Bum Crack wrote: That's just what happens in the real world.
The real world. Here we go again.

by zipzap » Fri Feb 12, 2010 1:20 pm
Bum Crack wrote: That's just what happens in the real world.
by FlyingHigh » Fri Feb 12, 2010 1:25 pm
zipzap wrote:Bum Crack wrote: That's just what happens in the real world.
The real world. Here we go again.
by FlyingHigh » Fri Feb 12, 2010 1:32 pm
Squawk wrote:Dutchy wrote:One thing Ive never been able to get a grip of is what do teachers actually get paid?
BAND 1 TEACHERS at 1/10/07 (note - current rates are now +3.75% from 9/2/09 and +4% from 1/10/09)
Step 1 = $49605 (graduate entry)
2 52165
3 54724
4 57280
5 59845
6 62403
7 64961
8 68422
AST 1/KEY TEACHER (fall back) 70492
AST 2 73791
BAND 2 PROMOTIONAL CLASSIFICATIONS
COORDINATOR 1 70492
COORDINATOR 2 73507
COORDINATOR 3 76829
ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL 1 77703
ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL 2 82291
BAND 3 PRINCIPALS/ DEPUTY PRINCIPALS
PC01 78576
PC02 83741
PC03 88908
PC04 94073
PC05 99242
PC06 104408
PC07 109575
PC08 114740
by Bum Crack » Fri Feb 12, 2010 2:27 pm
zipzap wrote:Bum Crack wrote: That's just what happens in the real world.
The real world. Here we go again.
by Bum Crack » Fri Feb 12, 2010 2:28 pm
FlyingHigh wrote:zipzap wrote:Bum Crack wrote: That's just what happens in the real world.
The real world. Here we go again.
Exactly. Aren't we all part of the real world?
by Apachebulldog » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:46 pm
by zipzap » Fri Feb 12, 2010 6:38 pm
Bum Crack wrote:zipzap wrote:Bum Crack wrote: That's just what happens in the real world.
The real world. Here we go again.
Yeah, you're right. They are the only profession who put in extra hours in their job. How silly of me to think they aren't
by Mic » Fri Feb 12, 2010 7:18 pm
Bum Crack wrote:FlyingHigh wrote:zipzap wrote:Bum Crack wrote: That's just what happens in the real world.
The real world. Here we go again.
Exactly. Aren't we all part of the real world?
Well stop making them out to be the only one's who work for their hard earned.
by FlyingHigh » Fri Feb 12, 2010 7:50 pm
Bum Crack wrote:FlyingHigh wrote:zipzap wrote:Bum Crack wrote: That's just what happens in the real world.
The real world. Here we go again.
Exactly. Aren't we all part of the real world?
Well stop making them out to be the only one's who work for their hard earned.
by HH3 » Fri Feb 12, 2010 8:08 pm
Chuck Norris wrote:Dogwatcher wrote:BIG SEXY wrote: lots of jobs are hard work and they dont get pay rises. im self emplyed, work anywhere from45 to 70 hours a week and im lucky if i get paid for 30.
yes it was my choice but it was the teachers choice to teach.
But mate, you are reliant on yourself and your will to make your business work. You can choose to work extra hours to make more profit for your business, or find new ways to do so.
Teachers have to ask to get more pay and look at the battle they go through to do that.BIG SEXY wrote: every industry has lazy workers but every industry assesses there workers and compensated them accordingly. perhaps its time teachers werent paid a flat rate but a rate determined by how good they actually are
I know some teachers that would agree with you on that.
I noted earlier in this thread that firefighters got a pay rise and didn't have to fight for it like the teachers did.
No votes in kicking around firefighters though is there....
How often are teachers' lives threatened though DW.
I can fully understand fireys getting a rise. That's a high-risk, dangerous job.
by Squawk » Fri Feb 12, 2010 8:55 pm
zipzap wrote:Always get a chuckle the way some people equate unhappy people in suits sitting in a climate-controlled office cubicles surrounded by other unhappy people in cubicles with the 'real world'.
by dedja » Sat Feb 13, 2010 11:29 am
zipzap wrote:Gee there are some muppets on this thread.
Just like clockwork, every time the T-word gets mentioned, bitter & jealous card-carrying members of the Big Bob fan club - who clearly had a bad experience in Biology (double meaning) - down tools and rise bunyip-like from the coal mine (Yorkshire, possibly) to grizzle about lazy teachers who snigger knowingly up their tweed sleeves while Joe the Plumber puts in 75 hours hard graft a week with no pay, no holidays and no 'spect.
