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

The IfL: why should we keep it in business?

Discussion in 'Further Education' started by Marley811, Feb 9, 2011.

  1. cariadwch

    cariadwch Established commenter

    The IfL will have to face up to the fact that a few tens of thousands will simply not pay the £68. It will be difficult for them to justify using the fees of those who reluctantly have paid to pay for costly disciplinary action against those who have not.
    Apparently the UCU launched a petition today against the introduction of self financing IfL fees.
    I'm got no problem with Lee Davis as a leader of a voluntary IfL. I'm sure it will have to go back to being an organisation that one volunteers to join...If large numbers refuse or can't be bothered to set up their direct debit agreements in April I'm sure thats what will happen.
  2. Hmm, teachered, your first postings ever today....
  3. Hi
    Can I add that us on the fringes of teaching paying £68 for a chance to tutor groups extended learning etc, some 90 Min's a session (if they run after the first week or 2) Taking the whole amount I was paid for the year, removing the amount the travel cost in time as well as money (I know we all pay to get to work but I often travel as long as I tutor so the balance can be different to a more static teacher) £68 is very much more pro rata than for those employed on a more full time contract.
    I have worked in my industry for over 25 years, have amassed a vast body of knowledge and <u>still</u> work in my industry, learning and developing all the time. Its this knowledge and love of my craft I pass on to anyone who will give me the time to show them. I love tutoring... couldn't do teaching in a formal setting even though my subject knowledge is more than adequate the system teachers have to slot themselves into isn't for me. But paying for the pleasure.....I don't think so.
    I can pro rata my professional development how about the fee?
  4. They are not modest are they?

    <h1>Committee members required for investigation, professional practice and appeal committees</h1><u>As a world-class professional body</u>, the Institute for Learning has a Code of Professional Practice which embraces and celebrates our members&rsquo; high standards of professional behaviour.


  5. VidalHair - others, like me I suspect, came to the TES site from the IfL article on Friday. Indeed these are my first messages and, having taken the time to read some of the 'discussions' here, almost certainly will be my last. I recognise now I should have just left my comment on the article and not left any thoughts here. Though I find it more than mildly ironic that a seasoned campaigner with all of 15 messages to their credit would see it their business to castigate a newcomer, unless, of course, this is just one of your many user names?

    Don't see you criticising those whose first posts are not particularly pro IfL - agenda?
  6. Surely one of the arguments here is that some of us would like the option to be able to apply for teaching roles in schools and be paid the same amount as someone who has QTS, not that we necessarily expect more money (on par with school teachers) for the roles currently held in FE (though of course this would be lovely!!)? I personally am not expecting new jobs to be created, but just the chance to compete against colleagues for a job in a secondary school, and have my qualification recognised alongside theirs. I feel this is particularly important for someone like myself who teaches art and design. Jobs in in FE are so thin on the ground (I just had to look at the 1 page of FE jobs in the TES supplement this month, and see that on that page not 1 job was related to my subject area) - that I would relish the chance to apply for an art teaching job in a school and know that I could get the same pay. After all my passion for my subject means I just want the chance to actually TEACH it! Of course my preference is for FE, which is the reason I trained in that sector initially, but I firmly believe that my skills, knowledge and qualification mean I am equally equipped to teach at Secondary level as anyone with QTS and a degree in the arts.
    That said, I am highly suspicous of the price hike from the Ifl. As someone who cannot find a job in FE, I resent having to pay the &pound;68 just to spend a bit more of my precious time filling out Reflect and proving my CPD to them. Perhaps a sliding scale depending on hours worked in the sector would work better, something similar to the one applied already for the CPD.
  7. Oh you are so right but fear the lily livered amongst us will quake at the thought of getting 'Egyptian' about ANY cause
  8. Well said Flurominx - my thoughts exactly. I don't want parity with school teachers, heaven knows in all but salary I am already far ahead of their limited experiences. I do, however, expect my professionalism (I'm not QTLS yet, this year, I promise) to be recognised for what it is - best qualified to teach my craft through my mix of hospitality and catering experince and my teaching qualifications. I have follwed the lead IfL takes here with keen interest as it will be the foot in the door we need. No, I don't expect my employer to pay me the same as a school teacher, different markets with different economies, but I do expect my standing to count.

