Teacher strikes

Forums › Off topic › Teacher strikes

1 | ... | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11

29746 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2249550 1-Jun-2019 14:27

Hammerer:

tdgeek:

Take the offer, maintain talks with Govt.

I don't imagine the Govt is saying if you take the offer, dont bother us for 3 years. Its likely they can squeak a but more each year for a while.

In the past it appears to have meant that teachers get little or no resolution on the issues left unresolved after the latest collective agreement is settled. Squeaks have no value outside the negotiations so the opportunity is lost until the next round of negotiations. The one real exception is partial progress at the next election if the government's election campaign needs sweeteners ("bribes") to bolster their votes.

I think that the government expects teachers to cave in now like they have in the past. This usually means another opportunity to get a meaningful change is lost and we have to wait another three years.

The last time teachers seemed this determined/militant was about 20 years ago when the government was merging and closing many schools. The government backed down on that issue but avoided having to do much to improve teaching. The strikes also improved the financial position of the education vote because it is a big saving when you don't have to pay striking teachers.

I think there are two things at play here. If they went for improvements under National's rule and they were told no. As time went on, it got worse for them, so now, a wee above average increase seems too low, as its built up over time. The current Govt is more socially aware so I can see them offering something next budget, election or not. Everyone knows its a good offer and everyone knows it's not enough. The Govt could give hints that the next budget will see non pay gains for education

This whole issue isn't a 2019 issue. Its a 10 year, maybe longer issue. Id want to now get away from pay and focus on teacher:student ratios and other factors that help the teachers

JayADee

2148 posts

Uber Geek

#2249615 1-Jun-2019 16:37

I don't see 3% as being a great offer, pay wise.

tdgeek

29746 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2249654 1-Jun-2019 17:52

JayADee:

I don't see 3% as being a great offer, pay wise.

Isn't that per year for 3 years? What else does the offer bring in, as far as conditions? As to be fair, its really about conditions not pay.

bagheera

539 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2250351 3-Jun-2019 13:52

I feel teachers should get paid the same as an mp, after all, they did back in 1979, have no problem with mp salaries getting cut to help out.

https://www.unleasheducation.co.nz/2017/backbench-mps-vs-teacher-salaries/

jonathan18

7413 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#2250866 4-Jun-2019 09:29

At the risk of reigniting this thread, I thought today's column from Dave Armstrong was worth linking to: https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/education/113200129/why-id-never-be-a-teacher-again

Batman

Mad Scientist
29763 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2251030 4-Jun-2019 12:10

Spot on

MikeAqua

7785 posts

Uber Geek

#2251064 4-Jun-2019 12:26

KiwiSurfer:

The concern I (and many others) have with performance pay is that teaching is a job where it's difficult to objectively measure the performance of an individual teacher in a way that separates their individual performance/skill/etc from factors external to the teacher.

When I hear the debate about performance based pay for teachers; teachers and their unions seem to be envisaging a system where teachers will receive bonuses formulaically calculated from their students' educational achievement. In reality all we need to do is identify better teachers and pay them more. I would bet dollars to doughnuts that principals know who their best teachers are.

Factors outside one's direct control affect performance in many jobs - try farming for vulnerability to external factors. Yet, in many such roles performance is rewarded. How? Managers observe their employees and use a range of soft and hard indicators to determine who are star, good and average employees and pay/reward accordingly.

Principals could so the same. Yes such a system is vulnerable to the fallibility of human beings. That applies in almost every workplace.

I suspect that unions oppose performance based pay at a fundamental level. It's contrary to that core value of solidarity.

Mike

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

frankv

5680 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2251077 4-Jun-2019 12:42

MikeAqua:

When I hear the debate about performance based pay for teachers; teachers and their unions seem to be envisaging a system where teachers will receive bonuses formulaically calculated from their students' educational achievement. In reality all we need to do is identify better teachers and pay them more. I would bet dollars to doughnuts that principals know who their best teachers are.

Factors outside one's direct control affect performance in many jobs - try farming for vulnerability to external factors. Yet, in many such roles performance is rewarded. How? Managers observe their employees and use a range of soft and hard indicators to determine who are star, good and average employees and pay/reward accordingly.

Principals could so the same. Yes such a system is vulnerable to the fallibility of human beings. That applies in almost every workplace.

I suspect that unions oppose performance based pay at a fundamental level. It's contrary to that core value of solidarity.

I think perhaps the whole public service mentality of formulaic pay scales is the problem. Nowhere else do you have this whole structure of scales and steps and merit bars and so on. And I think that's there to ensure transparency and auditability and so on where public money is being spent. If a person is on a particular salary, you need to be able to explain *why* they're on that step, and not being paid less or more. "I as a principal think that's what he's worth" isn't an acceptable answer.

