [in, not for] for 17 years.

You should sell copies of your rose coloured glasses mate, because you sure aint seen nuthing at our schools. If we all wore copies we might believe you.

Oh, my eldest is a HOD, [at 27] at a large high school too, before you tell me I could not have your insight. It also means I have some idea of your daughters pay packet, so stop crying about her work load.

Uniformed? maybe by far the majority work 38 or 36 hour weeks not 40.
Teachers are aware of their rights and their unions directions, they have the right to disagree any time.
And yes they in big number s take work home I truly think uniformed is a good description for some comments here.

My ex is a teacher. I have shared accommodation with teachers. I have witnessed teachers' parties. I have seen the level of care & responsibility entrusted to & then disregarded by teachers. I have witnessed the callous exploitation of generous conditions afforded to teachers. I have witnessed the me,me,me attitudes etc.etc. Yes, I also met true teachers who cared but could do nothing because the majority to-union-clinging mere repeaters of information would not allow the true teachers to succeed. I sincerely think that teachers do not need more pay, what they need is a far greater dose of a sense of caring & responsibility. But to be fair to them the whole of the public service now has that mentality. How often do we hear of "we're not allowed to discipline disruptive children". Well, if you really want to why not strike for that cause. If you do I'll change my opinion of you.

Burbs And others
I think you're selectively reading my comments.

I said that perhaps now isn't the best time for a campaign for pay rises.

I did say that there were 'bludgers' in every industry. But to declare ALL teachers the same as the worst case scenario is simply rank prejudice.

Hasbeen I can't be held responsible for your usually ill informed prejudices. Do I point out that at the time of my posting you hadn't and still haven't offered any comment only after the fact ad homimem attack.

Belly, I would be just as vehement in my defence of road workers etc. There are some that are skives and the system is sometime skewed but all? I think not.

Dwg so by your reasoning anybody that makes more than you is greedy hmmm well comrade we're in a capitalist environment.

Burbs you have almost a masters degree in what? You chose the industry not the teachers so why blame them.

BTW show me where the teachers claimed to be the only ones in the 'boat'? That's your assumption. Only you know you motivation for that wild assumption. I merely advocated that IMO they were deserving...I didn't say only them. another rash assumption.

Clearly you are either anti union or one of the minority that doesn't think in terms of self interest. If the latter I genuinely congratulate you. You putting in the extra effort to get an extra qualification without the expectation of improved rewards is indeed admirable.

In reality my objection was the alacrity with which some on this site jump to stereotyping and generalised assumptions. Most of which can't be substantiated with real facts. Generalisations are fine for broad policy directions but tend to insult individuals. I'll continue to defend the individual. Might I suggest that had you attacked the union or the issue and not ALL teachers. Then your burst wouldn't have been so offensive to the hard working teachers

Hang on examinator I found nothing wrong with your posts here I rarely do.
The naked attempt to put down ex partners and unions is here for all to see.
Yes teachers fed is strong, in fact often extremist in my view.
And it is not time for big wage rises.
But the unbalanced kick them in the guts view is no answer.
Fact is, as is often the case best result for every one may well be some place near the middle.
My advice?
For what it is worth one year wage deals give a chance to see how the economy is going.
Remember as a trade unionist without a reverse gear I do believe in a fair days pay for a fair days work.
And examinator I would be happy for you to represent me I see understanding fairness and balance in you.

Arn't they on $80 grand a year already!

Perhaps they should all do a stint at the local hospital with the nurses and doctors so they can see what stress realy is.

These guys don't have 'little lunch', 'big lunch', then down tools once the afternoon bell rings.

Sure there are some really genuinely great teachers who's dedication to their work is second to none, but they are dragged down by the ones who's only mission in life is to climb the ladder to the top, even if the kids are just something one must deal with while achieving their goal.

Be happy with your $80K for a while, otherwise, we may face the prospect of 'Indian' being our second language. They would jump at $80K a year.

Examinator,

Masters in Commerce. But I'm not making any complaints or blaming teachers for my career choices. I'm pointing out that your teachers challenges are consistent with most other professions.

I'm not terribly fond of unions for exactly this reason. While companies are struggling to keep afloat, people are losing wages and jobs, the teachers union is complaining about a 4% payrise.
But even so when I sat down this year with my boss I knew that if everyone got a pay rise, the company and the Australian economy would not benefit. So since I could only control my situation, I asked for no payrise. Ironically, I found out later, the company wasn't doing payrises anyway. My boss was amused. He appreciated the jesture.

The teacher debate is easy to fix. All teachers and teacher advocates seem to indicate that teachers work lots of hours.
So, they can work a standard 8am-5pm day, 5 days per week, 48 weeks per year. It should be no additional work for all those teachers already working well over that amount of hours. And it would settle the debate.

Belly
Sorry if I misread you.

I was objecting to the stereotyping rabble that tends to attack ALL anything. Usually with out evidence that their criticisms apply to all members. Or that all members of the group support the criticised actions willingly.

I don't accept painting any group of individuals with some broad tar brush. To my mind this is throwing the baby out with the bath water. i.e. because there are 'erks' therefore they're all 'erks' mentality. This tends to, as I said, offend the good.

