This is an interesting story because it shows the attitude of the Conservatives towards strikes (which we all know), but also that of society towards teachers.



And this is the crux of his complaint - the whole “disrupts family life” bit. Too many times have I heard stories from various teachers I know about parents who treat schools not as a place of education for their children, but as free child care to dip in and out of at a whim. Various incidents illustrate this - from taking children out of school for holidays (there are ample official holiday times - parents should stick to those) to children taking part in school plays being collected at 10pm when the play ended at 7:30 because the parent “was doing other things” - in this case a member of staff has to hang around with the child waiting, or (as is in their rights as this can be a form of child neglect) they call social services to collect the child.

The fact that Gove has recently said that schools should be open from 8am to 8pm, and possibly even on a Saturday, shows that the idea that schools are simply an extended form of creche is taking root.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... -Gove.html

So on to the notion of “inconvenience” - that is the nature of strikes. It’s the withdrawal of labour by the workforce, and this causes an inconvenience. I would call this the selfish attitude. Yes, it’s selfish to go on strike, but I feel it is more selfish to grizzle on about it. People always complain about how a strike affects them directly. I can’t get to work. I have to stay at home and look after my children. They never consider why strikes happen, nor what they would do if they were in a similar situation. People don’t go on strike lightly - you don’t get paid when you are on strike. There is usually a very good reason to do so.

The NUT is going on strike over their pension. teachers will have to pay more for less. The contributions will be going up, the official retirement age will be extended and when they do retire, the pension will be an average salary, NOT something approaching final salary. If you are a woman who has taken time out of her career to raise a family, you can guess that their average salary will be one lower than that of one who worked all their career without a family break. The vast majority of primary school teachers are women, so there are a lot who will be affected by this.

Is this fair? No. The pension structure was part of the employment package, and that is being changed. Not by negotiation, but by diktat.

Similar issues affect other public workers who are finding themselves on the firing line - literally. Many will lose their jobs. The government’s attitude is that it’s going to happen, and tough. I find it staggering that people feel that there should be no protests of any kind about this and that public sector workers should just take their P45 and be happy about it, and do nothing to attempt to reverse the decision. Any inconvenience suffered by the public as a result of these strikes is nothing compared to the inconvenience of redundancy, reduced pensions schemes, etc..

I think that he is wrong. As you say the teachers do not strike all the time. Also they are as middle class a bunch as you can get and they are not happy with this governments policies. Also why should he be upset? They send their kids to private schools already so it does not impact them at all.

As for parents taking kids out of school for holidays that is perfectly reasonable. When I was at school my dad ran a hotel so summer holidays were out as it was their peak trading period. So we always had holidays off peak. Then for many they get ripped off by holiday companies. So they clearly have financial reasons to do so. It could add a couple of thousand for a family to take a break at peak periods, so if the choice is a break off season or never going away what would you suggest?

I do agree with you about the creche attitude but that is a direct consequence of government policy of making everyone work so that they can afford the stupid property bubble that they are trapped in. If it were easier for middle income families to have a non working parent, though considering the attitudes towards single parents you have to wonder why people bother having kids.

As for the pensions. Average pay does suit women better even if they do take breaks. The real losers from such changes are the heads who might not get the high income till late in their careers. They are subsidised by everyone else. As for later retirements that is happening every where as a result of longevity. The contributions issue is worth fighting over. This sounds like a prelude to funding the pensions prior to privatising them.