Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Should teachers be banned from striking? Watch

Announcements
  • View Poll Results: Should teachers be banned from striking?
    Yes
    65
    28.02%
    No
    167
    71.98%

    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    They're striking over their pension plan, and their minimal rises, and that instead of being ensured a pay rise for the first x years they actually have to do their job properly. And while their pay was frozen and inflation was still happening, their base rate is still higher than the national median, and the top of the main scale outside of London is still 5k higher than the mean. They cry because their not actually bad pay isn't going up.
    And everyone else's is. So that's unfair, and you can clearly see the motive for striking. Glad to have sorted that out.

    Do you only believe in people who earn below average striking? I don't really see the issue with the pensions stuff, but it's not only teachers who are complaining about that. Overall, I don't see banning a group from having the right to strike is ever an acceptable choice. The police and army are banned for totally different reasons (although I wouldn't really care if the army striked, I mean, if someone were to invade, they'd stop striking pretty quick). Removing someone's right to strike is unneeded and somewhat authoritarian.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lerjj)
    And everyone else's is. So that's unfair, and you can clearly see the motive for striking. Glad to have sorted that out.
    Last I checked the majority of the public sector had its pay frozen.

    Do you only believe in people who earn below average striking? I don't really see the issue with the pensions stuff, but it's not only teachers who are complaining about that. Overall, I don't see banning a group from having the right to strike is ever an acceptable choice. The police and army are banned for totally different reasons (although I wouldn't really care if the army striked, I mean, if someone were to invade, they'd stop striking pretty quick). Removing someone's right to strike is unneeded and somewhat authoritarian.
    I don't think only those below average should be allowed to, I just think that those who are already pretty well of shouldn't be able to strike over such petty matters, it's not like they have unsafe working conditions or anything.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Last I checked the majority of the public sector had its pay frozen.


    I don't think only those below average should be allowed to, I just think that those who are already pretty well of shouldn't be able to strike over such petty matters, it's not like they have unsafe working conditions or anything.
    If it's petty, then nothing happens. Most teacher's probably won't even go on strike and lose a day's pay.

    The question is, do we want to ban people striking over petty things? Maybe
    Do we want to ban a group which has an unfortunate reputation for striking over petty things? I would say no

    The rest of the public sector also striked afaik over the things which affected all of them. Without stats, I didn't think teachers striked more than any other group (in fact, I thought they did it less often). So a ban would be insanely arbitrary.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lerjj)
    If it's petty, then nothing happens. Most teacher's probably won't even go on strike and lose a day's pay.

    The question is, do we want to ban people striking over petty things? Maybe
    Do we want to ban a group which has an unfortunate reputation for striking over petty things? I would say no

    The rest of the public sector also striked afaik over the things which affected all of them. Without stats, I didn't think teachers striked more than any other group (in fact, I thought they did it less often). So a ban would be insanely arbitrary.
    I believe barely any teachers went on strike last time, where my mum works none of the teachers were on strike and where my sister works was closed, not because of teachers striking, but because of the support staff who have been even worse off pay wise.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    I believe barely any teachers went on strike last time, where my mum works none of the teachers were on strike and where my sister works was closed, not because of teachers striking, but because of the support staff who have been even worse off pay wise.
    Okaay. I don't understand why you'd want to ban striking then? It serves no purpose (the ban), and unnecessarily reduces freedoms. I would generally hold against anything that satisfies those criteria.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    If you increase their pay in accordance with inflation then maybe their won't be such an issue, and maybe stop with all the cuts that are hurting the operations of the schools?
    People strike for a reason, to say it is greed is very cynical. To want to be paid money that does not lose value every year is not greed. A raise in wage should be on hard work and on merit, increase of pay in accordance with inflation should be mandatory.

    When you spend so much on nuclear weapon programmes that will never be used, and if are used will have a disastrous effect, why not spend the money on something that will actually be used instead and will have positive effects.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KrisCussans)
    If you increase their pay in accordance with inflation then maybe their won't be such an issue, and maybe stop with all the cuts that are hurting the operations of the schools?
    People strike for a reason, to say it is greed is very cynical. To want to be paid money that does not lose value every year is not greed. A raise in wage should be on hard work and on merit, increase of pay in accordance with inflation should be mandatory.

    When you spend so much on nuclear weapon programmes that will never be used, and if are used will have a disastrous effect, why not spend the money on something that will actually be used instead and will have positive effects.
    Its greed if revenues aren't keeping up with inflation.

    This is also a short term view, pay in the 15 years prior to 'austerity' ran ahead of inflation, I'm guessing you wouldn't want pay to be baseline to reflect inflation...
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    If teachers think they are underpaid, then they should just quit, simple. Why don't they quit, because they know they can't get a better paying job anywhere else, so clearly they are not underpaid after all.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Doctor_Einstein)
    Why don't they quit
    Err ...
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    No way! Of course teachers should be able to strike, hell everyone should legally be allowed to strike it's one of the only effective ways to get this wretched government to listen.

    I hate it when people disregard it as disruptive and they're deliberately trying to cause a fuss when really 1) why would someone want to lose a days pay? And 2) why spend years training to become a teacher to say one day "oh hey, I'm gonna go go on strike now" we and the government should value our teachers who play such an important role in society and deserve to be paid more. If MPs can get an 11% pay rise plus all their benefits and allowances we should get one too (lol I'm not a teacher).