Regarding anti union. To me the unions, political parties, governments, businesses are non human entities. They/their practices the are amalgams/compromises/deals etc. and represents the organisation not individuals per se therefore fair game.

However personalising them and saying that all unionists/bureaucrats etc. (people) are erks because some are, is unfair and annoy me too.
e.g. Wild statements like "Anna Bligh is an idiot" is a broad tarring and unsustainable, she clearly isn't. One is entitled to say that they don't like her leadership or public image et al but should be prepared to justify it...the first is plain prejudice/bigotry the latter is an opinion. I respect opinions that have some thought in them but not knee jerk prejudices.

Belly old mate, I'm a humanist that simply means (to me) attack what a person SAYS...me included but don't dehumanise groups of people by broad stroke tarring.

I am simply the countering to emotional/irrational prejudices. Clearly there are too many of them already and they tend to be simply reinforce the 'no thought required' principal or life.

Finally if some others can fall out of their trees spouting absurdly overstated/irrational drivel and claim the right to do so in the interest of true free speech. Then why aren't I allowed to attack what they say without being personally insulted, as some others regularly do?

Burbs,
I can understand your perspective. See my response to Belly.

Conversation on OLO are read by a variety of abilities so if what follows is old hat then I ask for your indulgence.

>Organisational theory clearly demonstrates that the primary purpose of any organisation is it's own survival therefore the individual specific interests become subordinate.The union therefore is compelled to increase benefits etc to justify their existence.

> From group dynamics perspective; Have you ever tried to change a union's direction with the standard organisational internal power interests? Good luck.
Even my one man campaign to introduce perspective to some topics has rendered me a marked man consider what happens when one works with an a tight group in an isolated environment like a school Truly an introspective environment, the peer pressure is extraordinary. .

> Capitalist theory tells us that people will go to where the money is.
Interstate have the same problems with not enough good teachers. It therefore follows that the interstate will snap up our best leaving us with the nine to fivers and the bludger mentality. The union is using this vulnerability to push for more benefits (aka parity).

> Culturally condition to be selfish and self indulgent so the claim is with in this context.

Notwithstanding the above that still neither justifies the claim in a the current fiscal nor does it sanction the extremes at either end.
To me if its extreme then it's probably not in the interests of the majority

It may be examinator that unions exist for unions.
Not in my view.
I think acting in the best interests of individual members is the only way to conduct myself.
And it is apparent they the members agree.
much, most of my work is fixing problems for single members or small groups.
Today is a non work day yet I have had more than twenty calls sent ten e mails some to groups of twenty.
Hating or disliking unions is in fashion, it goes hand in hand with lack of understanding.
Unions are not all powerful, do not control the world.
My quote was squarely aimed at our new contributor.
I see every thing I highlighted there.
I am not unlike a roadside car repair man, my phone rings when some one wants help, union dues are much like insurance for your car.
Nice to have if you smash it.
Groups other than unions get together in self interest, bosses have unions too.
But blind dislike is uninformed.
Holding opinions that are wrong is not proof of any thing other than being wrong
regards

Burbs
The teacher debate is easy to fix. All teachers and teacher advocates seem to indicate that teachers work lots of hours.
So, they can work a standard 8am-5pm day, 5 days per week, 48 weeks per year. It should be no additional work for all those teachers already working well over that amount of hours. And it would settle the debate.

What a great idea. How can they possibbly argue with this? It's a 'win win' for both sides of the argument and, any teachers who claim that their workload is to heavy, should find releife as the teachers that currently only work 9 to 3, and that's it, will relieve the workload simply by working their additional manditory hours.

Boy I will beat they would pull thier heads in real quick if they got a wiff of this.

rehctub

<< .. teachers that currently only work 9 to 3 .. >>

I've been around teachers for a long time and I've yet to meet one anywhere who only works from 9-3.

Perhaps you could give us some statistics and references on this mythical cohort you've plucked from the air. If not, I suggest you pull your head in and confine your authoritative pronouncements to the field of butchering where you might just have a shred of credibility.

Yes bronyn, you are right, the very 'minority' only work 9-3. It's just a pitty you have to continually attack someone just to get your point accross. You know I will admit when I am wrong, so Why the attacks?

Now on the other hand, if you are trying to upset me, take a number blossom and get in line. Many have tried but often failed.

However, 48 weeks instead of 40 something may let them know how the other half live. In any case, I am often told 'if you don't like it' being self employed that is, 'then don't do it'!

Same applies here dear!

A few thoughts here.

Firstly, I am a teacher. I am not on $80,000 - closer to $60,000, which is reasonable money (except that it took me four years at university and five years on the job to earn that). My former housemate works in a call centre and brings home more than me.

I think we all agree that teachers don't just do six hours a day, so I won't bother driving that point home. I'm happy to have a 9-5 workday, 48 weeks a year, if:
a) I get paid for overtime, or at least accrue time off in lieu.
b) I get to take my 4 weeks holidays when I want to, not during school holidays. That would be necessary if we are to have truly equal working conditions.
c) I get a monthly RDO like my family members who are not teachers.
I suspect that all of this would be impractical, though, so maybe the way it is now is better.

