Ah the hypocrisy
Legal minimum is 28 days
Including bank holidays.
My wife is a teacher. She works in Liverpool. She is not striking and one of the parents has called her a scab. Nice.
I am a supporter of teachers and often fight their corner but this is ill-timed and a massive mis-judgement. There are austerity cuts all over Europe and the red tops are foaming over military redundancies. The NUT and NASUWT run a very real risk of alienating themselves and causing untold self-harm. Particularly if working parents have to dip into their generous 28 legal minimum days leave. 😉Posted 4 years agoslackaliceMember
Presume that includes teachers then?
I don’t know, you’ll have to ask them.
or to make a higher profit for the employer and a higher dividend for the company shareholders.
Unfortunately Project, I think you are correct. So quite how a profit and loss balance sheet can be applied to imparting information and preparing the next generation I do not know…Posted 4 years agoernie_lynchMember
Who is one protecting; ones rights/self or protecting the childrens education?
High morale amongst teachers who are fairly rewarded is extremely good for children and their eduction.
There are austerity cuts all over Europe ……
And the startling fact is that austerity isn’t working.Posted 4 years agoRichPennyMember
as per usual lately there is always somebody that doesnt have anything to add to the debate, or ability to formulate an opinion, and turns to bitter insults,and blasphemy, oh what a sad life you must lead.
Your first contribution to the debate was to suggest that children should strike.
Your second contribution was to compare teachers to care workers.
I am amused.Posted 4 years agopiemonsterMember
Is it because they will teach your kids to not grow up bitter and envious ? Perhaps inspire them to improve themselves…PS have you thought of talking
You’ve had a different experience with education to me if I’m reading the intonation correctly.
I was taught to be factory fodder, nothing more. If I was lucky, office fodder.Posted 4 years agoEdukatorMember
And despite that the Fed announced they won’t be printing as much money yesterday. The markets tried to tell them something about the decision.
As for “imaginary” marking and preparation, Project, you obviously never handed in any homework in to get marked. or has your memory selectively erased all that red ink? On a practical level imagine what would happen if teachers only had a two-week holiday? A quarter of the population going on holiday at the same time.
You’ll be pleased to hear that teachers in France don’t get paid for their two-month summer break but generally do preparation all the same – perhaps you should emigrate.
I agree that adding shareholders and fat-cat bosses to the education bill is counterproductive.Posted 4 years agomolgripsSubscriber
Of course it’s a value judgement! The mere fact that care workers are paid minimum wage or just over is what the market will bear. The same market that is in our society.
It’s not a value judgement on care workers or teachers. Our societal values are embodied in the fact that we operate a market based economy. So we’re onto a whole new academic debate here, big vs small government.
For the government to intervene and set wages for certain professions means that individuals in power are making value judgements on professions. So rather than being an automatic function of the system it becomes a personal judgement. If you don’t agree with those people then this starts to become problematic.
In order to set wages you’d have to effectively nationalise the care industry, but why stop there? You’d have to nationalise a lot more if you’re going to be fair and consistent. Now personally I would rather certain things be nationalised, but as a nation we did this once and then we voiced our unhappiness through the ballot box.
I think it’s fairly easy at this point to blame Thatcher.Posted 4 years ago
The topic ‘Ah the hypocrisy’ is closed to new replies.