Supreme court

124»

Comments

  • IanH
    IanH Forum Participant Posts: 4,708
    1000 Comments
    edited April 2017 #92

    Contracts can easily be altered......so no extra pay, obviously.

    Or maybe no time off for kids during term time......either works well.

  • EasyT
    EasyT Forum Participant Posts: 16,194
    1000 Comments
    edited April 2017 #93

    I suppose the alternative Ian is to leave it to school and parents.

  • IanH
    IanH Forum Participant Posts: 4,708
    1000 Comments
    edited April 2017 #94

    They tried that and it didn't work, hence the law had to step in.

  • Cornersteady
    Cornersteady Club Member Posts: 14,426 ✭✭✭
    5,000 Likes 1000 Comments Name Dropper Photogenic
    edited April 2017 #95

    Really? easily altered? Another alternative fact Ian? The last time teachers pay and conditions were changed was the Teacher's Pay and Conditions Act of 1987. At that actually acted in our favour reducing the amount of days we had to teach from 195 to 190 (we still had to be in 195 days). Then there was the Education Act of 2002 which really focused  with schools being able to break away from local authority control setting among other things their own holidays and paying above the national rates if they wanted.

    In other words to change teacher's pay and conditions would require an act of parliament, quite time consuming and no political party has ever expressed any desire to do so.

  • Cornersteady
    Cornersteady Club Member Posts: 14,426 ✭✭✭
    5,000 Likes 1000 Comments Name Dropper Photogenic
    edited April 2017 #96

    wow, I am sure that Donald Trump will soon be in contact as you show a remarkable ability to post alternative facts, well alternative rubbish really in this case. The current law has not been changed one little bit, the recent ruling merely states than authorities can issue fines for non attendance. Can being the operative word.

Categories