Sir, - The events of the past few weeks have finally convinced me that the ASTI leadership has lost the plot - that is, if there was one in the first instance.
As a teacher and ASTI member for the past 26 years, I would be grateful if any of the executive or central executive committee would answer some questions for me. The questions reflect those asked at my own school and at the local branch of the union, but without success.
1. What is the present strategy concerning the pay claim, for which we clamoured so loudly during the last school year?
2. A motion passed at convention at Easter said the ASTI would not enter any discussions concerning supervision and substitution. Who, then, sat in on the recent discussions on these issues? Were these issues not items to be raised with the Government as part of the overall pay claim?
3. Why was the CEC split 76-70 concerning last week's ballot on the motion to withdraw from this voluntary work? Will we be informed of the discussions, and the reasons for the recommendation that accompanied the ballot?
4. Why was the wording for the ballot unavailable to us until we turned up to vote? Surely it could not have been different from the one voted on by CEC some two weeks prior to our ballot?
5. The wording on the ballot paper was, more or less, "Do you agree to withdraw from all supervision and substitution as may be directed by CEC on the basis of the outcome of this ballot?".
Isn't this just like asking "Have you stopped beating your wife yet?" You're damned if you say yes and damned if you say no.
If I voted yes to withdraw from supervision and substitution, wouldn't schools be forced to close on safety concerns, just like last year? If I voted no, was I now agreeing to do this voluntary work, and if so, why all the fuss over it last year? (I voted no, by the way.)
6. Does the 45 per cent No vote, which, remember, goes against the recommendation of CEC, not tell those in the leadership that many members are unhappy and dissatisfied with the issues and strategy it is adopting?
7. If we consider ourselves professional communicators, why is it that we seem unable to present our ideas and plans in a fashion that is understood and appreciated by Government, pupils, parents and the public in general? Why is part of my union subscription going to pay a PR company to do this work - and then, not very well?
8. Why was the leadership peeved at "leaks" to newspapers about union matters? With no information coming our way from head office, surely this is a reasonable channel for ordinary ASTI members to be kept up to date on what is going on?
The dissatisfaction and disillusionment among members in many schools cannot be allowed to continue or it will cause a serious, long-term rift in the profession.
9. Last question: Are there any answers? - Yours, etc.,
Michael Meany, St Mark's Community School, Tallaght, Dublin 24.