A further point I'd like to make is that we can't always believe what the newspapers tell us. I am not furious at the 4% offering, and none of my colleagues have expressed any fury either. Perhaps the head of the QTU is, but he is not a teacher. If he had done his job and ensured that a new agreement was ready on 1 May when the old one expired, this whole situation could have been avoided. To be honest, I'll take the 4% (which is, by the way, 0.5% less than independent schools have received) and see what comes in the future. Most teachers I know seem to be on the same wavelength as me.

Otokonoko,

Fair comment about the holidays. I agree that would be fair but I think if you looked across the whole spectrum of professionals working in Australia you'd find the majority don't get paid overtime, time in lieu, or RDO's. You stay until the job is done, and you don't get paid overtime for it.

I've worked for 5 employers in the last 10 years, and only had any of this when I was in a govt job.

We could all probably find an example of someone who is paid more than us. I know unskilled factory workers who earn 20-30K more than me. But it's important to compare apples with apples. They work shift work, weekends and overtime which I don't.

Does your call centre friend work 9-5, 5 days per week, or do they have 12 hour shifts, overnights and weekend work etc?

Belly,
I don't dislike unions. In some circumstances they're necessary as are businesses but there are some businesses that are so big, ruthless, so insensitive, so everything/anything for a profit and stuff the worker or the client...some banks/Telstra come to mind. That does not mean that there aren't real/good people in them or they don't serve a purpose.
You proved my point in every organization there are good and bad INDIVIDUALS.

I've even met a nice man who (spit..do a war dance curse a few times, kick something) likes sport and one who is an LNP supporter go figure. ;-)

Belly
Sorry I meant to say you proved my case that there are good and bad individuals in every walk in life and therefore dumping on all because of a minority is plain prejudice.

All
It seems to me that this like other discussions suffer from a lack of objective fact to substantiate their propositions.

i.e. teachers are making a 'pay grab' (pejorative wording). Then following it with a mass of impressions (usually plain superficial impressions).
It is a truism of life that the someone else's grass always appears to be greener so let's nobble them so we (I) can get more.

This is then 'justified'(?) by 'this is my opinion and I have right to it'
But do we? My rule of thumb for difference between an opinion and a prejudice is objective facts (real knowledge) and therefore the ability to support the proposition without resorting to extremes, abuse, tricks etc. Even if it conflicts with my conclusions. We do have the right to have different conclusions, but harm others because of our emotional prejudices etc.?

In the final analysis it all depends on where you see your interests lie but all thinking people agree that prejudices harm others and ultimately us all.
i.e. I know a young woman who's educational history is well, marginal.
She claimed You don't need an education. I wasn't good at school.(Y10 exit) Teachers were out to get me they're like that!

Well, now she's a functionary at a teachers union and vehemently claims teachers are under paid .... Presumably the real facts changed her mind or was it her interests go figure.

Hi burbs,

I think it's a basic human characteristic that we'll always feel 'hard done by' when other people are better off than us. My call centre friend works 9-5, 5 days a week, has no skills or qualifications and brings home substantially more money than me. I would love to be happy for her - to feel glad that she is doing so well - but that sense of jealousy always gets the better of me.

As for the overtime, time off in lieu and RDOs, I haven't had as much experience in the workforce as you, but all jobs I have worked in (other than teaching) had these little perks. Most of my friends' jobs do as well. I thought it was common practice.

Anyway, I think the most important point I wanted to get across is that teachers in general AREN'T furious at the 4%. If anything, most of us are furious at our union. It should have had an agreement ready for implementation when the old one expired at the start of May, rather than waiting until the eleventh hour. On top of the $450.00 a year I pay them (for what, I don't know) they have cost me more than $600.00 in potential earnings (assuming a 4% raise) over the past 5 months. They have dragged teachers' reputations through the mud, rarely consulting us along the way. Frankly, it's not good enough.

Examinator,

No objective fact. I didn't realise I required a high burden of proof to post here, but since you asked:

The core of my post was - I believe it is the wrong time for teachers to be furious about a pay rise:

Please see - the last 12 months increase in unemployment and increase in underutilisation of labour force.

http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/6202.0Main%20Features1Aug%202009?opendocument&tabname=Summary&prodno=6202.0&issue=Aug%202009&num=&view=

This survey shows that a majority of companies have frozen wages and are skipping or reducing bonuses:

http://www.mercer.com.au/summary.htm;jsessionid=@EgrTIjXAJ@uiej2fiUX3Q**.mercer02?siteLanguage=1012&idContent=1351085

And here showing that only 1.5m of 7.5m workers was entitled to RDO's. Sorry the data is a bit old.

http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/ProductsbyReleaseDate/E391985F180195AECA256EAD0078925E?OpenDocument202006&num=&view=

When you think that a teacher has a very responsible job and has to study for the registration as a teacher and is on about $62k p.a and a member of parliament gets about twice that....unqualified ...I ask you?