PIERCE H. PURCELL,
Sir, - I refer to recent letters from Charles O'Toole (March 14th) and Christine Atkinson (March 22nd).
Ms Atkinson notes that the benchmarking body can recommend a decrease, as well as an increase in salary. This is nothing new. The very same provision was in the Common Scheme of Conciliation and Arbitration for primary and second-level teachers, which goes back to 1973. Naturally enough, a salary decrease was never actually offered to teachers, and it is highly unlikely that the benchmarkers would be so stupid as to attempt that next June.
Mr O'Toole is perfectly right in his analysis of the present situation. The benchmarking body invited written submissions and oral presentations from the public service unions, and this has taken place. In the case of teachers' salaries, both the INTO and TUI have presented their cases.
The ASTI's Labour Court submission on salary constitutes an unassailable case for a substantial pay increase, and 74 per cent of ASTI members indicated in a recent survey that they wanted this submission to be sent to the benchmarking body. Clearly, their purpose was to convince the benchmarking body that teachers' pay had fallen seriously behind that of other comparable groups.
I believe the union still has time to submit this document and also to make the required oral presentation. If this were done, it should strengthen the teachers' case considerably. Whether it is done or not, the benchmarking body will still present its report in June. If teachers are dissatisfied with this report, then it is time for industrial action by all three unions.
I hope that at their annual conferences during Easter week the unions will agree some strategy of joint industrial action. - Your, etc.,
PIERCE H. PURCELL,
Davis Terrace,
Clonmel,
Co Tipperary.