TUI is most anxious to ensure that members, in deciding whether to support or oppose the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness (PPF), would do so on the basis of factual and accurate information. It is disturbing that misleading and inaccurate information has been circulated in an effort to secure a No vote.

The proposed agreement provides for pay increases of 19.2 per cent and for tax cuts worth, on average, a 10 per cent increase in take-home pay over the next three Budgets. This is in addition to increases teachers secured in Budget 2000.

The pay of teachers will not be tied to individual or school performance. All that is required for payment of the final phase of the agreement is that a school plan be produced by April 2001 and evidence that school plans are operational by 2002. There is no linking of pay to school performance. Irrespective of how a school performs, teachers in that school will receive the increases under the agreement provided that the Department certifies that schools in general have a school plan and are implementing it.

The TUI's presence at the negotiations ensured that whole school evaluation forms no part of the proposals. The official side had sought to have WSE included but, in the face of absolute opposition by TUI (and only TUI), backed down. The proposals provides for benchmarking, a process which, if the agreement is carried, the TUI will avail of to seek additional money for teachers through fair comparison with others in comparable professional employments.

The TUI has always advanced the case for social inclusion and additional expenditure for educational improvements. An additional 1,500 teachers will be appointed. Many other progressive educational initiatives advanced by the TUI are included in the proposals.

In the past three weeks branch meetings have been held and members of the executive committee have been in attendance. It has been made plain that the sovereign ballot of members will determine the union's attitude to the proposed PPF and that the executive committee will act in accordance with the mandate given.

No impediment has been placed in the way of those members of the union involved in the campaign against partnership.

We have also advised members that they should consider what strategy might fruitfully be followed in the event of the proposed PPF being rejected. In insisting on strategic, realistic decision-making, the executive of the TUI is providing genuine leadership. To do otherwise would be to abrogate our responsibility to our members.

The TUI is making no recommendation on the proposed agreement. However every teacher should read the proposed agreement and make the decision to vote Yes or No on the basis of factual and accurate information.

John MacGabhann, is vice-president, TUI