    Anyway, it's the same with firefighters, tube drivers and even postmen and women! People always complain their wages are too high when really, it's their wage which is too low! I mean the minimum wage is what? £6.31 or something? To buy a one day travel card in London costs over £8 where is the logic?
    Join a union, protest and make a difference!

    Peace.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Independentisha)
    No way! Of course teachers should be able to strike, hell everyone should legally be allowed to strike it's one of the only effective ways to get this wretched government to listen.

    I hate it when people disregard it as disruptive and they're deliberately trying to cause a fuss when really 1) why would someone want to lose a days pay? And 2) why spend years training to become a teacher to say one day "oh hey, I'm gonna go go on strike now" we and the government should value our teachers who play such an important role in society and deserve to be paid more. If MPs can get an 11% pay rise plus all their benefits and allowances we should get one too (lol I'm not a teacher).

    Anyway, it's the same with firefighters, tube drivers and even postmen and women! People always complain their wages are too high when really, it's their wage which is too low! I mean the minimum wage is what? £6.31 or something? To buy a one day travel card in London costs over £8 where is the logic?
    Join a union, protest and make a difference!

    Peace.
    When has a strike changed the mind of this Government?

    By what percentage would a new teacher's wage have risen from joining in Sept 2010 and Sept 2014 or 2015? By what percentage would a new MP's wage have risen from joining in May 2010 and Sept 2014 or 2015?

    Why should tube drivers be in the top 10% of UK earners?

    Not sure what the link is between the national minimum wage for one hour and a days travelcard covering as many journeys as you like in London....
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    When has a strike changed the mind of this Government?

    By what percentage would a new teacher's wage have risen from joining in Sept 2010 and Sept 2014 or 2015? By what percentage would a new MP's wage have risen from joining in May 2010 and Sept 2014 or 2015?

    Why should tube drivers be in the top 10% of UK earners?

    Not sure what the link is between the national minimum wage for one hour and a days travelcard covering as many journeys as you like in London....
    I'm a lil confused of the point you're trying to make. I'm not an economist I cannot throw statistics at you off the top of my head lol. But I never said tube drivers should be in the "top 10%" hell most jobs which I believe rightly deserve to be in that bracket are not even in the "top 50" 🙈. Anyway, I just believe people should have the right to strike or protest for what I believe is unfair or completely wrong whatever wage they may earn and whether they "deserve" it or not.

    And the link is, how can it cost more to get to work than what you would make in an hour! I'm not sure if you live in London or not but as far I'm concerned it's ridiculous. So yes, people should strike and their voices should be heard whether the government want to make false promises, blame previous governments or get off their arses and do something about it! I believe it's our right to do so (:

    Do you think staying silent is more effective?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Independentisha)
    I'm a lil confused of the point you're trying to make. I'm not an economist I cannot throw statistics at you off the top of my head lol. But I never said tube drivers should be in the "top 10%" hell most jobs which I believe rightly deserve to be in that bracket are not even in the "top 50" 🙈. Anyway, I just believe people should have the right to strike or protest for what I believe is unfair or completely wrong whatever wage they may earn and whether they "deserve" it or not.

    And the link is, how can it cost more to get to work than what you would make in an hour! I'm not sure if you live in London or not but as far I'm concerned it's ridiculous. So yes, people should strike and their voices should be heard whether the government want to make false promises, blame previous governments or get off their arses and do something about it! I believe it's our right to do so (:

    Do you think staying silent is more effective?
    Yup, but you also suggested people shouldn't criticise them for doing so. When tube drivers strike for better compensation they do so from a very high base.

    Ironically for your point, they force the travelcard price up. It can, Similarly if I commute from Manchester to London my travel costs would be more than my entire wage.

    Being 'silent' isn't, but demonstrating with your feet and doing something else does. Thats why London workers get more money.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    Yup, but you also suggested people shouldn't criticise them for doing so. When tube drivers strike for better compensation they do so from a very high base.

    Ironically for your point, they force the travelcard price up. It can, Similarly if I commute from Manchester to London my travel costs would be more than my entire wage.

    Being 'silent' isn't, but demonstrating with your feet and doing something else does. Thats why London workers get more money.
    Oh yeah, well I don't think people should. If people are brave enough to stand up to the government with all the negativity being published in the media about all the "chaos" they have caused and the "outrage". I respect those who still go out and protest and exercise their right to strike whether the "general" public agree with it or not (who the hell is the general public???)

    Funnily enough I was gonna mention that, but what I was gonna say was you would think with the amount us Londoners are forced to pay they would pay those workers a bit more, init? Like, where does that money go?

    So you agree with demonstrating but not striking then? What's the difference?
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Everybody has the right to strike - however, I think teachers have a moral obligation to think about what they are doing and how it affects the students under their guidance/influence.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mackay)
    Everybody has the right to strike -
    Tell that to the people who aren't legally allowed to strike

    however, I think teachers have a moral obligation to think about what they are doing and how it affects the students under their guidance/influence.
    And this makes it sound like you're naive enough to think it actually has any effect on education.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    the only people who shouldn't be able to strike imo are emergency service workers & they should have stronger rights in other areas to make up for this, the right to strike is a cornerstone of any democracy.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
    Useful resources
    Uni match

    Applying to uni?

    Our tool will help you find the perfect course

    Articles:

    Debate and current affairs guidelinesDebate and current affairs wiki

    Quick link:

    Educational debate unanswered threads

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.