Much as I usually enjoy Judith Gillespie's regular pious diatribes, she seems to have plumbed new depths of confusion (TESS, August 8).
As a self-confessed inhabitant of somewhere called "the real world", she seems to see some bizarre conflict between a universally agreed-in-advance pay formula, and those who do less well under this deal complaining about it. In "the real world", there exists something called human nature.
As with any such agreement some will welcome it, some will acquiesce and some will demur - such is life. There is little news value or controversy involved, though some seem hell bent on manufacturing a stooshie.
Pundits, even ex-activists, should be wary of sweeping generalisations. Not all teachers think the same, and all inhabit this seemingly exclusive "real world". The most telling point in Mrs Gillespie's latest polemic is that, on the two occasions she describes herself as a parent, the word "mere" precedes it.
What can this mean? Is it really to denigrate parents? Or could it be a mild piece of sarcasm, used as a cudgel to indulge in yet more random teacher-bashing?
Alastair Kidd Eildon Crescent, Melrose