Teachers and Sick Leave..

[Fishcake]

I think we may be coming down too hard on Sue here. I have a feeling there is more to her arguments than she has put on and if she is like me does not always explain herself too well.

 

Sue am I right that you didn't mean to single out teachers and they were an example used because of your experience? I ask because I think maybe I didn't give you a fair crack before and I often (see my knee jerk postin gin all its glory all over) jump to the wrong conclusions.

[andikay]

Yep you're right.

 

 

Being a teacher isn't open season on physical and verbal abuse.I'm sure the mechanic would be off sick, if every time a car failed its MOT the car owner beat him up.

 

How many of the teachers off sick are off because they were beat up?

[andikay]

So why pick on teachers?

 

I would imagine that’s because the thread is about teachers off sick.

[Guest sibon]

Yes

yes

no

no

no

no

 

So, not exactly the most informed basis for forming an opinion.

 

 

But I do know that my children’s education suffered because two teachers were never at work and the school couldn't provide a permanent replacement. In my opinion a child’s educations is more important than the rights of a teacher to sit at home on full pay that can't teach.

 

I agree entirely. If you read the rest of my posts on this thread, you should see that pretty clearly. I've also maintained consistently that malingering teachers are few and far between. They undoubtedly need sacking.

 

Long term illness can hit anyone. Most reputable private sector companies have sick pay schemes, just like the public sector. A teacher on genuine long term sick leave can have a disproportionate effect upon a small number of pupils. That is really an issue for the senior managers at the school to resolve. They should have the budget, the contacts and the creativity to make sure that the problem is dealt with. I know a place where that happens:wink:

 

Which still leaves us with mystery of why you and sues budgie are bad-mouthing a hardworking, valuable profession.

[andikay]

I know a lot of teachers and I think (this links in with society having a problem with instilling basic manners in children) that they do a difficult job. they are limited to what they can do and the odds are against them. I wouldn't be a teacher, not because of the stress but because I would end up shouting a lot and that wouldn't be cool.

 

Sue, why are you concerned about what other people do or don't do? Do you feel badly done to? Is the grass greener? Is this a tax payer thing? Is this a daily mail thing? Lots of people focus on external issues and like to blame allsorts save for what is really wrong in their lives. Just a thought.

 

Without sue and people like her there would be no debate, if we don’t debate there would be no point to SF. Or are we all expected to agree with each other?

[Wildcat]

There a difference between being paid to do nothing and where you live.

If you employed a builder on a daily rate and he rang you to say he couldn't work for a couple of months because he had a allergy to cement, would you employ another builder or would you just keep paying him for doing nothing?

 

If you employed a teacher on a day rate they would be employed like supply teachers are on day rates there would be no stability as retention would be poor disrupting the children's learning and involving lots of bureaucracy and costs constantly interviewing staff. A reason why private sector teaching offers permanent contracts too.

 

But I do know that my children’s education suffered because two teachers were never at work and the school couldn't provide a permanent replacement. In my opinion a child’s educations is more important than the rights of a teacher to sit at home on full pay that can't teach.

 

Your solution would disrupt your child's education... instead of just a couple of the subjects your child is being taught being disrupted because of long term sickness all their subjects would because all the teachers would be on zero hour contracts (like supply teachers) and constantly changing jobs!

[Wildcat]

Without sue and people like her there would be no debate, if we don’t debate there would be no point to SF. Or are we all expected to agree with each other?

 

There is no value in debating with someone who's opinion is not just ill informed, but who refuses to accept evidence or be reasonable.

[Guest sibon]

Or are we all expected to agree with each other?

 

Oh no. Please don't do that. But also, don't be surprised when folks disagree with you.

[andikay]

So, not exactly the most informed basis for forming an opinion.

 

 

 

 

I agree entirely. If you read the rest of my posts on this thread, you should see that pretty clearly. I've also maintained consistently that malingering teachers are few and far between. They undoubtedly need sacking.

 

Long term illness can hit anyone. Most reputable private sector companies have sick pay schemes, just like the public sector. A teacher on genuine long term sick leave can have a disproportionate effect upon a small number of pupils. That is really an issue for the senior managers at the school to resolve. They should have the budget, the contacts and the creativity to make sure that the problem is dealt with. I know a place where that happens:wink:

 

Which still leaves us with mystery of why you and sues budgie are bad-mouthing a hardworking, valuable profession.

This is a forum, people become members to debate issues, my children’s education suffered because of a couple of teacher that never attended school, one of them was disable and couldn't teach, she couldn't be sacked or replaced. I can't make it any clearer. I'm not attacking all teachers just the ones that are incapable of working but are still being paid. If they can’t do the job they are being paid to do they should leave and allow the school to replace them.

Why attack the members because they disagree with you or have had a different experience than you?

[andikay]

If you employed a teacher on a day rate they would be employed like supply teachers are on day rates there would be no stability as retention would be poor disrupting the children's learning and involving lots of bureaucracy and costs constantly interviewing staff. A reason why private sector teaching offers permanent contracts too.

 

 

 

Your solution would disrupt your child's education... instead of just a couple of the subjects your child is being taught being disrupted because of long term sickness all their subjects would because all the teachers would be on zero hour contracts (like supply teachers) and constantly changing jobs!

 

What solution, you might want to read what I wrote again, all I have said is that people wouldn’t want to payer a builder to sit at home when he should be building your extension.

You wouldn’t pay a plumber to sit at home because he can’t bend over to fit your central heating.

You wouldn’t pay a taxi driver if he could no longer drive.

So why should we pay teachers that can no longer teach.