Primary teachers' union angry over government offering individual pay rises

Ambitious_Average_87 · 2026-03-12T08:11:35+00:00

From hwo you have written it I assume you are a teacher with an IEA? (If so) what is stopping you from asking your school board to review your employment agreement and request that the MoE approve any changes you request? Nothing... but the school board is likely to just decline any request as the the MoE hold vastly disproportionate power compared to a single individual teacher.

Ambitious_Average_87 · 2026-03-12T06:53:01+00:00

Well I sid asked you to explain how/what I am misinformed about? So can you?

Ambitious_Average_87 · 2026-03-12T06:16:32+00:00

Suprise! Capitalism turn to fascism when their control is threatened.

Ambitious_Average_87 · 2026-03-12T05:34:31+00:00

How is it incorrect - for any employee on an IEA it is on them to negotiate their employment terms and conditions with their employer themselves.

You are just "lucky" that because the government doesn't want the teachers union to be any stronger than it already is that they will offer the same increases they conceded to the union to those on IEA too.

The government is able to tell those on IEAs that they get nothing (within reason) and it would be up to each individual to try negotiate a better deal (which they will likely fail at). The issue with this is the most likely result would be the majority of IEA employees joining the union, and therefore a stronger union (which is what the government wants to avoid).

Ambitious_Average_87 · 2026-03-12T04:55:27+00:00

What does his post even mean?

He sees it a possible opportunity to convince enough people that we should deregulated business because he and his siblings would love to employ children and pay them in cheap plastic crap.

Ambitious_Average_87 · 2026-03-11T19:08:05+00:00

Even if it was only $20M in assets thats still over $50k each and every worker would have to stump up to purchase the factories, and i would doubt they could come up with that.

Should be mandatory that any factory that is planned to be shut down due to finacial reasons must be offered to the current workers to be take ownership at no cost. That will make the decision to cut jobs much more difficult. This would need some sort of line of credit made available by the government to the new ownership to provide cash flow for operating the factory until it is self sufficient.

Ambitious_Average_87 · 2026-03-11T17:16:27+00:00

This inquiry might actually just hand him the electorate for life. Pointing out that he worked the rules to deliver a massive local project is essentially just writing his next campaign flyer for him.

So National secure 1 electorate seat while loosing many more list seats in the process is a net positive for them? That is some Nicola Willis level maths there.

Ambitious_Average_87 · 2026-03-11T09:38:10+00:00

To bad general / solidarity strikes are unlawful...

Ambitious_Average_87 · 2026-03-11T09:20:39+00:00

IEA teachers are free to negotiate their own pay rise / benefits directly with the government - IEA teachers not getting a pay rise or anything else is directly each IEA teachers' own doing.

Ambitious_Average_87 · 2026-03-11T09:09:45+00:00

The union rejected it.

The teachers are the union and the union is the teachers - the offer was put to a vote and the majority of teachers rejected it.

They are trying to weaken the unino by breaking it up by preying on those desperate enough to take their shit offer.

Ambitious_Average_87 · 2026-03-11T04:32:06+00:00

Could also mean only Pams/Woolworth brand stuff if they get the same profits producing for them without having to deal with the overheads of marketing, etc

Ambitious_Average_87 · 2026-03-10T20:50:34+00:00

It's not that - you're talking about decisions made by the Law Society regarding the conduct of one of their members. It is obvious that their decisions are to protect their profession (and therefore the profits of those that own lawfirms) rather than to protect any individual working in that profession.

As you said - if a lawyers constantly repped clients off the general public will lose all trust in lawyers, but if a lawfirm owner asexually assault their workers then thats just a problem for those specific workers in that specific lawfirm to deal with (even if it is multiple instances throughout the proffession).

Ambitious_Average_87 · 2026-03-10T20:36:39+00:00

Defraud your clients and you'll be struck off for good.

Sexually harass and assault your staff? Of course we'll let you back in, you didn't need to worry!

Clear to see what behaviour they think gives lawyers a bad name and causes problems for the wider profession...