MikeAqua

7785 posts

Uber Geek

#2251093 4-Jun-2019 12:56

frankv:

I think perhaps the whole public service mentality of formulaic pay scales is the problem. Nowhere else do you have this whole structure of scales and steps and merit bars and so on. And I think that's there to ensure transparency and auditability and so on where public money is being spent. If a person is on a particular salary, you need to be able to explain *why* they're on that step, and not being paid less or more. "I as a principal think that's what he's worth" isn't an acceptable answer.

Ironically the only highly formulaic systems I have seen are in collective contracts at the insistence of the unions. The aim is officially to remove 'management bias'. In reality replaced with a whole lot of subjective measures, equally subject to bias and often outcomes are contested by the union.

Mike

jonathan18

7413 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#2251162 4-Jun-2019 14:39

frankv:

I think perhaps the whole public service mentality of formulaic pay scales is the problem. Nowhere else do you have this whole structure of scales and steps and merit bars and so on.

Your post gives the impression that the most common method for paying public servants in NZ is via such 'formulaic pay scales', whereas I'd hazard a guess that a high proportion are subject to performance-based pay (particularly those in the 'core' civil service). I've worked for a number of government departments and at every one of them I've been subject to performance-based pay in all its glory.

Teachers are probably the biggest group who have held onto a more traditional pay system - does anyone know any other groups? Police?

Ge0rge

2055 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2251266 4-Jun-2019 15:04

NZDF - no performance pay there.

jonathan18

7413 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#2251273 4-Jun-2019 15:16

Ge0rge: NZDF - no performance pay there.

Yep; well, to be more specific, not for service members, but even then progression is still linked to meeting specific conditions so isn't a given.

And NZDF civilian staff have the typical performance-based pay requirements as other government departments.

JimmyH

2886 posts

Uber Geek

#2253342 6-Jun-2019 21:33

MikeAqua:

KiwiSurfer:

The concern I (and many others) have with performance pay is that teaching is a job where it's difficult to objectively measure the performance of an individual teacher in a way that separates their individual performance/skill/etc from factors external to the teacher.

When I hear the debate about performance based pay for teachers; teachers and their unions seem to be envisaging a system where teachers will receive bonuses formulaically calculated from their students' educational achievement. In reality all we need to do is identify better teachers and pay them more. I would bet dollars to doughnuts that principals know who their best teachers are.

Factors outside one's direct control affect performance in many jobs - try farming for vulnerability to external factors. Yet, in many such roles performance is rewarded. How? Managers observe their employees and use a range of soft and hard indicators to determine who are star, good and average employees and pay/reward accordingly.

Principals could so the same. Yes such a system is vulnerable to the fallibility of human beings. That applies in almost every workplace.

I suspect that unions oppose performance based pay at a fundamental level. It's contrary to that core value of solidarity.

This.

When I was at school (a long time ago now) there were some great teachers, some mediocre teachers and some outright duds who had sat there for years. It was common knowledge and everyone (the students, the parents, the other teachers) knew which was which. That's clearly still the case now.

Personally, I support higher average pay for teachers. But the quid pro quo has to be proper performance assessment, management and pay. The good ones should get a lot more. The poor performers should be paid less and, if they don't improve, shown the door. Also, those with qualifications in high demand and shortage (Science, Maths with good degrees) should be paid more than in other areas where the market is awash with candidates (eg mediocre arts degrees in subjects with no market demand).

The unions seem to value solidarity and protecting poor performers much more than they do helping strong performers get their due or the children. I know two teachers who have resigned from the union for this reason.

Handle9

11391 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2253386 6-Jun-2019 21:53

Why do you think there is no performance assessment process or performance management in teaching? From what I have seen from my wife's performance assessments there is a fairly rigorous process which is at least as effective as corporate performance assessment.

Teachers are like any other populations, there is a bell curve of performance with the vast majority being from a bit below average to a bit above average. There are some horrible teachers and some great teachers. This is also the same across almost every professional group including engineers, it guys and doctors.

Hammerer

2476 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2253575 7-Jun-2019 09:11

Handle9: Why do you think there is no performance assessment process or performance management in teaching? From what I have seen from my wife's performance assessments there is a fairly rigorous process which is at least as effective as corporate performance assessment.

Teachers are like any other populations, there is a bell curve of performance with the vast majority being from a bit below average to a bit above average. There are some horrible teachers and some great teachers. This is also the same across almost every professional group including engineers, it guys and doctors.

Or were you replying to a post further back than the previous reply? From reading @JimmyH's comments, I can't see that he's saying there's no assessment or management. He's primarily saying that it needs to be properly linked to pay as with the text I've bolded below.

JimmyH:

Personally, I support higher average pay for teachers. But the quid pro quo has to be proper performance assessment, management and pay. The good ones should get a lot more. The poor performers should be paid less and, if they don't improve, shown the door. Also, those with qualifications in high demand and shortage (Science, Maths with good degrees) should be paid more than in other areas where the market is awash with candidates (eg mediocre arts degrees in subjects with no market demand).

The unions seem to value solidarity and protecting poor performers much more than they do helping strong performers get their due or the children. I know two teachers who have resigned from the union for this reason.

1 | ... | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11