Teachers get it handy!

[Ulick]

The offer is three times as much as the average statutory redundancy package.

Three times the average - but is it three times the average in comparable jobs? For example the current voluntary redundancy package on offer at Queen's is "up to two years". Thing with these packages is they only encourage older staff to move on by offering something like 4 weeks pay per year of service "up to 90 weeks" - not everyone will get the "90 weeks". Anything less and it's not worth it for an older member of staff to leave as they can hold on for a few years and get the same on retirement. What's also not mentioned is that a redundancy package of this size is taxable over the £30k mark and taking into consideration current earnings in the year, most of that will be taxed at 40%. Not a bad package but considering most of these people will never work again at the same level or salary, it's not up there with the best either - only a fraction of what the RUC & UDR got and they'd hardly qualifications hanging out of them and doesn't come anywhere near the half million payouts to politicians and advisor in the south. If we want to make room for all of these unemployed young teachers, the older ones need an incentive to move on.

[Evil Genius]

The offer is three times as much as the average statutory redundancy package.

Three times the average - but is it three times the average in comparable jobs? For example the current voluntary redundancy package on offer at Queen's is "up to two years". Thing with these packages is they only encourage older staff to move on by offering something like 4 weeks pay per year of service "up to 90 weeks" - not everyone will get the "90 weeks". Anything less and it's not worth it for an older member of staff to leave as they can hold on for a few years and get the same on retirement. What's also not mentioned is that a redundancy package of this size is taxable over the £30k mark and taking into consideration current earnings in the year, most of that will be taxed at 40%. Not a bad package but considering most of these people will never work again at the same level or salary, it's not up there with the best either - only a fraction of what the RUC & UDR got and they'd hardly qualifications hanging out of them and doesn't come anywhere near the half million payouts to politicians and advisor in the south. If we want to make room for all of these unemployed young teachers, the older ones need an incentive to move on.

Re your comparison in bold, there are two key differences.

1. With Teachers, there is a perceived need to reduce the overall numbers, whereas with the RUC (at least), there was no reduction in police numbers, rather it was necessary to encourage serving RUC officers to retire early, in order to make way for new PSNI replacements;
2. Whilst misbehaviour in the classroom can be a problem, the Teaching profession didn't see 500 of its number murdered by their pupils over the course of 30 years...

[trileacman]

The offer is three times as much as the average statutory redundancy package.

Three times the average - but is it three times the average in comparable jobs? For example the current voluntary redundancy package on offer at Queen's is "up to two years". Thing with these packages is they only encourage older staff to move on by offering something like 4 weeks pay per year of service "up to 90 weeks" - not everyone will get the "90 weeks". Anything less and it's not worth it for an older member of staff to leave as they can hold on for a few years and get the same on retirement. What's also not mentioned is that a redundancy package of this size is taxable over the £30k mark and taking into consideration current earnings in the year, most of that will be taxed at 40%. Not a bad package but considering most of these people will never work again at the same level or salary, it's not up there with the best either - only a fraction of what the RUC & UDR got and they'd hardly qualifications hanging out of them and doesn't come anywhere near the half million payouts to politicians and advisor in the south. If we want to make room for all of these unemployed young teachers, the older ones need an incentive to move on.

Re your comparison in bold, there are two key differences.

1. With Teachers, there is a perceived need to reduce the overall numbers, whereas with the RUC (at least), there was no reduction in police numbers, rather it was necessary to encourage serving RUC officers to retire early, in order to make way for new PSNI replacements;
2. Whilst misbehaviour in the classroom can be a problem, the Teaching profession didn't see 500 of its number murdered by their pupils over the course of 30 years...

You can turn that on its head very quickly. 

[Evil Genius]

The offer is three times as much as the average statutory redundancy package.

