The argument, which I've seen regularly, that public sector workers are taxpayers too, so that's all OK, simply doesn't make sense. Every public sector worker is a burden on the finances of the nation, regardless of their job, and the amount they return via tax doesn't make up the amount they take in salary and pension. If it were possible to make up the shortfall with public sector workers' taxes, then why doesn't the government just employ everyone?
I dont know if people are aware of this.... and at the moment I am trying to get confirmation from my Unison Branch, but staff facing redundancy may lose 1 years redundancy pay if they go ahead with strike action.
My school is closing August 2012 - NUT and ATL have told teachers at my school not to strike as this would affect final redundancy payments (info is also on their websites)
Soon as I have heard back my Unison Office I will post their reply, I would strongly recommend anyone else in the same position check to see how striking will affect redundancy payments.
Just a thought, and I'm not sure whether anybody has mentioned this as the thread has now entered its 18th page, but as the schools are likely to be shut as the majority (all?) the teaching unions have decided to strike, will my striking as a technician not just shoot myself in the foot? I would be throwing away a perfect opportunity to get a lot done that would actually benefit me more than anybody else. The school is closed so the Unions have made their point, and I can get on with doing a lot of work in a day with no teachers or students to worry about.
I'm glad they've chosen a Wednesday. I work on Tuesdays and Thursdays, and I'd have to bill the unions for my loss of earnings if they'd chosen either of my working days.
Our place. Only Yr11 are in (due to mocks) but we are offering baby sitting aswell.
If you were due to be in but couldn't be due to the head making the decision to close the school on the grounds of not having enough staff etc... you were available for work and the school would have to pay you as normal.
The thing which bothers me about the strike is that Unison has 1.3 million members.
Only 196,000 bothered to vote, despite having the paperwork sent to you and pre-paid envelopes to return the vote. All you had to do was put a cross in the right box, stick it in the envelope and pop it in a post back.
Out of that 149,000 voted yes, I wonder how many were swayed by the mistruths portrayed in the literature they sent out.
Yes, that may be 76%, but why didn't the majority vote? Are they happy with the status quo?
[QUOTE=TechMonkey;757953]There are a few groups that shouldn't strike. Those within (I think) 3 years of retiring, <snip> QUOTE]
Does this include voluntary early retirement?
Trouble is, these days, I'd do most anything (legal) for a day off.
It has been getting a bit tiresome reading about union after union talk about "resounding message" and "overwhelming agreement" etc. on 30% turnouts though. It cheapens any vote where there actually is massive support for the issue.