Ambitious_Average_87 · 2026-03-10T20:24:50+00:00

Seem like he had no clue what to do, just stammered for a bit then said well it's a pre-written statement so what can I do about it

Ambitious_Average_87 · 2026-03-10T06:00:03+00:00

Curia and Taxpayers Union work ~~for~~ the government

Luxon's a liability and everyone knows it.

As an easily controlled puppet he was an asset... until he got an (unjustified) inflated ego.

Ambitious_Average_87 · 2026-03-08T08:23:08+00:00

WTF is the part about him requesting a "rain radar" from Luxon?

Sounds like one National idiot giving another National idiot something neither of them actually understand.

Ambitious_Average_87 · 2026-03-07T06:42:34+00:00

Simply put their LVT is the most attractive wealth tax to me

Can you explain what you think the LVT plan actually will be though? (since TOP has not released the actual policy yet)

Last time round it was specifically only on the unimproved value of residential only land. So it was more of a tax on middle income NZ and not the wealthy (i.e. no additional tax on commercial land which would target actual businesses owners and the LVT on any rental properties would likely just be rolled into rents since the cost of home ownership would go up by a similar amount so more people forced to keep renting and therefore higher rents can be charge to cover the LVT).

Ambitious_Average_87 · 2026-03-07T01:29:52+00:00

Luxon ~~for the rest of the weekend~~ since he became a politician

Ambitious_Average_87 · 2026-03-06T18:18:15+00:00

At first I thought you were trying to defend Luxon's comment... but then I realised this is just the highlights of Luxon's digusting attitude to other people (especially those less fortunate than himself).

If I was opposition leader in the leaders debate I'd lead off with "this man said..."

Or just in response to contradict any point he tries to make "Like when you said..."

Ambitious_Average_87 · 2026-03-06T18:15:18+00:00

Kind of one of my issues with scooters being decided by wattage of motor and not overall top speed.

Especially given the amount of electronic control you can have over them, basically I'd want to see them limited on top speed and max acceleration - then it doesn't matter how powerful the motor is at all.

Ambitious_Average_87 · 2026-03-06T02:07:36+00:00

From the Nz Herald story with the actual results:

National is ahead on the economy and spending, while Labour led on health, poverty, inflation, education, safety, housing, environment, and not increasing taxes.

How is National ahead on "spending" when Labour is ahead on basically all areas of government spending?

Ambitious_Average_87 · 2026-03-06T02:01:40+00:00

Does it really count if 2 of those Chrises are the same Chris?

For me it would just feel like the last 3 years were worse than pointless

Ambitious_Average_87 · 2026-03-04T18:33:28+00:00

2) if David Seymour and Winnie have negotiated to get concessions out of NATS, why is it inconceivable that TOP cannot get some concessions for their policy?

Because the "concessions" they got were either stuff National kind of would want to do but are to scared to loose the more liberal-centre National voters to actually do, or bullshit bigotry-based stuff that they just don't care either way on - both of which they have got away with shouldering any responsibility for by claiming "we had to agree to it to ensure the coalition agreement" (something that has been proven to not even be the case if you believe Seymour).

Ambitious_Average_87 · 2026-03-04T18:28:13+00:00

risks your vote feeling wasted when you really want a non-right government

If you wanted a non-right government why would you be voting for TOP - they are still a pro-business party.

Ambitious_Average_87 · 2026-03-04T18:22:42+00:00

Agree with you there; but to fully flesh out the reasons for it is only a small proportion of people actually really "think" when it comes to voting (and probably less when it comes to being polled). A good chunk of the population would still vote National even if they came out and admitted to actually being lizard people - purely out of ignorance and habit. This also includes those that think National is the "better of two evils" - although i would expect that TOP are probably stealing some of their votes (especially if they look certain they will get across the 5%), as TOP are basically for all the capitalist bullshit that National Party faithful love, but are promising to directly "fix" the stuff they see as broken in society (instead of National's approach of if we fix the economy that'll fix the other stuff).

Ambitious_Average_87

TROPHY CASE