In yesterday's Irish Times Bertie Ahern asked: "why are the teachers on strike?" The answer is that for almost a year the Government has refused to enter into negotiations on the pay claim of my union, the Association of Secondary Teachers, Ireland.
The Taoiseach goes on to suggest that the ASTI strike is about a power struggle rather than achieving a fair salary for the teaching profession.
He should know that the ASTI is a democratically organised union with 17,000 members. Issues affecting the union and its members are debated at school, branch, regional and national level. Views are expressed and decisions are made on the basis of these views. The decisions presented to the public are the views of the democratic majority, and not of any particular grouping.
The ASTI is seeking a special salary increase to reflect the increased productivity its members have given in transforming the education system over the past decade and to narrow the widening gap between teachers' pay and the pay of other graduate-entry professions. The national agreement, the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness, does not allow the ASTI to pursue such a pay claim.
The only process for pursuing a special claim under the PPF is the benchmarking process. The ASTI has consistently rejected this process because of the lengthy time scale for its report and any payments arising, because of the lack of clarity about its procedures, because of the doubts about its capacity to deal with issues in relation to teachers and because it does not offer any guarantee of an increase which would address the issues in the ASTI claim.
It is misleading to quote the increases provided for under the PPF and to imply that these address the ASTI claim. They apply to all workers covered by the PPF. They do not change the relative position of teachers.
The ASTI has been pursuing a pay increase outside the terms of the PPF since last March. The union pursued this claim through the machinery available. Throughout this process Government representatives argued that teachers should not pursue a special increase outside the PPF.
ASTI members were gravely disappointed that the arbitration board accepted the Government's view and did not address the issues presented in the ASTI claim. The ASTI rejected the outcome of the pay machinery process and balloted members on industrial action in support of its pay claim.
The outcome of that ballot was that nine out of 10 of those who voted supported industrial action in pursuit in the claim.
After nine days of industrial action during November and December, including a work-to-rule type of industrial action which involved the withdrawal of voluntary lunchtime supervision and cover for absent colleagues, the ASTI and the Government side agreed to enter talks with an independent facilitator from the Labour Relations Commission.
The ASTI entered these talks in good faith and suspended further industrial action while the talks were in progress. The union believed the Government side would take the same approach.
However, the Government's decision to provoke teachers at this point by docking money illegally for days on which they withdrew voluntary supervision shattered their confidence in the Government's commitment to resolve the dispute in a fair and reasonable manner.
Irish second-level schools, due to the failure of successive governments to fund them properly, depend to a large extent on the voluntary co-operation and participation of teachers for the provision of a wide range of duties. School boards of management - the teachers' employers - have acknowledged the voluntary nature of this work.
However, the decision of the Government not to recognise this has offended and angered many teachers and led them to question whether they should be involved in such activities in the future. On the days when ASTI members withdrew voluntary supervision most schools did not accept students as school management was concerned by health and safety issues.
This was because of the lack of adult supervision. The responsibility for providing this supervision rests with school management authorities. The Government, however, has consistently failed to provide resources to cover the cost of such adult supervision.
Teachers delivered a service in schools on those days by engaging in school-related activities.
To restore the faith of ASTI members in the Government's commitment to resolve this dispute, what is required is the repayment of the money deducted as soon as possible, without preconditions and without prejudice.
This dispute will not be resolved by scoring points in the media. It will only be resolved when both sides discuss the issues in an independent forum in which the ASTI has confidence that its claim will be dealt with in a fair and reasonable manner.
The responsibility for the continued disruption of schools lies with the Government. When the talks process is initiated by the Government, the industrial action will cease and the concerns of parents and students about the disruption of the education service may be assuaged.
Charlie Lennon is general secretary of the Association of Secondary Teachers, Ireland