Three times the average - but is it three times the average in comparable jobs? For example the current voluntary redundancy package on offer at Queen's is "up to two years". Thing with these packages is they only encourage older staff to move on by offering something like 4 weeks pay per year of service "up to 90 weeks" - not everyone will get the "90 weeks". Anything less and it's not worth it for an older member of staff to leave as they can hold on for a few years and get the same on retirement. What's also not mentioned is that a redundancy package of this size is taxable over the £30k mark and taking into consideration current earnings in the year, most of that will be taxed at 40%. Not a bad package but considering most of these people will never work again at the same level or salary, it's not up there with the best either - only a fraction of what the RUC & UDR got and they'd hardly qualifications hanging out of them and doesn't come anywhere near the half million payouts to politicians and advisor in the south. If we want to make room for all of these unemployed young teachers, the older ones need an incentive to move on.

Re your comparison in bold, there are two key differences.

1. With Teachers, there is a perceived need to reduce the overall numbers, whereas with the RUC (at least), there was no reduction in police numbers, rather it was necessary to encourage serving RUC officers to retire early, in order to make way for new PSNI replacements;
2. Whilst misbehaviour in the classroom can be a problem, the Teaching profession didn't see 500 of its number murdered by their pupils over the course of 30 years...

You can turn that on its head very quickly. 

Perhaps, but it doesn't repudiate my point that Donagh Ulick was making a misleading/unhelpful comparison.

[AQMP]

The offer is three times as much as the average statutory redundancy package.

Three times the average - but is it three times the average in comparable jobs? For example the current voluntary redundancy package on offer at Queen's is "up to two years". Thing with these packages is they only encourage older staff to move on by offering something like 4 weeks pay per year of service "up to 90 weeks" - not everyone will get the "90 weeks". Anything less and it's not worth it for an older member of staff to leave as they can hold on for a few years and get the same on retirement. What's also not mentioned is that a redundancy package of this size is taxable over the £30k mark and taking into consideration current earnings in the year, most of that will be taxed at 40%. Not a bad package but considering most of these people will never work again at the same level or salary, it's not up there with the best either - only a fraction of what the RUC & UDR got and they'd hardly qualifications hanging out of them and doesn't come anywhere near the half million payouts to politicians and advisor in the south. If we want to make room for all of these unemployed young teachers, the older ones need an incentive to move on.

Re your comparison in bold, there are two key differences.

1. With Teachers, there is a perceived need to reduce the overall numbers, whereas with the RUC (at least), there was no reduction in police numbers, rather it was necessary to encourage serving RUC officers to retire early, in order to make way for new PSNI replacements;
2. Whilst misbehaviour in the classroom can be a problem, the Teaching profession didn't see 500 of its number murdered by their pupils over the course of 30 years...

This is true but people would really get hot under the collar if teachers retiring with an attractive package were re-hired as classroom assistants a few months later.

[theskull1]

This is true but people would really get hot under the collar if teachers retiring with an attractive package were re-hired as classroom assistants a few months later.

Already happening. Lots of well connected retired teachers still the sub of choice to their mate the head.

[Tony Baloney]

This is true but people would really get hot under the collar if teachers retiring with an attractive package were re-hired as classroom assistants a few months later.

Already happening. Lots of well connected retired teachers still the sub of choice to their mate the head.

With the proposed budget cuts can many Heads afford these retired teachers as they'll be on the highest daily rate. It's a rotten system if it is still the case.

[Gaffer]

This is true but people would really get hot under the collar if teachers retiring with an attractive package were re-hired as classroom assistants a few months later.

Already happening. Lots of well connected retired teachers still the sub of choice to their mate the head.

With the proposed budget cuts can many Heads afford these retired teachers as they'll be on the highest daily rate. It's a rotten system if it is still the case.

They shouldnt be employing them  !

If I had the power I would outlaw it  !

and I'd  slap the greedy 'retired' teachers around the lugs ! 

