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

We MUST have ONE TEACHING union post CV19

Discussion in 'Personal' started by red_observer, Apr 9, 2020.

  1. Kandahar

    Kandahar Star commenter

    I fully agree with you Mr Oberver. The NEU ought to be strong, but are comprised of the ATL who were insrumental in allowing coversupervisors as paid up members!. The NASUWT continue to be the equivalent of the Liberal party - very on the fence and weak. The good old days of men-led teaching unions of the seventies are a distant past I'm afraid.
    JL48 and red_observer like this.
  2. afterdark

    afterdark Lead commenter

  3. lizziescat

    lizziescat Star commenter

    But that didn't make any difference because.....
    .....their members immediately left Nas/Uwe and joined the NEU single union.

    .....oh no , they didn’t:rolleyes:

    The union is the membership.
    agathamorse and border_walker like this.
  4. 50sman

    50sman Lead commenter

    The unions would not unite in the 1989s (remember AMMA as they then were had a conscience clause which meant they didn’t have to strike. PAT was formed by those staff who didn’t want to strike at all. As a result we got national curriculum, Baker days and eventually OFSTED.

    Many teachers aren’t even in a union.

    it hit me when I was on supply about 6 years ago and went on strike to protect the pensions of the staff in the school who actually went to work and got paid on those days!
  5. red_observer

    red_observer Star commenter

    Yes remember those times. The strikes of the 80s left a lot of scars. The NUT rep at our place broke the strike but carried on and so I left and barely ever spoke to her again. It’s going to be unpopular to say this but the presence of a lot of second income women also blunts the militancy of teaching unions. We have no chance.
    Kandahar likes this.
  6. JL48

    JL48 Star commenter

    For a short while I was an NUT rep for a large comprehensive in central London. When I went to the area meetings I would bring up issues like workload, working conditions etc. to the other officers. They weren't interested.

    What were they interested in? Gender pay equality, racism against teachers of colour in schools and how the Palestinian teaching union that we were sponsoring were doing in the occupied territories. I kid you not.

    Until the average teacher wakes up and realises that the unions are not some kind of government ombudsman, and actually takes an interest and requires them to represent their interests then little will change.
    Kandahar and red_observer like this.
  7. Mangleworzle

    Mangleworzle Star commenter

    I remember that very clearly (a bit more than 6 years though?).

    Virtually none of the younger members who were hit the hardest by the changes went on strike and many were at pains to show they cared so much about the kids which is why they weren't striking - and hoping to be noticed by management. The strikers were older staff, though by no means all of the older staff. I even heard some very gleefully talk about "being able to catch up without the kids around" and get paid as well.

    I told myself if nothing else I was doing it for my benefit at least and was very disappointed at how few of my colleagues were prepared to miss a days pay for themselves let alone anyone else.

    The common refrain from the young was something like "there will be hardly any pension left for us then anyway, what's the point?" Turkeys voting for Christmas.

    By the time it settled, the strikers pensions by and large were intact, the non-strikers got what they expected. The average teachers pension at the time was about £10,000 p.a., changing retirement age from 60 to 67 therefore cost them £70,000 each without the fall due to the new criteria for calculating pensionable salary.

    At some ill defined point in my teaching career teachers stopped being the union and started to see a union as a sort of insurance company. Too many are too keen to be seen to be a management pet with some ill defined future benefit that might bring.
    agathamorse likes this.
  8. lizziescat

    lizziescat Star commenter

    Even before the pension changes , I remember the ‘consultation’ of the change to TLRs where some colleagues were set to have their management points degraded or lose them altogether. The younger staff view was that,’it doesn’t affect me’ except that in my school it meant cutting posts of responsibility promotions by about a third which lessened those available for ..err... the younger staff to get future promotions.
    agathamorse and Mangleworzle like this.
  9. coffeekid

    coffeekid Star commenter

    Thought so. Sigh.
  10. afterdark

    afterdark Lead commenter

    Yes, you were talking to me.
    No, I meant England because other parts of union such as Scotland have different laws.
    coffeekid likes this.
  11. Kandahar

    Kandahar Star commenter

    the problem in a nutshell.
  12. JL48

    JL48 Star commenter

    Yes, well. Unless more sensible people start to get involved, it won't change.
    Kandahar likes this.
  13. red_observer

    red_observer Star commenter

    i should have known better yes

    1 Teachers are happy to be pushed around
    2 For a lot of people teaching is a nice second income so why bother upsetting the apple cart even if you are being treated like dirt
    3 No point striking...youre only hurting the kids and its all about them
    4 union officials wont want to give up their perks
    5 Teachers, a lot of them, are tories.

  14. JL48

    JL48 Star commenter

    My first HoD was very active in the union, a complete pain in the neck for SLT, and the truest blue Tory you could imagine. He used to call me a Trot because I bought the Independent.

Share This Page