Should teaching unions strike to defend their pay and conditions?
I listened to someone from the ATL passionately defend their decision to take strike action. Asked if the union really had a mandate as only 35% of members had voted, she replied that many MPs would be grateful for such a mandate, the point was accepted and the debate moved on. I wonder if the EIS would like to comment on this?
They already have. Former president Kay Barnett (the one who met privately with Alex Salmond the week before the sell-out) called for unity in the broad church that is the EIS yada yada yada and other vomit-inducing platitudes. What was the quote from Jonathan Swift? "I never wonder at the wickedness of (wo) men but I often wonder that they be no more ashamed."
When exactly is the tough-talking SSTA balloting its members on strike action on pay and conditions? I note that the last emergency motion passed at the SSTA AGM talks about, "fighting injustice" . How will it do this? Handing Cosla a punishment exercise? Giving Mike Russell the 1,000 yard stare? Give me a break. Has the SSTA given us any alternative suggestion as to how to proceed? Not a bit of it. The bark of the SSTA is much louder than its bite.
When they ask us to. That's what unions do - respond to the concerns of their members. My bet would be September-ish when the McCormac review reports or when the pensions proposals are fully fleshed out by the UK Government.