That'll put the subbin' out of 'em

[Ulick]

BTW the triple redundancy rate is not as good as it appears because redundancy payments are taxed at 40% above £30,000.  It shows a lack of foresight by DE because the large payments won't mean much more for teachers and 40% of the payments above £30K will be sent back to the Treasury from scarce funds for schools.  The same rate will be paid to teachers of all ages although it is supposed to be targeted at teachers in the 55+ age bracket to bridge the gap to their pension at 60.  It would have been better to give them a pension contribution to bring their pension closer to 40 years, this would have targeted the older teachers and with no tax implications all of the DE expenditure would have stayed in NI. Ahhhhhhhhhh!

Presumably those taking the package have the choice to purchase additional voluntary contributions and save the tax.   

[Billys Boots]

I don't see the problem with hiring very experienced professionals (thought retired) as substitute cover, as long as they're taxed appropriately on their income. 

[Ulick]

I don't see the problem with hiring very experienced professionals (thought retired) as substitute cover, as long as they're taxed appropriately on their income.

There are particular problems with it up here Billy:

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/education/5000-teachers-canrsquot-find-a-job-16052896.html

[Billys Boots]

I understand that alright Ulick, but from the perspective of: (a) Principal Teachers/Boards of Management, and (b) Students/Parents, and only in respect of short-term substitute cover, are retired teachers not as good an, if not better, option than inexperienced graduates?  Teacher supply and demand changes radically from year-to-year, and medium to long-term employment prospects for teachers are usually reasonably good, in general, no?? 

[theskull1]

I understand that alright Ulick, but from the perspective of: (a) Principal Teachers/Boards of Management, and (b) Students/Parents, and only in respect of short-term substitute cover, are retired teachers not as good an, if not better, option than inexperienced graduates?  Teacher supply and demand changes radically from year-to-year, and medium to long-term employment prospects for teachers are usually reasonably good, in general, no??

Generally speaking Billy from what I've heard..these retired teachers are spent forces who just babysit classes rather than teach. If they still were enthused they'd still be teaching. Subbing is stress free and a good way to supplement the pension

[Ulick]

I understand that alright Ulick, but from the perspective of: (a) Principal Teachers/Boards of Management, and (b) Students/Parents, and only in respect of short-term substitute cover, are retired teachers not as good an, if not better, option than inexperienced graduates?  Teacher supply and demand changes radically from year-to-year, and medium to long-term employment prospects for teachers are usually reasonably good, in general, no??

Slightly different system up here than the south which effectually means that teacher demand doesn't really change that much from year to year. I agree in that I'd rather have an experienced teacher in as short term cover for my children but the high number of newly qualified teachers out of work means that few of them are getting any experience which in the long term isn't a good thing. 

[Billys Boots]

I understand that alright Ulick, but from the perspective of: (a) Principal Teachers/Boards of Management, and (b) Students/Parents, and only in respect of short-term substitute cover, are retired teachers not as good an, if not better, option than inexperienced graduates?  Teacher supply and demand changes radically from year-to-year, and medium to long-term employment prospects for teachers are usually reasonably good, in general, no??

Slightly different system up here than the south which effectually means that teacher demand doesn't really change that much from year to year. I agree in that I'd rather have an experienced teacher in as short term cover for my children but the high number of newly qualified teachers out of work means that few of them are getting any experience which in the long term isn't a good thing.

I get you now; the problem thus lies with the teacher-training institutions - they shouldn't be churning out more graduates than the system can actually use.  I think, though I may be wrong, the teacher-training colleges down here change their intake numbers from year to year depending on the demographics and projected job-generations/retirements etc.  They get it wrong from time-to-time, but in general they can react to shortages and over-supply over a three-year period.

Generally speaking Billy from what I've heard..these retired teachers are spent forces who just babysit classes rather than teach. If they still were enthused they'd still be teaching. Subbing is stress free and a good way to supplement the pension

Short-term subbing is a babysitting job, irrespective of who the sub is - a teacher can't be expected to dovetail into curriculum delivery with a class they have for a day or two.  I would never describe teaching a class you don't know as stress-free.  I do get your point though, I'm just saying for such a short-term job it's probably better to use someone experienced than not.