    You don't have to fill our Reflect, it is entirely optional.

    I think I agree with you on a sliding scale, but I expect that would mean full-timers paying much more and at the end of the day it is a 'licence to practice' - I would rather those teaching below a threshhold, say 120 hours each year, paying a lesser fee - not a sliding scale - how would IfL check what people were telling them without the checking costing more money?
  9. I doubt the rest of the country who have to pay to work in their vocations or professions would have much sympathy, indeed those paying hundreds or even thousands to do so would probably think us pathetic. Real world and all that - it's the 'big society' ..... we all pay instead of the state.
  10. While the UCU petition is emotionally sincere, it is rather like asking turkeys to vote for Christmas. I have uploaded a petition calling upon government to repeal/revoke specific regulations and remove IfL's monopoly status in relation to our CPD and registration, thus making membership voluntary. Please support colleagues. www.petitionbuzz.com/petitions/endiflmonopoly
  11. The IFL is a joke, the principal of compulsory membership of a professional body is great, but so was the principal behind private finance initiatives. However, just as PFI have proved to be nothing but a burden to the schools and hospitals that have been subjected to them, the IFL is now proving to be nothing but a pain in the backside to every FE lecturer I have spoken to.
    I have signed your petition and I urge every othe lecturer to both sign the petition and refuse to pay the IFL.
  12. moonpenny

    moonpenny Occasional commenter

    Hmmm...........the only thing it has done for me is added to my workload when I have had to fill in my inset records online, most of it quite forgettable and not really that significant to my job role.
    Any meaningful inset i.e. specialist training days which actually help me is firmly recorded in my head as basically there has been 4 days in 6 years and I can remember the dates anyway. The rest doesn't really need to be recorded.
    I won't be rushing to pay the money and am hoping the unions can back us up on this.
  13. moonpenny

    moonpenny Occasional commenter

  14. You have inset?
    I can count mine even more easily. A big fat zero.
  15. cariadwch

    cariadwch Established commenter

    Is the IfL a democratic institution, run in the interests of its membership to promote members interests?
    If the answer is yes, then the majority of members seem to view it as a pointless irrelevance. and therefore should call for it to be scrapped - a truly democratic option for the membership. IFL - give members this vote or members should choose not to pay the fee to force its demise,
  16. moonpenny

    moonpenny Occasional commenter

    Unfortunately, yes.
    Well, that simplifies things even more[​IMG]

    On top of the IFL request , I also got a letter from my professional membership body asking for &pound;82 . I also have to keep being a member so I can carry out my job so it isn't as though I can say no to that.
    I think I should change my user name to money (less) penny.
  17. Sorry if this has been posted before and I missed it


    I am not a member but could still sign it and it has over 10000 signatures.

    I also signed the other petition mentioned on here but I was only number 45 - hope there's lots more now.

    Yesterday I rang the IfL and the said that if you earn less than personal allowance of £6000 something then it's 'only' £45 ... bit better but still don't want to be forced to pay for something I detest and am forced to be part of.

    My work (council) sent an email saying that if we don't pay we are no longer entitled to work for them ... wonderful ... NOT

    I will wait for as long as possible with paying - if I ever pay ...
  18. jacob

    jacob Lead commenter

    You can also write to your MP to ask him/her to ask Gove to amend his bill that disbands the GTC to include disbanding the IfL.
  19. Cheflecturer you are always convinced you are so right all of the time...is there a reason why you always seem to be PRO-IFL? Why not have the bottle to post your real name instead of hiding behind a pseudonym
  20. cariadwch

    cariadwch Established commenter

    I disagree with much of what cheflecturer says, but what's your opinion on the IfL then 'PDent'?.

Share This Page