Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
THE CENTRAL EXECUTIVE of one of Ireland’s largest public sector trade unions has decided not to make any recommendation to its members on whether they should accept the proposed ‘Croke Park 2′ public pay agreement.
The central committee of the Irish National Teachers’ Organisation last night decided that while it would put the matter to its members, in a postal ballot to be held over the next six weeks, it would not issue formal guidance on how it believes teachers should vote.
Last night’s meeting of the committee had followed an original meeting on Wednesday, when the committee decided it needed further details from the Labour Relations Commission about the exact impact of the deal.
The INTO is one of the largest public unions, with a membership of about 32,000 within the Republic – equivalent to about 11 per cent of the entire public workforce.
In a statement the union said the latest proposals offered “significant potential gains” for newly-qualified teachers, who are on pay grades significantly lower than their colleagues who entered the system before 2011.
“However, all teachers are affected by the draft proposals, who have already had pay cuts imposed over the last two years,” it added.
“The proposals include changes to increments, the loss of supervision allowance, and the financial impact for members earning over €65,000.”
It said that given the government’s threat to legislate for pay cuts in the absence of an agreement, the deal on the table represented the best possible package of measures that could be secured via negotiation.
Ballot papers will be sent to members on March 14, which are to be returned by mid-April to determine the result.
INTO members approved the original Croke Park deal by a two-to-one margin.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Pay the police a pittance and they won’t try an inch.
Interesting finding given the inquiry heard no evidence from the Police. It sounds like a typical British inquiry we’ve experienced many times in Ireland. It starts with an outcome and works it’s way backwards from there to find evidence that fits that outcome.
Do you mean the units that deliberately slowed down to delay their arrival at the scene thereby giving adequate time to the murderer to carry out Allahs will
Those are hate facts.
@George Roche: Yes, apparently. And any commentary on them or on how they might possibly be related to the Tunisian attacks would really be hate opinion.
Have you read the disclaimer about bias in their results, I’d say not given your blind faith as displayed in your post citing them
And as for your claim the journal banned someone you know (most likely another of your on line identities I’m guessing) for a comment: I’d say you’ve gone the “full Trump” there, by banned you actually mean the moderator deleted a comment ? Big difference!
@Boganity: You’d be wrong on all counts.
Why is a low paid Tunisian police officer going to risk himself to protect wealthy tourists ?
Because it’s his job
@Mrs M: Poorly paid police around the world protect richer people than themselves every day amd always have done. Not everything is all about money.
It is if your a policeman in country that doesn’t provide an income to your family if you get killed on the job.
Hello.
have your say