1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

EIS members ACCEPT pay & conditions deal

Discussion in 'Scotland - education news' started by Liviboy, Oct 4, 2015.

  1. Liviboy

    Liviboy Occasional commenter

    Released today

    http://www.eis.org.uk/public.asp?id=3089&dbase=2

    Members of EIS have overwhelming voted to accept a 2-year pay and conditions offer from local authority employers.

    [​IMG]

    The offer to teachers and associated professionals, negotiated through the Scottish Negotiating Committee for Teachers (SNCT), includes a 2.5% increase in pay over two years, with 1.5% for 2015-16 and a further 1% for 2016-17.

    The EIS will move for formal acceptance of the offer at the full SNCT meeting later this month.

    EIS members voted to accept the new offer by 83% (voting to accept) to 17% (voting to reject).

    Commenting on the ballot result, EIS General Secretary Larry Flanagan said, "Teachers have acknowledged the positive elements of the overall package and the degree of financial certainty that comes with a two year agreement, even while recognising that the pay award itself is disappointing.

    "That a meagre pay increase of 2.5% over two years actually exceeds current government pay policy demonstrates that teachers, in line with other public sector workers, are continuing to pay the price for an economic crisis that was not of their making.

    "The EIS remains committed to pursuing future restorative pay rises to return teachers’ real-terms pay to at least pre- crisis levels.

    Mr Flanagan added, "The non-pay elements of the agreement are more positive, including a commitment to further consider supply teaching issues, an agreed set of principles and action on managing teacher workload and, crucially, a separate commitment from the Scottish Government on maintaining teacher numbers for the length of the agreement.

    "The EIS will now work to ensure the agreed actions to address workload are delivered at local level, and will engage actively with employers on the issues of supply provision and improving the pay and conditions of supply teachers."
     
  2. Flere-Imsaho

    Flere-Imsaho Star commenter

    What was the turnout?
     
  3. Liviboy

    Liviboy Occasional commenter

    Your guess is as good as mine. The above was copied direct from the EIS site (link at the top). No turnout has been announced as yet.
     
  4. Effinbankers

    Effinbankers Lead commenter

    Why encourage a Yes vote then?

    I'm happy to be one of the 17%
     
  5. subman68

    subman68 Occasional commenter

    This is a disgrace, Why have a union if they are going to "encourage" a YES vote for a pay rise for a main grade teacher of £10.05 per week (before tax and pension) you will be lucky to get £5. The disgusting element is that he says it "commitment to further consider supply teaching issues" no deal, no apology for stabbing every supply teacher in the front (not the back he knew that his union what Sh**ing on these people)

    The unions are weak, the members are weaker.
    Not a good start tot he working week, I just hope my train driver application was good enough.
     
  6. Liviboy

    Liviboy Occasional commenter

    I think what annoys me more is around the AGM time, in all the press it was strike threats, teachers had "had enough", we weren't going down without a fight. Fast forward a couple of months and with NO CHANGES WHATSOEVER to the offer, it is balloted on and reccomended for acceptance.

    Whenever there is an argument that the unions are weak, somebody always replies with "the members ARE the union" or "there is no appetite for action"...why do they not ask us? If we are the union, then we need to demand ballots on industrial action. I'm sick of hearing on the news about our "growing economy", etc. yet in the same sentence be told how we need to suffer to "cut the debt".

    At least bring on a ballot on willingness for action - they could have saved £££ by doing that at the same time as the ballot on the offer...but no!

    This isn't a pay rise...as you say £10 extra if you're lucky plus the removal of contracting-out in April will essentially cancel out the pay rise for 2016-17 of 1%.
     
  7. redz

    redz New commenter

    But we are the members and many members don't care! Look at the turnout for ballots on previous issues...very low turnout, ballot and strike action on pensions, again low turnout. This was something all members should have been voting on. Not enough of members are interested. Therefore what can the EIS do when their own members can't find two minutes to vote.
     
  8. Liviboy

    Liviboy Occasional commenter

    Redz - the simple answer is they need to be much better at communicating and informing their members.

    We get the odd "eBulletin" and a quarterly magazine. Neither really give the emphasis needed to the reducing Ts&Cs. We need to be MUCH more informed as memebers - it shouldn't be up to us to find information out, it's surely Union HQs job to send that information in as many ways possible to reach the maximum number of people.

    We have a couple of posters up at work but neither really give the message.

    There should have been HUGE posters on pension changes detailing all the negatives (and the positives....) of the scheme changes.

    There should have been leaflets, e-mails, magazine articles and press releases galore of the poor salary negotiations. They should be detailing EXACTLY what we are paid to do (and then detail all the things we aren't). Most new teachers to the profession (let's be honest, the profession is generally becoming younger) don't think the conditions are that bad because everything has either happened before they started or has been drip-fed. It's the whole frog in boiling water vs. frog in cold water which is warmed up slowly argument.

    I'll be honest, I don't really see what my union does FOR me for my £12 odd a month. Now when I say this I mean in terms of what I believe the Union HQs should be doing which is all of the above. Ultimately we are the union but our leaders should be doing just that - leading us! It's surely what they are paid the big bucks to do! I don't see the Union HQ really listening to its grass-roots members at the AGM, I don't see them trying to rally us all together.

    To take a political POV - what we have just now is an "Ed Milliband" - he didn't exactly excite the masses when he spoke. Comapre that to Jeremy Corbyn who gets everybody cheering, etc. This is not a political party broadcast by any standards just different approaches to leadership at grass-roots level.
     
  9. Marco82

    Marco82 Established commenter

    Liviboy, I back what you say 100 percent. What is most annoying is the posturing that goes on beforehand, when the leaders know full well they have no intention of leading a struggle. They negotiate a **** agreement, recommend support then sit back and say, ah well, you see, the membership wouldn't support us. Nice fig leaf. And who can blame us, the members, for accepting the deal when we see our leaders lack the willingness to fight. That is the two way nature of the question of leadership. But hey, look, no sooner have they thrown in the towel on wages but their web site is boldly announcing how we must fight Tory attacks on the right to strike. The Tories will be quacking in their boots when they read that. And one final point. I am fully behind the Syrian refugees as they flee a war zone in search of a better life. Western governments, who are behind the whole mess, have a moral duty to support them. But the Leaders of the EIS, who have shown themselves incapable of defending our interests over the last six years, decide to show their rrradical teeth by donating 10 K of union money to refugee care. Again, I don't argue with this, but I do object to those people using our subscriptions just so they can appear to be very right on. How about showing your teeth on an issue that really counts instead of running for the hills at the first puff of smoke.
     
    bigjimmy2 likes this.
  10. bigjimmy2

    bigjimmy2 Lead commenter

    "The Tories will be quacking in their boots . . ." did make me laugh!
    duck.jpg duck.jpg duck.jpg duck.jpg
     
  11. Liviboy

    Liviboy Occasional commenter

    Just to confirm it was announced today the turnout was 28%!

    That has really annoyed me - they couldn't have made it easier to vote! 28%!!!!!!!!!!
     
  12. TheBigA

    TheBigA Occasional commenter

    The 28% turnout is an absolute f*cking joke, it's actually embarrassing. As a profession we're our own worst enemy.
     
  13. Liviboy

    Liviboy Occasional commenter

    No wonder they reccomended acceptance - with online voting that took literally 30 seconds, what chance would they have had of any type of turnout on a postal industrial action ballot!

    As a profession we really have nobody else to blaim. But personally, it angers me greatly. No wonder we get taken for a ride!
     
  14. horatio1

    horatio1 New commenter

    So less than 5% of the membership voted against the deal. Hardly a good basis for any future negotiations or action.
     
  15. halfajack

    halfajack Occasional commenter

    Yet people will continue to say 'the unions' should be doing more.
     
  16. Marco82

    Marco82 Established commenter

    I am an EIS member but I have to say I didn't vote myself as I couldnt remember how to log on having forgotten my number. Am I wrong or did we not get a postal vote this time? If not, then that is a scandal for I am sure that the overwhelming majority of members pay no attention whatsoever to the union websites, most don't even get an e-mail for the lists are always out of date and full of mistakes.
     
  17. halfajack

    halfajack Occasional commenter

    Email the membership address on the website and tell the you're not getting emails. They will update the list. Sorry to be blunt, but it's a member's responsibility to make sure the union has their contact details. The vote was online but instructions on how to vote were sent by post to members for whom they didn't have an email address.
     
  18. bigjimmy2

    bigjimmy2 Lead commenter

    Junior doctors offered 11% . . .
     
  19. suzuki1690

    suzuki1690 New commenter

    Junior doctors are on a low basic wage eg circa £24000 in their first year and around £28000 in their second year. If they have a post with long hours or a particularly difficult job they are given a Banding over and above this basic wage. The Banding could be 30% or 40% or 50% of their basic wage added on as a form of supplement. This supplement is given eg if they are working weekends and or 12 hour shifts or as I said a particularly onerous post. Now it is this Banding that the Tories want to remove. To simply replace it with an 11% pay rise on basic pay. I dont think 11% makes up for their loss or that indeed 11% added on to £24000 is really enough for the long hours junior hospital doctors work or their level of qualification. 11% is a great headline but the devil is in the detail. I support any strike action they take as I know first hand how god awful that job can be for a 24 year old.
     
  20. BillyBobJoe

    BillyBobJoe Lead commenter

    Yeah, don't fall for the tories' divide and rule tactics. The pay bill for junior doctors is not going to increase a penny, it's all smoke and mirrors.
     

Share This Page