Ok, without wanting to sound a bit dim, why, if the government are offering such a shit deal, dont the teachers, etc. just get private pensions like everybody else?

Surely its their choice where they put their pensions and if the deal is that bad, then they need to look elsewhere for a a better deal? x

Laura, for me the pension was always a perk of the job as pay is pretty grim. Ive been paying into it for almost 12 years now. If id have known then what I know now I would have but I'm getting a bit old now to benefit from a new pension

Well Laura you have said yourself. Private pensions are shite. Yes the public sector pension will work out better still but does that mean you should lie down and let the government ride roughshod over your rights? Its like Lisa said, they are taking the surplus being paid in and asking for more. Wouldnt you have something to say if it were your savings they were raiding. Maybe I didnt explain it very well its all a bit long winded to be true

I honestly didnt realise that pay was bad for teachers? I always thought that teachers got a pretty good salary? x

I can only speak for nurses and I have to say theres been vast improvements in the last 10 years ive been doing it. I dont even mind that my retirement age has been lifted as thats gonna be a universal thing. Assuming my back and knees hold out that long of course. If everyone opts out the public sector pensions though its only gonna make matters worse

I'm not against the principle just the means, I would hate to think that anybody suffered today, or a child died because the care wasnt there in hospitals, etc. Mario, I have total respect for you for carrying on working and if I were in your shoes I would have done the same, for the same reasons.

I would be really narked if my money was effectively being stolen, lets face it, who wouldnt be.

Teachers do get a reasonable pay although I suspect if you work out the hours we work it would be a poor hourly rate but that's true for many people. The problem is I've now hit the top of my pay scale (and lets just say I'm not on the higher tax earner scale so we're not talking a massive amount) and there's nowhere else for me to go for the rest of my career. However, it still hits us when we get pay freezes when everything else goes up. The other thing is that with my qualifications I could be on a lot more in the private sector (which most of the friends I graduated are). I often work the same hours as my sister and end up on a lot less.

However, I'm not for a second going to suggest that I'm badly paid. I could take the loss in my pay packet. It would just mean less going into my savings. If we ever manage to sell our flat and move to a house we would be close to our overdraft every month though. However, many public sector workers are a lot worse off and don't get paid much. There's also the principle of the matter. Why should we pay off the deficit in what is basically a sneak tax when we didn't in any way cause the problem.

Not really when you consider the hours they do

I think a normalise wage starts at £21k and raising to £35k ... is that about right?

School is 190 days a year - so in theory they earn £110- £184 a day (£13-£23/hour) - not bad you think - but the reality is they do a hell of a lot more hours that that

It's less than what Dan earns, I think its OK pay ... but I don't think it can be classed as great compared to what others who have studied for the same time can earn .. all depends what you compare it against.. but I agree that they have studied a long time and possibly would never earn the same as someone who choose for example engineering or architecture

they get an ok salary Laura but god i know Lots of teachers and their day doesnt end at 3.30 when school finishes and TBH they dont generally use the holidays they get either some of my close friends are in there contiuously through holidays planning for future terms

the idea they sit on their arse for 6 weeks doing eff all is a myth (in my experience)

i can see both side's, i can understand why people are angry about them, luckily for me it was my day off work so i didnt have to make arrangements for chilcare but inknow a lot of parents have struggled today, also with my mum going into hospital and there being skelington staffing things have been pretty hectic there!!

but i do agree with the principel of them!! my mum is a nurse, and is fully behind the strikers although she felt she had a duty of care to her patients so decided not to strike...although obvs ended up being off work anyway!! i am behind them because they need to stand up to the government, its discusting what they are doing it just a shame it puts a lot of the public out too...especialy parent of school children!! x

Lisa wrote:

Not really when you consider the hours they do

I think a normalise wage starts at £21k and raising to £35k ... is that about right?

School is 190 days a year - so in theory they earn £110- £184 a day (£13-£23/hour) - not bad you think - but the reality is they do a hell of a lot more hours that that

It's less than what Dan earns, I think its OK pay ... but I don't think it can be classed as great compared to what others who have studied for the same time can earn .. all depends what you compare it against.. but I agree that they have studied a long time and possibly would never earn the same as someone who choose for example engineering or architecture

Yeah you're about right. I'm on £34,000 something (never actually know what I earn although I suppose I could go and look it up on the NUT website). There are two scales above me but I don't think they go up much and you have to go quite a bit extra whole school stuff to get them (although that may just be my school and my head). We are contracted for 195 days a year so a great wage for the hours that in theory I do but I generally work from 8 in the morning and its not unusual for me to work until 10 at night plus at least a day in the weekend and I used to basically work all my holidays unless we were actually on holiday (they keep changing the history we teach so I have to learn it) until I got ill and have learnt since not to spend the whole 13 weeks we have 'off' working. I also have 7 parents evenings a year and 2 open evenings plus meetings at least once a week and other late nights.

However, I'm not going to complain about what I earn. I earn less than I might with my qualifications but more than many and I chose to do the job. I also love the job. It would be nice to get pay rises in line with inflation each year but I'm sure everyone wants that.

I completely understand why people are striking and agree that what the government is doing isn't fair but at the same time think striking just doesn't actually help not when the act of striking affects the economy and then in turn means more money needs to be found from somewhere.

I don't really understand what the government are trying to do so am just going on what's been written here.

David Cameron was on This Morning today and basically said that the strike was pointless because they were still negotiating with the unions and that it didn't have that big an impact (of course he may just have been saying that to make the unions think it's worthless and not do anymore I don't know!) ... but have people lost a day's earnings to look after their kids for nothing?

I generally don't agree with striking anyway but I suppose at least it has made people sit up and realise what's going on and it has raised awareness about the cuts the government are making but I'm not sure if it will have had any benefit I think the government are still going to go ahead anyway.

The news this morning reckons there will be a resolution by New Year so fingers crossed as I would hate to see any more strikes. Much as I am behind the principle 100% I also dislike the means.

I see Jeremy Clarksons made a tit of himself though