Boo hoo, why should you get a payrise cos I didn't get one and my job's heaps harder, there's not enough hospitals...wah wah....
Take the chip off your shoulder, get off your bums and get organised and fight for it yourself if it's so important to you. Cripes alive, you sound like Port supporters!
FWIW the new arbitration ruling has introduced a Step 9 for teachers' salaries which is entirely PERFORMANCE BASED. ie to get any way near the top rate a teacher will have to undergo rigorous out of hours professional development and undergo stringent assessment of performance - which is as it should be and has always been the case for ASTs anyway.
by Mic » Sat Feb 13, 2010 11:51 am
dedja wrote:zipzap wrote:Gee there are some muppets on this thread.
Just like clockwork, every time the T-word gets mentioned, bitter & jealous card-carrying members of the Big Bob fan club - who clearly had a bad experience in Biology (double meaning) - down tools and rise bunyip-like from the coal mine (Yorkshire, possibly) to grizzle about lazy teachers who snigger knowingly up their tweed sleeves while Joe the Plumber puts in 75 hours hard graft a week with no pay, no holidays and no 'spect.
Boo hoo, why should you get a payrise cos I didn't get one and my job's heaps harder, there's not enough hospitals...wah wah....
Take the chip off your shoulder, get off your bums and get organised and fight for it yourself if it's so important to you. Cripes alive, you sound like Port supporters!
FWIW the new arbitration ruling has introduced a Step 9 for teachers' salaries which is entirely PERFORMANCE BASED. ie to get any way near the top rate a teacher will have to undergo rigorous out of hours professional development and undergo stringent assessment of performance - which is as it should be and has always been the case for ASTs anyway.
That's a good start ... how does one get to step 8 would be my question.
by dedja » Sat Feb 13, 2010 11:55 am
Mic wrote:dedja wrote:zipzap wrote:Gee there are some muppets on this thread.
Just like clockwork, every time the T-word gets mentioned, bitter & jealous card-carrying members of the Big Bob fan club - who clearly had a bad experience in Biology (double meaning) - down tools and rise bunyip-like from the coal mine (Yorkshire, possibly) to grizzle about lazy teachers who snigger knowingly up their tweed sleeves while Joe the Plumber puts in 75 hours hard graft a week with no pay, no holidays and no 'spect.
Boo hoo, why should you get a payrise cos I didn't get one and my job's heaps harder, there's not enough hospitals...wah wah....
Take the chip off your shoulder, get off your bums and get organised and fight for it yourself if it's so important to you. Cripes alive, you sound like Port supporters!
FWIW the new arbitration ruling has introduced a Step 9 for teachers' salaries which is entirely PERFORMANCE BASED. ie to get any way near the top rate a teacher will have to undergo rigorous out of hours professional development and undergo stringent assessment of performance - which is as it should be and has always been the case for ASTs anyway.
That's a good start ... how does one get to step 8 would be my question.
Steps go up for every year of teaching and stop when you get to Step 8.
by Dog_ger » Sat Feb 13, 2010 1:55 pm
Apachebulldog wrote:Dogger is spot the aged care workers in this state are grossly underpaid ie cleaners,kitchen staff, maintenance workers, 16,17 and 18 dollars per hour is not good enough now nusres well thats another story.
My other half is a supervisor in aged care and gets less than all the above mentioned something definetly wrong but the funny thing some of these facilities are owned by different church groups who have millions of dollars and guess what the CEO'S, admin staff etc are on top money plus company cars very interesting
by RustyCage » Sun Feb 14, 2010 12:14 am
Dogwatcher wrote:"How about the children" is actually a fair comment.
As in the coverage of the issue I've seen in the past few days, neither the union or government has commented on the 'conditions' that were also part of the debate. What happened to those?
BS - the reason the union asks for a high ball figure is because the government will offer a low ball figure (as generally they know the public will support them in that because, again, teachers are easy to have a kick at).
The union did stuff up this time though in forcing this one to drag on.
by RustyCage » Sun Feb 14, 2010 12:19 am
gossipgirl wrote:It always amuses me that there is an assumption if a job pays more then you get better people. Its really a load of crap you just attract more greedy people.
I would support the teachers in striking if it would mean a better education for the kids but it is always about money money money.
The problem with the education system is that there are far too many bureaucrats and not enough teachers, teaching in schools.
of course the union receives more money if their members are paid more
by dedja » Sun Feb 14, 2010 12:29 am
by RustyCage » Sun Feb 14, 2010 12:42 am
by dedja » Sun Feb 14, 2010 12:53 am
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |