Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 23 Feb 1994

Vol. 139 No. 7

Teachers' Early Retirement Scheme: Motion.

Mr. O'Toole

I move:

That Seanad Éireann—

recognising the particular problems, demands, pressures and inherent stress on teachers;

aware of the high incidence of disability and stress related illness among teachers;

and noting that teaching is a profession which very often has a shorter than normal career span;

calls on the Minister for Education to introduce, this year, an option of early retirement for teachers who have reached the age of 50 years.

I consider the amendment to this motion to be a total and cowardly retreat under fire, a refusal by the Minister to deal with an issue. I cannot disagree with the words of the amendment as they are from the teachers' conciliation and arbitration scheme. However, I do not know see its relevance. The amendment states "that matters within the scope of the scheme will be dealt with exclusively through the machinery of the scheme". I do not know anybody here who wants it to be dealt with any other way.

It also states "that, in respect of any claim before the Conciliation Council, no party to the scheme shall, in furtherance of its case, move any outside body to make representations on its behalf;". I do not know that any party to the scheme is moving this body to do anything on its behalf. I am the general secretary of the INTO which is a party to the scheme. This is not coming from the INTO. The other names to this motion — Senator Lee, Senator Norris, Senator Henry and Senator Quinn — are not members of any of the parties to the scheme and two of them are teachers at third level whose salary is not determined by the conciliation and arbitration scheme for first and second level teachers.

I note that the Minister is unable to be here. My reason for putting down this motion is very clear. The Minister has raised this issue time and again. She gave a further commitment on early retirement in the Dáil and in December at the Select Committee on Social Affairs referred to the fact that the claim was at conciliation. The Minister has on three or four occasions since April given a commitment on this issue.

Teaching is a job with different kinds of stress and demands. There is no question of teaching being unique as a stressful occupation; there are many stressful occupations. However, teachers experience a different kind of stress where they know in the morning that five or six times over the course of the morning he or she will be brought to the brink of tolerance in terms of the limit of normal endurance and do not know from what corner of the room that challenge to their authority will come.

Irish primary schools are the most overcrowded in Europe. Post-primary schools and third level colleges have their own problems but at times primary teaching can often deteriorate into crowd control. This is an additional demand on teachers. In recent times teachers have had to increasingly cope with the problems of home and community as they find their way into the classroom. In overcrowded classrooms teachers must try to identify and respond to the learning, growing and emotional problems of pupils on top of everything else during the course of the day.

Teaching is a harrowing, demanding and wearing job, as are many other occupations. However, these occupations have ways of allowing people out of the job at particular times. That outlet does not exist in the teaching profession and we and the officials in the Department often have to find ways around the system to allow teachers ways out through disability, etc., when there should be a clear and understood process of early retirement.

Many teachers can continue for 40 years with constant energy output. I want to make clear that this is not an ageist motion. There are many people in their sixties or late fifties who are suited to the job and have the metabolism to continue. Therefore, I would be opposed to pressuring people to retire. However, this motion is to give them the option. The wear and tear of the job proves intolerable for many teachers who no longer have the vitality to cope with the professional demands of the job.

Teachers deserve and demand the opportunity to retire from their teaching responsibilities with dignity and reasonable financial security. That is not too much to ask for people who give of their all daily, and the Minister has recognised this. Last Easter, the Minister indicated her support for the concept of early retirement. She announced it at all three teacher congresses where it was well received. The teachers were pleased to hear this commitment and the Minister received the applause and acclamation of delegates representing 50,000 teachers at first and second level; this was re-echoed in the third level institutions.

The Minister received the applause and acclamation and was very happy to indulge in it, to which she was entitled. I was one of those who complimented her and we looked forward to a system being put in operation for 1 September. That did not happen. No proposal has been brought forward by the Minister so far. It would be disingenuous for her not to address this problem urgently. She must be as good as her word. She was the person who raised the matter and now has a duty to fulfil her promises. She has a responsibility to respond to the expectations which she gave teachers at the different congresses last year.

In reference to the amendment, it is now clear that nothing came from the Minister. The teachers' unions were required to submit a claim for an early retirement scheme in the hope of processing the matter. That claim has been lying there for months and it has not been possible to get a response from the Minister. I hoped she would come here tonight and fulfil her promises, and give reality to the expectations of teachers and allow this matter to go forward.

This matter cannot be dealt with or negotiated in this forum. In that sense, the amendment is tautologous and does not address the issue. We want a commitment from the Minister that she will introduce what she said in a number of other fora she was going to do. We need consummation of that promise. We want to hear what she is going to do about it. This issue will not go away; it is a live issue among teachers at all levels. They want to know what is going to happen. If the Minister visits the three teacher congresses at Easter this year, this will be the issue on which we will want a response. I regret that she is not here to put forward her point of view. I am not trying to demean the Minister of State, Deputy Aylward. This issue began with the Minister. When the Minister of State puts forward his viewpoint, I hope it will be a clear and unambiguous commitment on behalf of the Minister. However, if the Minister was going to give this commitment, she would be here herself. Instead, she sent someone else to take the flak——

Mr. Dardis

That is unfair.

Mr. O'Toole

It may not be fair but it is true. It is not fair either for teachers.

Mr. Magner

Senator O'Toole has been absent from this House on other business as well.

Mr. O'Toole

——who are waiting to hear what the Minister——

Mr. Magner

That is rubbish.

Mr. O'Toole

Control the Government benches, a Chathaoirligh.

Mr. Magner

Never mind the Government benches.

Mr. O'Toole

Senators on the Government benches feel sore about this matter.

Mr. Magner

That is rubbish and Senator O'Toole knows it.

Mr. O'Toole

It will be rubbish indeed if the Minister proves me wrong on the matter——

Mr. Magner

It is customary for Senator O'Toole to be the first to attack.

Mr. O'Toole

——and I will be the first to apologise cravenly if the Minister comes forward with any measure tonight.

Mr. Magner

I never heard Senator O'Toole apologise for anything.

Mr. O'Toole

I understand Senator Magner is embarrassed by the situation. A commitment and a promise have been given but they have not been fulfilled. I hope we can all come back and say "Wasn't O'Toole wrong that night; wasn't he unfair to the Minister?"

(Interruptions).

Mr. O'Toole

We are referring to people who take responsibility for classes at an early stage of their careers. They are now in their fifties and sixties, but are still expected to have the same level of energy to deal with classes of 30-40 or more. Teachers are supposed to act like wise and prudent parents. There would be serious questions asked if a parent in their mid to late fifties was to start taking responsibility for a family of 40. A similar demand is being made on primary teachers every day of the week. There should be a recognition of that kind of wear and tear; it is not any other job. Politicians prepare themselves to make a speech, trade unionists prepare themselves for a series of negotiations and actors psyche themselves to go on stage. No matter how they feel teachers have to put on a positive performance every day. They do not know from where the pressure will come.

In light of the Minister's promises, I ask for a reasonable response in terms of an escape clause for teachers that would give them the option to leave the teaching profession with dignity and security. They should not have to prove they are disabled, for example, to get this entitlement. I hope the Minister of State gives a clear and unambiguous commitment to this issue.

Professor Lee

I second this motion because it is a matter of common observation that the quality of life in teaching has declined over the last few decades. The challenges currently confronting teachers, especially the type that Senator O'Toole said leads to stress, have increased beyond all recognition compared with the time many of these teachers entered the profession.

I confirm Senator O'Toole's statements about the implications of the amendment. The words "no party to the scheme shall, in furtherance of its case, move any outside body to make representations on its behalf", baffle me as much as they baffle Senator O'Toole. I reject the notion that this amendment imputes that those of us supporting this proposal are somehow parties to some type of outside quasi-conspiracy. I, for one, was unaware of the terms of the conciliation council. Even if I had been aware of them, I would not have taken the slightest notice of them for reasons I will give in a moment. They seem to virtually privatise an issue which is a matter of grave public concern. I am speaking here solely on my own behalf and because I happen to believe in the merits of the case, not on behalf of any institution or organisation, and I am sure that is the case with the other Independent Senators too.

It is a matter of common observation, perhaps worst of all in the cities but it is becoming increasingly so in rural areas, that teachers are obliged to confront sustained stressful situations in a manner inconceivable 30 years ago. That will certainly have led to burn-out in a number of cases. It is also commonly observed that a percentage of people in all occupations find that they have chosen the wrong career; they would not choose it if they were starting over, but there is no way out. In many of those cases, whether in the public or private services, one can hide from the consequences, in other words, there is no direct spillover effect on other people. However, a teacher who is in the wrong occupation continues, day after day, to teach. If only 5 per cent of teachers made the wrong choice — a conservative estimate for any occupation — the consequences and the spinoffs on approximately 5 per cent of pupils at national or secondary level would be enormous. That is a matter of concern for pupils and parents.

The consequences of stress, disillusion and frustration are more directly felt by innocent parties in teaching than is the case in most other occupations. If one works in an office, there are ways of being "carried" or of daydreaming one's way out of the situation but a teacher cannot do that because it would be quickly perceived by the pupils. It is most unfortunate that they should occasionally have as role models adults who may be frustrated, bored, short of temper or genial disposition because of the circumstances they find themselves in.

The implications of early retirement in teaching deserves to be seriously considered from the point of view of teachers, pupils and parents because they have knock-on effects. These people cannot be good and effective teachers, however much they try to commit and rededicate themselves as the years go by. From an intellectual, a character building, an emotional and other points of view, I find it difficult to understand how it can be in the public interest to oblige those in their fifties or sixties who feel they made the wrong decision to continue in that occupation.

Those teachers, who are now in their fifties, chose teaching nearly 30 years ago when there were few alternatives and that would have increased the proportion of those who chose a career for which they were not suited. We still oblige people to choose careers at an extraordinarily young age by international standards, when they were often intellectually and emotionally immature and are not able to make a mature judgment on the career path they wished to follow. Shoving people in their early twenties into life career paths is fraught with a potential for disillusion and a sense of failure as one goes along.

A sense of failure and a sense of frustration are demoralising feelings for those who experience them. Regardless of the career we are pursuing and despite congenial appearances, we all have at some stage been afflicted with a sense of frustration and inadequacy. Some of us may overcome that or, at least, give the impression of overcoming it more effectively than others.

I share Senator O'Toole's feelings for teachers who do not like their job, who are switched off, who realise that they are not giving of their best and that they are not the people they used to be. It is difficult to imagine the sense of frustration they must feel going in day after day as well as the sense that their pupils derive from their incapacity to convey the excitement of learning, which is something every child should have an opportunity to acquire in the course of their school years. I strongly support the principle underlying this motion and I am glad to second Senator O'Toole's.

Mr. Mullooly

I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all the words after "Seanad Éireann" and substitute the following:

"recognising that the terms of the Conciliation and Arbitration Scheme for Teachers stipulate——

that matters within the scope of the scheme will be dealt with exclusively through the machinery of the scheme;

that, in respect of any claim before the Conciliation Council, no party to the scheme shall, in furtherance of its case, move any outside body to make representations on its behalf;

notes that the teacher unions have submitted a joint claim to the Council seeking early retirement for teachers and that the matter is under discussion at the Council.

I welcome the fact that the amendment confirms that the three teacher unions have submitted a joint claim for early retirement. I also welcome the fact that the amendment confirms that the claim is currently under discussion at the conciliation council. In due course the claim will be determined through the conciliation and arbitration process. The option of early retirement should be there for those teachers who have reached a stage where they are no longer able to cope with the stress and strain of teaching. I earnestly hope that the outcome of the claim to which the amendment refers will result in that option becoming available to teachers.

There is now a general recognition that teaching is a demanding and stressful occupation. There is also a recognition that the vast majority of teachers work extremely hard. The perception of teaching as an occupation which involves only short hours and long holidays is no longer widespread. Teachers at every level carry a heavy workload. Preparation and correction can be time consuming. Many teachers give time voluntarily to extra-curricular activities such as games. Teaching is an occupation which demands much energy and commitment. Every school situation has its own problems and difficulties, which vary from school to school. In any one school the problems and the difficulties can fluctuate and change from day to day.

The sources of stress for teachers are many and varied. Class size in Ireland is still very high. Many school buildings are seriously substandard. Many primary schools lack essential basic facilities such as a staff room or a telephone. The majority of primary schools have no access to the services of a remedial teacher. Some schools have seriously physically handicapped pupils in ordinary classroom situations with little or no support services. Many pupils lack motivation and discipline is a growing problem.

It is a recognised fact that domestic problems are on the increase, and domestic problems inevitably translate into classroom problems. It would appear that there are now more broken homes and more difficult domestic situations in this country than at any time in the past. All the indications are that child abuse is on the increase. Crime and drug and substance abuse are widespread in many urban areas. Poverty and unemployment create their own problems and difficulties. Teachers have to cope with the growing number of emotionally disturbed and disruptive pupils. Bullying is another problem which appears to be on the increase. It is small wonder therefore that some teachers burn out before they reach an age at which they can retire without suffering considerable financial loss.

In the majority of cases these teachers have no option but to struggle on. Their work deteriorates, which has a consequential detrimental effect on their pupils. The teacher realises that his or her performance is not up to scratch and this exacerbates the stress. The realisation that he or she cannot retire without suffering considerable financial loss puts an additional strain on the teacher. It would be much better for all concerned if such teachers could retire with dignity even though they might have only reached the age of 50. This is not possible now but it would be possible if an acceptable early retirement arrangement were put in place.

I believe we are talking about a small minority of teachers and that such a scheme would have so many beneficial effects that it would more than justify the cost involved. I also believe that the cost involved would not be great. The cost implications of such a scheme should not be computed on the basis that all or almost all teachers would avail of the option of early retirement. I am convinced this would not be the case. A majority of teachers would continue to normal retirement age, but the option should be there for those teachers whose capacity to do a reasonable job has been adversely affected by the stresses inherent in teaching. The availability of such an option would also have a beneficial impact on the morale of teachers generally.

I acknowledge that there have been several welcome developments in recent times which will help to alleviate some of the problems to which I have referred. The pupil teacher ratio has been reduced and hopefully will continue to be reduced. Many school buildings have been improved. There are indications of a much increased provision for in-service education and training. More remedial teachers are being appointed. However, in spite of all these improvements, teaching will always be a demanding and stressful occupation. There will always be teachers who will suffer premature burnout and that is why the option of early retirement is so important.

The availability of early retirement would help enhance the attractiveness of teaching as a career. We have to face the fact that teaching as a career is no longer as sought after as once was the case. Teachers are not seen as being well paid. Promotion and career opportunities are limited. The status of the teacher in society has declined. There was a time when teaching attracted the brightest and the best of our secondary school leavers, but this unfortunately is no longer the case. The number of male entrants to the teaching profession has been declining for a number of years. These are all matters which need to be redressed. Any development which would make teaching more attractive would be helpful in this regard and the introduction of the option of early retirement would certainly have this effect. I look forward to a satisfactory outcome from the discussions which are taking place at the conciliation council.

Mr. Cotter

I totally support this motion put down by the Independent Senators. I commend them for it. I am somewhat disappointed, as they are, at the proposed amendment. It diminishes the intent of the original motion. It also casts a serious doubt over what the Minister intended when she travelled the country at Easter, taking wonderful applause for making that announcement at the teachers' conferences. The announcement was warmly welcomed and teachers had looked forward to it for a long time. It is therefore difficult to understand why this amendment has been proposed.

The Minister normally has a very good attendance here. There have been a couple of occasions recently where she did not come in. In each case it seemed to be a political decision to stay out.

Acting Chairman

Senator Cotter, that is not in order.

Mr. Cotter

Maybe this evening the Minister has some other function to attend.

Acting Chairman

Senator Cotter, I would like you to refrain. That is not in order.

Mr. Cotter

I will give the Minister the benefit of the doubt this evening but it is rather strange——

Acting Chairman

Please continue on the motion, Senator.

Mr. Cotter

——that the other Government party has had to carry the can in this instance. There is obviously some tactic that I do not fully understand.

Mr. Magner

The Senator should deal with his own problems, which are many and varied.

Acting Chairman

I ask you to confine yourself to the motion. Senator.

(Interruptions.)

Acting Chairman

The Senator has only eight minutes. He should use them to discuss the motion.

Mr. Cotter

I will. I am disappointed with the way the whole thing has been handled this evening and I am entitled to register that disappointment. Those of us who are in touch with the teaching profession know that they were all under the impression last Easter after their conferences that the Minister had decided to introduce early retirement for teachers in the near future. That was the intent, that is what she said at the time, but it seems that the Department is now backtracking.

This amendment has been proposed to cast some doubt on what is happening. The Minister has the power to make these decisions herself. To talk about conciliation and arbitration in these terms does not make any sense whatsoever. I am supporting the motion fully and calling on the Minister here this evening to deliver the goods now. She accepted the applause gracefully during the conferences and she got a wonderful press. That announcement was one of the central reasons for the wonderful press she received last Easter. Teachers were very pleased, because many teachers would like to have the option to retire at the age of 50 or thereabouts. They are continually telling us that. I was at a teachers' meeting last night in Monaghan town and that was one of the things they mentioned. They would like to have the option to retire. Family circumstances might mean they would have to stay a bit longer, but if the option was there it would improve the mental health of teachers, because many of them in both the primary and the post primary sectors are under extreme stress.

The stresses and strains which accumulate over the years are enormous and any of us who have been in teaching — many of us in this House have been teachers — will agree with that. Society has changed and greater emphasis is now put on education. Parents have greater aspirations for their children, which is good, but it adds up to incredible pressure on the teacher. In both Houses you hear regularly that educational attainment is regarded as the saviour of the nation. That message is going out in every Government programme produced these days: if we manage our educational affairs properly and educate our children to the highest possible level we will have social and economic progress; and if we do not, then we will not. This means that from the first day our children go to school parents keep a close eye on them and see that they are getting the very best attention so that they will get the best results in their leaving certificate. That is the target now from the age of four, because it opens or closes the gate for a child when they reach that level. Incredible pressure is associated with the leaving certificate and the points system. This has transferred right down to infants' class in national schools. It is good that people recognise that. They recognise that a quality education implies a good teaching environment and a teacher who is comfortable and relaxed and who has good mental health.

Because of the stresses and strains in today's society, many teachers when they reach the middle years have grave difficulty in maintaining any sort of energetic and even handed approach towards the business of educating children. The Jamie Bulger case is a perfect illustration of how society has changed. It is an extreme example to take, but Jamie Bulger was murdered by two ten year olds. Children aged eight, nine, ten or 11 years regularly appear in court in this country. These children are in somebody's classroom. It causes teachers emotional distress to be faced with big classes. Ireland has the biggest class sizes in the developed EU countries. Facing those problems, it is very difficult to handle a big class.

The fact that teachers go to work every morning is quite incredible, given the conditions they work in. I was in Urbleshanny school on Monday. The school was built in 1932. The classrooms are small and the lighting is bad. They have just the four walls and no facilities. The new curriculum is not taught in Urbleshanny national school because it is impossible to teach it. That is the situation all over County Monaghan and all over the country.

The teacher in Ireland is expected to be a manager of two football teams or more. I have walked into classrooms where there were 38 students, and yet we talk about the pupil-teacher ratio coming down. The pupil-teacher ratio in Ireland is the highest pupil-teacher ratio in the developed part of Europe. In the rest of Europe pupil-teacher ratios are 11 to one, 15 to one or 16 to one. In Ireland we talk about a ratio of 28 to one, but in fact it translates into 38 children in a class. The same problems exist at post primary level. There is a school in my constituency built for 150 students, with toilets for 150 students. There are 360 pupils there now; they are virtually teaching in the toilets. The stresses and strains are incredible under normal conditions, but when bad working conditions are added the problems are greater.

I support this motion. I hope the House will accept it and that the Minister will give us a positive response.

Minister of State at the Department of Education (Mr. Aylward)

I want to apologise for the absence of the Minister. This motion was submitted on Thursday last. The Minister is unavoidably absent because she had prior commitments. She is not deliberately missing from the House. Referring to the applause at the teachers' conferences, which has been mentioned several times, I hope and am confident that the same applause will be available to the Minister this year when they hear her very constructive comments at the round of conferences in the near future.

The three teacher unions have submitted a joint claim to the Conciliation Council for Teachers seeking that teachers be entitled to retire from teaching service on a pension from 50 years of age on the basis of accrued pension with ten years' enhancement. The claim is being considered in accordance with the provisions of the scheme of conciliation and arbitration for teachers. The parties to the schemes are the Ministers for Education and Finance, the managerial authorities of primary and post-primary schools and the three teachers' unions.

The terms of the conciliation and arbitration scheme for teachers stipulate that matters within the scope of the scheme will be dealt with exclusively through the machinery of the scheme, that in respect of a claim before the conciliation council, no party to the scheme shall in furtherance of its case move any outside body to make representations on its behalf and that the proceedings of the council are confidential and that no statements concerning them may be issued except with the authority of the council.

I know that Members will accept that in these circumstances it would be against the terms of the conciliation and arbitration scheme for teachers to comment on the possible outcome of negotiations on a claim currently before the council. I can, for the information of the House, outline the present position in relation to the retirement of teachers. Under the existing retirement provisions the pension arrangements for national school teachers are governed by the national school teachers superannuation schemes, 1934 to 1972. All permanent teachers must join the scheme.

The pension arrangements for teachers in secondary, community and comprehensive schools are governed by the secondary teachers superannuation schemes, 1929 to 1972. This is a voluntary scheme. About three-quarters of the secondary teachers are members of the scheme.

The pension arrangements of vocational school teachers are governed by the local government superannuation scheme, which is administered by the Department of the Environment. Membership is compulsory. The superannuation of vocational teachers cannot be discussed within the conciliation and arbitration scheme for teachers. Any proposal for an amendment of the teachers' schemes would have to involve discussions with the Department of the Environment. All three schemes are contributory, that is, there is a 5 per cent deduction from salaries in the case of all teachers who are members of the schemes. They are non-funded schemes, in other words, employees' and employers' contributions are not paid into a separate fund to which superannuation benefits could be charged. Instead, remuneration is paid net of the employee's contribution and the full cost of benefits is met from recurrent expenditure in the same way as the remuneration of serving teachers.

All three superannuation schemes are part of the wider provision for public service superannuation and changes must be considered in that context. Improved early retirement arrangements for teachers, apart from being costly, would be likely to have repercussive effects for other public servants which could result in large increases in public service expenditure. Consequently, the Department of Finance has a crucial role in considering changes.

The standard pension is calculated at one eightieth of retiring pensionable salary for each year of reckonable service subject to a maximum of 40 years; the standard lump sum is calculated at three eightieths of retiring pensionable salary for each year of reckonable service up to a maximum of 40 years.

Under the current superannuation provisions for national, secondary, community and comprehensive school teachers, teachers may receive the following awards on retiring. A teacher who has reached the age of compulsory retirement, which is the end of the school year following his or her 65th birthday, may receive a lump sum based on actual pensionable service and retiring salary. A pension and lump sum are paid to a teacher who satisfies the Minister for Education and the Minister for Finance that while in the teaching service he or she has become incapable from infirmity of mind or body of discharging the duties of a teacher and that such infirmity is likely to be permanent. Notional years may be added to actual pensionable service in calculating pension and lump sum. The maximum is ten years but this applies only to a teacher with ten years' service. For teachers with more than 20 years service the maximum is six and two-third years. However, years cannot be added to give teachers more service than they would have had if they continued in service until they could retire voluntarily. Thus a national teacher aged 55 with 35 years' service could not get any added years.

A teacher who has reached 60 years of age and has at least five years of pensionable service may receive a pension and lump sum. In times gone by the pensionable salary of teachers retiring voluntarily was averaged over three years in a way that was less favourable than for those at compulsory retirement age. This disincentive has been ended.

In the national teachers' scheme there is a further provision allowing for retirement at 55 years of age where the teacher has at least 35 years' pensionable service. Averaging of scale salary occurs where a teacher has not held the same salary point over the last three years of pensionable service. The averaging method used nowadays is more favourable than that which operated some years ago. "Ineffective" teachers may retire with a pension based on actual service from the age of 50 at the Minister's discretion. In recent years there has not been recourse to these arrangements.

A teacher with at least five years' pensionable service who leaves without immediate entitlement to a pension may get a pension and lump sum from the age of 60 based on actual service and the uprated equivalent of retiring pensionable salary.

A teacher may resign and transfer accrued superannuation entitlements to another employment, within certain limits. Facilities exist to enable teachers to carry accrued pension rights to and from approved organisations or services. These include the Civil Service, Garda Síochána, Defence Forces, universities, local authorities, health boards and most State-sponsored bodies.

A teacher who retires on grounds of ill health with less than five years' pensionable service may be awarded a disablement gratuity. This is a once-off payment calculated by reference to service and retiring pensionable salary. No pension is payable. Short service gratuity is now confined to teachers who retire or resign with less than five years' pensionable service. They receive a short service gratuity which is a refund of the contributions paid to the pension scheme, less a deduction for tax.

I wish to avail of this opportunity to refer to the general issues of disability and stress which have been raised by Members of the House and which relate to arguments advanced by those seeking more favourable early retirement arrangements for teachers. The crucial wording on eligibility for disability pension is "when a teacher becomes incapable from infirmity of mind or body from discharging the duties of a teacher". Thus a teacher may qualify for a disability pension while capable of taking on alternative employment. Disability pensions are subject to periodic review, but only up to the age of 50.

The wording of the provision for disability pension and the trends in implementing it in recent years might suggest that stress and burn-out, to the extent that they can be objectively established, should be dealt with as disabilities and qualify for disability pension. While the existence of stress and burn-out has been acknowledged in general terms, establishing it in a specific case with the degree of confidence needed to approve a public service pension would not be easy.

A feature of conditions for disability pension is the provision allowing a pension and lump sum to be reduced if it is considered that the teacher contributed to the disability. It would be important, therefore, to distinguish the teacher who reaches a certain condition for reasons outside his or her control, such as illness, disease or clinical stress, from the teacher who is ineffective because of laziness, alcoholism, private interests or lack of interest. It would be unfair and unwise to reward the latter type of teacher with early retirement with enhanced benefits which are denied to the efficient and hard working teacher. This would be a good example of a perverse incentive.

Establishing inefficiency generally is an educational issue to be dealt with through a process involving the school principal, the board of management, the inspectorate and the Minister. On the other hand, establishing stress as a justification for special treatment would seem to be a medical issue which should be left to the medical profession. Such an approach if adopted would suggest that a clear distinction should be made between medical and non-medical reasons.

Any demanding job will have its quota of stress and teaching is no exception. Some stress factors in teaching would be shared by other occupations, such as accountability for performance or the obligation to be available for duty at prescribed times whether this is convenient. Stress can also be related to features peculiar to the particular case, such as the physical conditions in the workplace and the temperaments of others with whom one works.

Early retirement is not the only response to the teacher in difficulty and it should not be the first response. Indeed, in a survey carried out recently on behalf of the Council of Teachers Unions on stress in teaching, teachers themselves identified 16 strategies to overcome stress but did not include early retirement among them.

Mr. O'Toole

That is like saying one would not become pregnant if one was not a woman.

Mr. Alyward

The first response should be to support the teacher through in-service training, peer group support, better facilities in schools, improved codes of conduct for students, selective counselling for teachers, a welfare service for teachers, more secretarial services, etc. Senator O'Toole also mentioned these matters. There have been substantial improvements in a number of these areas over the past few years and further improvements are in prospect.

Teaching has its own particular stress factors. First among these must be the demand that a teacher must be on the alert with his or her class every moment of class time. A teacher in front of a class has little time to relax. Related to this is the particular types of demands which students make on a teacher, the noise levels, the disturbance levels, the application of rules which must often be there to enable the day-to-day operation of a class or school to take place, etc.

Often it may seem to teachers that their situation has worsened in recent times. Perhaps the biggest change has been in matters of discipline. This is not a matter of the abolition of corporal punishment, but of the fact that children today are less submissive and thus less amenable than they were in the past. Allied to this has been the greater interest and thus the greater demands made by parents. In the past the teacher may have been one of the few educated people in his or her area. Today teachers must contend with the fact that some parents are more highly educated than many teachers.

There have also been curricular changes which have imposed demands on teachers in terms of updating their knowledge and skills. Classes are large by European standards. If this is so, there are areas in which stress has been lessened in recent times. In a recent survey commissioned by the three teachers unions, to which I have already referred, reducing the pupil/teacher ratio was identified by teachers as the principal action to combat sources of stress in teachers. Beginning in 1960 there has been an improvement in class sizes in primary schools and today's classes are considerably smaller than those of 20 or 30 years ago. The target for the pupil/teacher ratio in primary schools under the Programme for a Partnership Government is 22: 1 which will represent a reduction of 19 per cent over a period of seven years.

Specialisms have been developed within the teaching force, such as remedial teachers, guidance teachers, home, school and community liaison teachers, teachers for children with handicaps and visiting teachers for children with certain impairments. These are supports for the class teachers.

Not all curricular change leads to further stress. The 1971 curriculum in primary schools has provided teachers with freedom and flexibility and the challenges it presents should be much more a matter of excitement than stress. At post-primary level the new junior certificate syllabuses have been devised with the full involvement of the teachers. The increase in the number of levels in all subjects enables teachers to allow for differences in abilities as opposed to trying to cater for all ability levels within the same course.

The conditions in which teachers work have also improved greatly over the years. Many more teachers now work in bright, spacious, modern classrooms than they did years ago. Schools often have additional facilities that did not exist before. The length of the primary school year in Ireland, which was 200 days some decades ago, is now at 184 days minimum, shorter than in most other European countries. The effective length of the post-primary school year — 168 — is considerably shorter again. A relevant factor in regard to occupational stress must be the amount of time one has to spend on the job. By comparison with other occupations it must be conceded that the teachers' working year and working day are relatively short. Teachers in Ireland work a shorter year and consequently have longer vacations than their counterparts in most other European Union countries.

A particular difference between schools today and those some years ago and one with special relevance to the matter of stress is the change in relationships. Few elements in a work situation can contribute so much to stress as tension in this sphere. Yet the old authoritarian relationship between manager and teacher or between inspector and teacher is now almost entirely a thing of the past. Teachers are no longer subject to the same type of consorious scrutiny in their work by inspectors as they may often have been formerly.

One of the difficulties in trying to measure stress at different times and in different individuals is to know when like is being measured with like. In former times, there was a relatively greater degree of harshness about the features of life and when people may have been more submissive, many things may have been endured as part of the nature of things which people nowadays would be unwilling to suffer or would consider themselves stressed if they did have to put up with them. This may be relevant to assertions that teachers are having to have recourse to retirement earlier than heretofore. People may consider they have a choice not to have to accept things which many, in times past, would have put up with, patiently or otherwise. So increased recourse to earlier retirement does not necessarily imply that greater stress is being experienced.

As stress is, in effect, an occupational hazard, the salary paid for a job should take account of the stress level. So it is in respect of teaching. In the case of the last special pay increase awarded to teachers at arbitration, the teachers unions put forward arguments related to increasing levels of stress in the profession. The arbitrator in making his award stated that he had taken into consideration all factors put before him. This leaves the question of how people cope with stress. If there is stress in teaching today — and teaching would not be a challenging profession if there was no stress — perhaps teachers need to be helped to cope with it. We all, including politicians, meet stress and the important thing is to know how to manage it.

I made a brief reference earlier to a welfare service for teachers as one of the means of providing support for teachers experiencing difficulties. I am happy to say that the Programme for Competitiveness and Work provides that the current discussions on the question of a welfare service for teachers will be concluded at the earliest possible date and proposals will be brought forward for the establishment of a welfare service. There is abundant material available about coping with stress in relation to work. An approach to the issue among teachers might be to try to tap into this material and perhaps to engage people with skills in stress management as part of the planned major development in in-service training for teachers. Again it is worth noting that in the survey of teachers I mentioned earlier, teachers accorded a high priority to in-service training as an action to combat sources of stress.

Stress, to some extent, has become a buzz word, as if the existence of stress was due entirely to technological and other changes in society. As I have already indicated, it is not as if stress did not exist in the past. What is clearly different is the constant publicity, media and otherwise, sought and given to stress. Public agitation can be a double-edged sword. Attention, so won, invariably concentrates on the negative aspects of an occupation, whether it be that of a nurse, a garda or a teacher. Constant focusing on the negative runs the risk of reducing the status of teaching as an occupation, lowering the esteem and morale of those in the profession and diminishing the attractiveness of the profession to those contemplating teaching as a career.

The issue of early retirement is a matter in the first instance for discussion and resolution by the parties who share responsibility for the operation and administration of the school system. These parties have agreed that the Conciliation Council for Teachers is the appropriate forum for dealing with matters such as this in a rational and considered manner. I believe that all of us should agree that the competence and jurisdiction of the council has to be preserved and respected.

Mr. Norris

Could you advise me, a Leas-Chathaoirligh, how is the debate going——

Mr. Magner

It is going well.

Mr. Norris

——because if it is a case that Senator Quinn will not have the opportunity to contribute, I should like to share my time with him.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

The Senator has eight minutes and it is a matter for himself whether he wishes to share that with Senator Quinn.

Mr. Sherlock

I indicated earlier, a Leas-Chathaoirligh. Do I take it that I will have a chance to speak?

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

I would hope so.

Mr. Norris

I may not take all my time because I have a number of clear points to make.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

May I take it that the Senator is sharing with Senator Quinn?

Mr. Quinn

No.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

You are not sharing?

Mr. Norris

No. Senator Quinn is taking time from my colleague Senator O'Toole.

I welcome the Minister to the House. I know he is a very decent person. However, on his performance this evening, when he was obviously ventriloquised by advisers, I would give him approximately six for reading, but whoever created this script would get three for composition. It is a hopeless piece of rubbish in my opinion with some ludicrous double entendres. No teacher would get away with a phrase about how much time is spent on the job without a sniggering group of pupils in a class. I would like to point to a paragraph which I find quite astonishing:

It would be important, therefore, to distinguish the teacher who reaches a certain condition for reasons outside his or her control, such as illness, disease or clinical stress, from the teacher who is ineffective because of laziness, alcoholism, private interests or simple lack of interest.

There seems to be a whole series of non sequiturs there. Does the Minister believe that alcoholism is not a disease? Does the Minister not believe that a caring employer ought to intervene in a situation of alcoholism? Is alcoholism not frequently a response to the kind of stress one meets in the teaching profession? I do not wish to blackguard my colleagues and I do not even want to specify my own department, but if I look around me in university circles — and I am not even confining myself to my own university — not only in Ireland but in America and Europe as well, I see friends and colleagues who suffer from alcoholism, who have drug problems, marital problems, nervous breakdowns and some have committed suicide. That is a fairly clear response to stress. I would say that stress is a very real issue for all members of the teaching profession, including third level.

In my opinion, alcoholism is a disease and is not something that is chosen. The Minister establishes an artificial distinction between reasons that are "outside his or her control" and others such as "laziness, alcoholism, private interests" etc. Alcoholism is not within the control of the individual unless a caring employer intervenes as they should. There may well be circumstances in which somebody suffering from the disease of alcoholism — even if the Minister does not appear to recognise the disease — should be permitted to withdraw. May I ask the Minister — or may I ask the puppeteers through the Minister — whether it is believed in the Department of Education that an alcoholic teacher is a good teacher or should they not be permitted to get out of the system? It seems to be implied there that you simply keep alcoholic teachers almost in a kind of vindictive situation.

I have to declare a certain interest in this because I am a teacher at third level. I am glad to see that the motion, as framed, covers all levels of teaching — primary, secondary and third level. I love teaching. I thoroughly enjoy it partly because I am an egomaniac and partly because I regard teaching as a performance art. I started teaching when I was 22 or 23 years old. I came into the profession after being an under-graduate and I was given a heavy workload. I was thrilled because I thought it was a vote of confidence in me, although it did not help with research. If I were to continue teaching until the age of 65, I would have taught for about 43 years. It is my stated ambition to get out at the age of 55 by which stage I will have contributed about 33 years. Jesus Christ accomplished his life's work and miracles in 33 years; I wonder what the university system and the Minister expect to extract from me by attempting to compel me to continue for ten additional miraculous years.

Mr. Cotter

Crucifixion.

Mr. Norris

Crucifixion takes time.

Mr. Magner

The trouble is that God was not given the option.

Mr. Norris

The Senator is right; I was not. I enjoy teaching and always have. However, if one has taught for a considerable time it becomes increasingly difficult to adapt to the rapid process of change. The universities, for example, are going through a process of modularisation. The obituary of a distinguished professor of classics who was a connection of mine, although not a blood relation, queried, among other things, whether such a brilliant research mind and superb teacher would have been able to survive in a world of modularisation, semesterisation and so forth. It is sometimes difficult to adapt to a system — and what I consider its increasing inflexibility for the teacher — which is intended to produce greater flexibility for the students.

There should be an early retirement option. People who wish to retire at the age of 50 should be permitted to do so. What is the point in keeping them if they do not wish to continue? How will they be good teachers? How will they transmit to the students the love of and interest in their subject which they felt at one time if they must continually reiterate the same material every year and set examination questions on that material? Taking repeat examinations and special examinations into account, one may find oneself setting examination questions on the same material four or five times a year. In the extreme case of five times in the year, one can multiply that by 40 and arrive at 200 questions to be extracted from, for example, the works of D.H. Lawrence or——

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

The Senator has one minute left.

Mr. Norris

Teaching is a vocation.

Mr. Aylward

The Senator must say it all quickly.

Mr. Norris

Exactly, like the good teacher I am. Perhaps I should become boring. That would demonstrate to the Minister why he ought to retire me before I bore everybody to death.

Teaching should be a vocation. If it ceases to be a vocation the teacher, in the interest of not only himself or herself but also the students, should be given the option of retirement. There is a nasty, parsimonious, accounting mentality which, if one retires before the age of 60 or 65, creates what is called an "abatement" of the pension so that one is docked part of the pension for every month. This is a mean minded approach to what should be a joyful profession and vocation. If I look around, not with contempt or to be humorous, not just within my university but at my academic colleagues at international level and see the number of casualties as they go beyond that point where they can sustain——

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

The Senator's time is up. He is taking time from other Members.

Mr. Norris

I hesitate to do that. I hope I made my point.

Mr. Magner

I wish to share my time with Senator Kelly.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Mr. Magner

I should probably say "My name is Senator Magner, I am not a teacher" because there are many teachers present.

Mr. Sherlock

It is a good job.

Mr. Norris

We can tell by the Senator's suntan that he is not a teacher.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Senator Magner without interruption.

Mr. Magner

There are more teachers here than can be found in Galway during the Easter weekend. Senator O'Toole referred to the absence of the Minister, Deputy Bhreathnach.

Mr. O'Toole

I thought she would be here.

Mr. Magner

Senator O'Toole knows that the Minister's duties prohibited her from being here this evening, yet he remarked on her absence in a most disparaging way. That is unfair. If Senator O'Toole were consistent when putting down motions which involve the expenditure of large sums of public money, he should not walk through the lobby to knock a miserly tax imposition of £28 on somebody with an income of £26,000 and a house worth £80,000.

Mr. O'Toole

I voted for it.

Mr. Magner

The Senator did not vote for it and he spoke against it.

Mr. O'Toole

I voted for it on both occasions.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Senator Magner, without interruption.

Mr. Norris

Is Senator Magner not even to be interrupted by the truth?

Mr. Magner

There were many impositions in the budget. Money must be raised and the public must support the raising of that money.

One of the bad legacies of Thatcherism was the attack on the teaching profession. It behoves us to use moderate language about teachers' conditions. Listening to Senator O'Toole and particularly Senator Cotter one would think every teacher was a psychiatric case and that every school was falling down. The reality is different.

Mr. Cotter

How does the Senator know?

Mr. Magner

I have been involved with teachers for the last 15 years.

Mr. Cotter

How many?

Mr. Magner

Many teachers. I was a member of Cork vocational education committee for many years.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Senator Magner, without interruption.

Mr. Magner

The Senators do not own the profession, they work in it; do not forget that. It is owned by the public. Do not give me this special pleading that because you are a teacher you know best and you will set your own wages and conditions. It would be beautiful if we all could——

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Senator Magner will address his remarks through the Chair.

Mr. Magner

When one is being provoked one must respond.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

I assure the Senator that I will protect him.

Mr. O'Toole

The Senator said nothing on the motion so far.

Mr. Magner

The reality of teachers' stress is accepted by all, although not the extent that was propagandised this evening. There are other stresses which do not impact on teachers but which impact on the majority of the population. Teachers are in no danger of losing their employment. If Senator O'Toole wishes to see real stress he should stand outside a factory where the employees have just received their redundancy notices.

Mr. O'Toole

Is the Senator going to speak on the motion?

Mr. Magner

I am putting the motion in context. The Senator is asking the State to spend enormous sums of money which he has not quantified because it does not concern him. He is not concerned about raising this money. His only concern is propagandising for his membership and attacking somebody who is not here. The Senator knows why the Minister could not be here. He took the easy and rather mean option of referring to her absence.

Mr. O'Toole

Speak to the motion.

Mr. Cotter

The Senator's time is up. He has not spoken to the motion yet.

Mr. Norris

The Senator has not told us where she is.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Senator Magner, without interruption. Senator Magner should address his remarks through the Chair.

Mr. Magner

The Minister, Deputy Bhreathnach, has been most consistent in her attendance in this House. She has also, to the acclamation of Senators——

Mr. Cotter

Does the Senator want a copy of the motion?

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Senator Cotter must resume his seat immediately.

Mr. Magner

She has subjected herself to questions and answers in this Chamber. Senator Cotter can do no wrong because he is a teacher. He owns the profession and nobody else is entitled to a say, not even those who pay the bills.

Mr. O'Toole

I do not agree. People should have a say in teaching. This is a democracy.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Senator Magner, without interruption. Senator O'Toole was not interrupted.

Mr. Norris

He was.

Mr. O'Toole

I hardly got two sentences out.

Mr. Magner

Great damage was done to the teaching profession in Britain by the Thatcher Government. It used extravagant language when talking about the teaching profession. It caused lasting damage to that profession in terms of public esteem for teachers and education — the edifice was diminished by those attacks and the use of extravagant language. I accept that there are problems in relation to the teaching profession in terms of stress and illness and they can be addressed. However, to try to portray a profession that is so stressed out of its mind that the majority of it must leave at 50 years of age is a nonsense.

Mr. Norris

Nobody said that.

Mr. O'Toole

Read the motion again.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

I understand the Senator is sharing his time with Senator Kelly.

Mr. Magner

I am.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

There are three minutes left.

Mr. Cotter

He has said nothing yet.

Ms Kelly

I am a former teacher, I am married to a teacher and I agree that there is stress in the teaching profession. The Minister has outlined some of the reasons for the stress — large classes——

Mr. Cotter

Senator Magner is partly the cause of it.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Senator Kelly, without interruption. I am surprised at Senator Cotter.

Mr. Cotter

I am sorry.

Mr. Magner

He is getting touchy.

Ms Kelly

I do not know if the Leas-Chathaoirleach is a teacher but he has made an excellent job of keeping this crowd in order.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Unfortunately I am not.

Mr. Magner

He is one of the few who is not.

Ms Kelly

He is experiencing the stress of what many teachers have to put up with — a large group of unruly individuals who will not sit down and will not keep quiet and who want to have their own way in everything.

Mr. Norris

It is most unfair on Senator Magner.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Senator Kelly without any further interruption.

Ms Kelly

Large classes, disturbed pupils and the greater expectations of parents with a wider curriculum to cover than in the past teachers have a great sense of frustration at not having any form of advancement or a recognition of achievement, but all these sources of stress so not necessarily need the remedy of early retirement and the Minister alluded to this.

With regard to large classes, the Government is going a long way to reducing the pupil teacher ratio. Nobody can deny that with a reduced number of children in the class a teacher's ability to communicate with each child and to give each child a little extra attention is greatly enhanced. The Government is committed to further reduce of pupils in classes the element of stress will, in time, be reduced. With disturbed pupils who come largely from disturbed homes and backgrounds there is a wider range of services available to schools in the form of remedial teachers and visiting experts and there are facilities where children can go to be assessed. Problem children can thus have their problems identified and isolated and, in many cases, remedied.

Parents did not have the same expectations 40 or 50 years ago as parents of today. Some parents who did not have a great education wanted that lack remedied for their children. Greater liaison between parents and teachers in putting some of the onus on the parents. I recommend that the Minister takes note of the report of the National Education Convention which recommends a more flexible role for senior teachers. This would do a great deal to relieve stress on senior teachers. There could be a greater flexibility when there is a genuine need for a teacher to retire early so that the Department facilitates this need.

Mr. Cotter

The Senator said more in three minutes than Senator Magner would in an evening.

Mr. McDonagh

I am happy to speak after the solid, middle of the road performance of Senator Kelly. It would be more difficult to follow the eloquence, rhetoric and verbiage of Senator Norris and the loquacious performance of Senator Magner who deviated from the motion.

I support this motion. I am another teacher who has witnessed a changing pattern in education over the years and the failure of successive Governments to meaningfully reduce class sizes, and the big changes in the curriculum, especially in recent times. Teachers have, to say the least, a traumatic time and teaching is fast becoming a young person's occupation. Stress is the key word in the motion and it is the norm for teachers. Demands come from all sides from the establishment of support groups for teachers under stress. In the stereotyped reply from the Minister there is reference to some such structure.

It is also accepted that stress is highest among older teachers and recently released figures from Woodchester Plan show clearly that most of the classes in the loss of salary protection schemes are from teachers in stress related areas. The cost is exorbitant and is unproductive. Teachers over 50 years are on the maximum salary. They could easily be replaced by young teachers at the bottom of the scale at a lower overall cost to the Department and the State.

Teaching is the least mobile of professions, caused by the so-called "grandfather scale." It takes 25 years to reach the maximum on the teachers' salary scale; no other professional group has such a structure. If teachers were allowed to retire at 50 years of age it would open the door for thousands of unemployed young and not so young teachers to get into the classroom. One of the most difficult jobs to get at present is a full-time teaching post. I speak from experience as chairperson of the appointments board of a vocational education committee. It is sad to witness at first hand the scramble for jobs by highly qualified young teachers, endowed with exceptional talents as they traverse the country to attend at interview after interview for teaching jobs.

CVs are turned out by the score, holders of B.As, B.Comms, H.Dips and other qualifications vie for part-time jobs. I was given an example by a young teacher at an interview board who informed us they had applied for 30 positions and the Galway vocational education committee interview board was the first to call this teacher to an interview — and it was only for a part-time position for ten or 11 hours per week. That gives an indication of the great difficulty facing young teachers at present. Thousands of teachers are in situ in part-time teaching posts with no security of tenure.

There is a great need for the Minister to set up proper structures for eligible part-time teachers and enshrined within it must be a proper superannuation pension scheme. At present job sharing people retain their pension rights and a precedent has been established here. It is now incumbent on the Minister to instruct the Department to set in train and adequate pension scheme for EPTs, that is eligible part-time teachers.

The Department's failure to put in place a properly structured in-service system has accelerated stress related problems in a rapidly changing educational environment. Much of the taxpayers' money is going in higher education grants to train new young educationalists more familiar with current changes but few of them ever get the chance to use their talents in a permanent post. Volumes have been written and spoken about this topic but has there ever been a proper evaluation of the cost to the State, the benefit to the education system and the effects of unemployment on newly qualified graduates and trainee teachers?

We have an ageing teaching profession all of whom have contributed nobly to the State and its youth. One example is a school I know well, which currently has 47 full-time teachers, 32 of whom will retire within a ten year span under the present system. Another school has 18 teachers of whom 11 will retire in a seven year span. Meanwhile young gifted teachers have little or no chance of promotion in the present rigid system.

Recent studies show a high percentage of teachers would retire if a proper scheme was put in place. There are obvious signs of low morale at the upper end of the teaching scale. The National Education Convention highlighted many of these problems. Repetitive motions to annual conventions relate to early retirement structures. Over the years many Ministers for Education have promised to look at these matters but little has happened. Action is now necessary.

How many teachers get a maximum benefit from pensions at the age of 65? What is the average length of pension benefit to a retired teacher? These are rhetorical questions. Most teachers who are lucky to see 65 are burnt-out and are unable to enjoy a deserved break. Is it fair to ask older teachers to implement totally new programmes? Is it fair to the thousands of highly qualified young teachers to work below their full potential in part-time teaching jobs? Some teachers are employed on building sites and in shops and, sadly but undoubtedly, some are on the dole.

Any teacher who has given 25 or at most 30 years to teaching should be allowed to retire on full pension. At present a teacher is expected to teach up to 45 years to qualify for full retirement benefit. This is grossly unfair to the older teachers and equally unfair to the thousands of unemployed young teachers. The cliché says life begins at 50; I say teacher retirement should begin at 50, or at the latest at 55.

Miss Ormonde

I have waited a long time to speak and all the points seem to have been made. However I will keep strictly to the topic, which is whether teachers should retire because of stress. We have ranged widely from that topic and I am now stressed from listening to all the points made. Speakers should not have deviated so much from the motion, especially at this time in the evening. Perhaps the points could be made at another time on another topic.

Teachers experience stress and there is need for early retirement. I spoke this morning to colleagues at work about this motion and asked their opinion. All of them agreed there should be an early retirement option for teachers under stress but it should not be made compulsory. I dread the word "stress" because it is a buzz word used to describe every mood and illness that may affect us. I am concerned that we are not taking our profession seriously.

One reason for stress in teaching is that the format for discipline has changed. My experience is that students now have a right to challenge the teacher on any subject, even if they are not qualified to do so. Teachers cannot touch students; if they do they will be challenged by parents. In my school there was an argument in a classroom and a teacher touched a student. Immediately the parents intervened and called in a solicitor. The stress of that incident led the young teacher to decide to leave the profession.

At post-primary level the parents' aspirations for their children cause stress. No one mentioned the points system, which is the biggest source of stress today. At parent-teacher meetings we are confronted by parents saying how many points their child must get to enter a given course. That puts dreadful pressure on teachers who feel inadequate if their students do not get enough points; the points system decides if they are good teachers. The teacher may have a different philosophy and feel he or she is educating for life rather than serving the points system.

I would not be entirely in favour of the early retirement option. However, to deviate slightly, teachers have no options for mobility. Often a teacher is in one staff room from the time he enters the profession until retirement. That is not healthy. Perhaps the option of mobility has not been considered by the conciliation council but it should. Career breaks have not been mentioned either, and that is an equally good option. Teachers may not want to take early retirement. It would be good if it was available; all the other options should be examined first but there are none at present.

At present career breaks may depend on subjects, on individual teachers and whether there is a replacement teacher. That option should be open and easily available. It was said this evening that many young teachers are waiting to enter the system. If we had mobility and career breaks those young teachers could be used.

The Minister did not provide an answer to the question whether there should be early retirement but he may be unable to do so because we are in the middle of negotiations. That is the path we should follow. Teachers have made submissions to my union, the Teachers' Union of Ireland. I want that union to negotiate for me; I do not want to carry on negotiations for them. We want the Minister to know that. There is support for using the machinery and asking the Minister to put it into action. The teachers' conferences will take place in two months time and they will develop the matter further.

All the options should be considered. The question is whether there should be early retirement because of stress. We should examine if there should be ways for teachers to overcome the stress. We should not confine the question to that narrow issue. I ask the Minister to make those points at the Easter conferences. I want my union to discuss those issues.

One Senator mentioned illnesses and said alcoholism might not be an illness. It is a huge stress factor; we have all heard the phrase: "it would drive you to drink". Alcoholism should be seen as an illness rather than resulting from stress in the school. I agree with the motion but I believe the matter should go through the conciliation council.

Mr. Sherlock

I am prepared to share my time with Senator Farrelly.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

As of now, Senator Farrelly should have an opportunity to contribute without sharing.

Mr. Sherlock

I wondered at the outset of Senator Ormonde's contribution if it would be necessary for me to speak at all because she appeared to be saying the right thing. She made good points but, as she said herself, she deviated from the subject. The main point is whether people who vote against this motion are so doing in the interests of party politics rather than teachers and their pupils. That is the bottom line. Would a motion of this nature be put before the Seanad unless it was the considered opinion of teachers, and those in the profession generally, that it is reasonable to agree to the introduction of an early retirement scheme, and it is the considered opinion? In view of that fact, the Minister should not tell the House that he had any part in drawing up that document. Senator Norris quoted from that document but I would not have the audacity to come into the House and talk about ineffectiveness due to laziness or alcoholism. It is an insult to the teachers to make such references because the Minister of State did not analyse the causes of stress in schools.

I was a member of a vocational committee for five years and I am aware of the stress and strain some teachers have to endure. I am also aware of the situation in primary schools. The Minister of State and his Department need to analyse the situation and realise that there has been a complete change in attitude. To a great extent there is no respect for authority and teachers must contend with that. Is it right to say that teachers must continue after 24 or 30 years service in a difficult job which has become more difficult as time passed?

Regarding the pupil/teacher ratio in primary schools, the fact that there has been such a diabolical ratio has largely contributed to the stress and strain on many teachers. Teachers have other problems, such as the capitation system of payment to primary schools which should be urgently addressed. As regards the amount of work that has to be done in the area of adult literacy, that is an indictment of the Department's policy in this area of education.

The Minister of State said there is an abundance of material available about coping with stress in relation to work and an approach to the issue among teachers might be to try to tap into this material and perhaps to engage people's skills. I did not think that the Minister of State would address the House with that type of lingo. If we recognise that due to stress and strain there are teachers who cannot cope with the situation and want early retirement at 50, that is reasonable. Does the Minister think that people who are associated with and who represent teachers would put down a motion of this type without good grounds and without the support of teachers? The point was made that stress has become a buzz word. That is an insult because the Minister of State knows there is a major problem and that the solution is at least to provide the option of retiring at 50.

Senator Ormonde made a good point; there should be an opportunity to opt out for a year or two but that is not available. I discussed this matter with teachers before this motion and they said that would be a help. The Minister of State has not addressed this problem but he said there is machinery for conciliation. He used most of his speech to tell the House what is already available by way of superannuation or retirement through disability. However, a person would almost need to be in a wheelchair to qualify. The fact is that there is a major problem which must be addressed and it is reasonable to propose the option of early retirement for teachers. That is why I support this motion and I ask other Members with common sense to do likewise.

Mr. Aylward

On a point of order, certain Members seem to think that I, or the Minister, could make a definitive statement here tonight. That is not possible because of the constraints which are placed on the Minister, as on the other partners, in the conciliation and arbitration system. That is a fact and we cannot breach it. It is unfair for Senators to give that message. We have no intention of breaking our part of the bargain.

Mr. Sherlock

This would give an impetus to the negotiations.

Mr. Aylward

That might put a question mark over the entire motion.

Mr. Farrelly

I welcome the opportunity to contribute on this motion. I listened to the Minister's reply on a point of order. We are aware of serious problems in primary schools due to teachers who have different types of problems. There is consultation and a mechanism to deal with these problems but for the majority of circumstances the system does not exist which would allow teachers to take early retirement and the children suffer as a result.

As Senators, we cannot get details when asking questions but I would like the Minister of State to tell the House how many letters on files are piling up in his Department about teachers who have problems in primary schools and where parents, out of frustration, have moved their children to schools up to six miles away. Such situations are causing the break up of parish communities and leading to people having no confidence in the boards of management in the schools concerned. On the first and only time the Minister attended the conferences last year, she said she was in favour of introducing early retirement. Why has there been such a long delay in introducing this system which is urgently required in such a stressful area? I cannot understand it. Gardaí can retire after 30 years' service when they come to 50 years of age or a little older.

I cannot see why these negotiations and the arbitration cannot be concluded, considering the serious problems existing in primary schools throughout the country, with the children as sufferers. Last night I met with the parents of children who have been moved from the local school because of problems. Admittedly, the problem cannot be addressed as there is no mechanism to deal with it. How long must negotiations continue, as children continue to suffer from existing problems?

We all can have health problems arising from all walks of life and we must feel sorry for those with such problems. In this respect there are demands placed on the education of children, including the demand for them to do well. Where children have only the one opportunity in life to receive this education, we are told that there is a mechanism, through conciliation, to deal with problems where they arise. However, the reality is that the problems cannot be addressed because the mechanism does not allow for this. The teachers accept that the problems can be addressed if there is a means and a will to do so within the Department, but there is no such will. Nobody with a child, who, as I have said, has only one chance to be educated, should be subjected to a situation where because of a problem their child may suffer.

There is a general awareness of the large number of people who are willing, able and eligible, if the opportunity arose, to start teaching. However, that opportunity is not being granted to them. The amendment from the Government parties, following the Minister's statement to the unions in April 1993, leads me to wonder what the Minister will say this year. Will the Minister advise that the issue is still under negotiation? It is time to call the shots and make the decisions on behalf of the future generation in this country and of the teachers who desire a facility for those in the profession who wish to leave the system.

Mr. Quinn

I support the motion as it highlights an important issue that requires debate, debate in a broader sense and not limited to the teaching profession. The situation regarding teachers is merely a symptom of the change that the world is going through. That change arises because, for the first time in history, people born into one world die in another, a world that is completely different and has become different in the course of their own lifetime. This is not overstating the case, as many would argue that this radical change is now taking place so fast that it happens several times during a single lifetime. It presents an enormous scale of challenge that we have not experienced before.

An important consequence of this fast moving change is that the old way of dividing up a person's lifetime is now dead and gone. The old idea was that people were educated for a specific career in the early part of their life. All the preparation and training that a person went through was expected to last an entire lifetime, and this was usually so at times when the world did not change much. The situation is different today. At the most extreme, there are those who argue that one cannot expect the one career to last a lifetime and that people should plan to make at least one change and perhaps even several career changes. I am not speaking of changing jobs, rather the possibility of changing careers.

However, even within a single career such as teaching, the job itself is changing all the time. This means that the preparation for teaching which young people receive in their teenage years and early twenties becomes outdated long before the end of their careers. In this respect it was interesting to hear Senator Norris speak of joining the teaching profession at the age of 23 and being expected to continue teaching for many years afterwards. In consequence of this there must be continuous adaptation and training all the way down the line. Unfortunately, the notion of training during a teacher's career has been neglected. It is an area where resources have not been spent. In this respect I agree with Senator Ormonde when she spoke of the need for adaptation and that it must now have a high priority.

To put it at its most extreme, we cannot expect teachers to operate on the basis that what they learnt 30 years ago will apply in the future. Senator Lee spoke of everything changing out of recognition. The subject matter, the technology of teaching, the expectations from the educational system and the competition for the student's ear, as vividly described by many Senators tonight who are teachers, have all changed.

As everybody in Ireland today has a need to adapt continuously in whatever job they hold, we must especially realise that this need presses strongly on teachers. We must provide the means whereby they can adapt during their teaching lifetime. There will be some for whom the changes are too great, some who, as Senator Lee referred to, burn out before the normal retiring age. For those the notion of early retirement may be a good idea.

However, it is important that we do not make the big leap into concluding that early retirement should become the norm, or creating a situation where it is allowed to become the norm This was not suggested when Senator O'Toole spoke of the possibility that not even 5 per cent would accept the early retirement option. However, it could easily become the norm if the wrong system was put in place. One only has to consider what happens in Brussels where a large number of those working in the EU Commission are invalided out 15 years or so ahead of time. That is a system which, although founded on good intentions, has become an expensive recipe for abuse.

Another reason we should take care to stress that adaptation is the norm and that early retirement should be the exception, the last resort, arises from the growing tendency to believe that people over 50 years of age have come to the end of their working life. The view is that they are truly finished and should retire because there is not a useful purpose to be served by their continued career participation and that they do not have as much to offer as younger people. This view is wrong, not only because I am in that age group myself, as are many Senators in the House, but because what we should be saying is that people still have a worthwhile contribution to make if they adapt properly to today's conditions. This is why some months ago I proposed, and had accepted, that age should be regarded as a cause for unfair dismissal. It was a proposal to stop people being made redundant on the grounds of age alone.

Our approach to this issue should have two elements. As the norm we should help people to adapt to this total wave of change. As the exception, for those who are genuinely unable to adapt, we should insert the safety net of early retirement as proposed by this motion. If we approach the problem in this way, we should have some chance of achieving the objectives within the resources available to us. Therefore we must consider the possibility of early retirement as the exception but adaptation as the norm.

Mr. O'Toole

I thank all Members for their contributions to the debate. I would not differ with those who addressed the question of early retirement. I would differ with those who addressed the question early retirement. I regret, however, that the Minister was not prepared to give a commitment this evening. That is not a problem in regard to conciliation and arbitration. The Minister could have repeated the commitment she gave last year. It is the Minister's job to tell her negotiators what she wants done so they may negotiate through the conciliation and arbitration scheme. This happens all the time; it happened last week in Government Buildings when the social partners reached agreement on pay, etc. This then goes to the conciliation council where it is dealt with.

The Minister of State's speech was unacceptable. One page was devoted to the motion, five or six pages explained the current system on retirement, six pages dealt with stress and two-thirds of a page referred to this issue. He stated that all three schemes are contributory but are non-funded. That is not my problem. In the last three weeks I issued a statement saying it was a disgrace that the Government is in breach of its own legislation on superannuation. Given that £4 billion is spent on public service pay and wages and 6 per cent of this is taken in superannuation contributions each year, approximately £300 million should go into a superannuation fund which would eventually find its feet and be in a position to reduce the cost and burden of pensions. That is required in industry and where it is not required, the State must move in. As we saw in the budget, the Minister for Finance made a huge contribution to the pension funds of semi-State bodies. It is not my fault that it is non-funded. Members of my organisation pay a contribution which is taken from their salaries each month. It is irresponsible that pensions must be paid from current expenditure.

Another aspect of the speech I found extraordinary was that of the 16 strategies teachers thought of to deal with stress on the job, early retirement was not considered. How would one cope with stress on the job after early retirement? It is like saying one will not crash one's car if one does not drive or the best way to deal with competitiveness in industry is to close down one's shop. Of course it is not a strategy for dealing with stress, it is something which comes after one has failed to deal with it.

I listened to Members, including Senator Quinn, speak about the need for in-service training, an adaptable, flexibile approach to the job, job sharing and career breaks, etc. I spent five arguing with the Department to introduce career breaks. I pointed out that it would save it money and create flexibility, but the Department rejected it. However, it followed the former Department of the Public Service when it took that decision. I spent the past five years arguing with the Department to introduce a job sharing scheme. Finally, it is to this Minister's credit that she agreed to allow one case I put forward. We now have two miserly job sharing schemes in primary education. This would not cost the State, but it shows a lack of adapability on the part of those who take decisions. I have spoken about in-service education for the past ten or 12 years and, in fairness, this Minister has grasped the nettle and in-service education will take place this year.

It is extraordinary that we must fight for things which are good and do not cost money. Last year the Minister stood before 1,000 people and spoke about the need for early retirement. She now speaks about the repercussive effect it would have on the public service. It seems the Minister did not think about it at the time or that she is now having second thoughts. That is unacceptable. There is no commitment to move forward.

Early retirement — I made sure this was included in the motion — must be an option rather than the norm. Last week I read an essay by Disraeli about advances made through the discoveries and initiatives of those past what is now considered retirement age. People have studied languages at this time and some great autobiographers and philosophers have written during this productive period in a person's life. I am attracted to that area of life and, like others, I studied de senectute at post primary school.

The Minister has opted out of a commitment she gave. However, this issue will not go away. I noted those on the Government benches said this will be dealt through conciliation and arbitration. I looked for an answer to this at conciliation and arbitration, but it was not forthcoming. If we do not get an answer we must ask if this issue is being buried. It is unacceptable if that is the case. It infuses anarchy in the system if the Minister makes a point and says this is the way forward, but nothing happens. Last April the Minister said she wanted to introduce early retirement, but she has not done this.

I got a letter from a teacher who attended the congress last year. We video the congress and large screens show what is going on. He wrote that if the Minister attends this year's congress, he would be pleased if we would play the video of last year's speech as she enters the hall so she would be clear about the commitment she gave and the response she got. I would not do that because it is not in anyone's interest to embarrass Ministers, although it is embarrassing for those concerned.

A commitment has been given which we cannot walk away from. At some stage someone will have to pay the price. This commitment would not cost a significant amount of money because people are paying into their pension funds at all times and a variety of approaches could be taken. It is well known that someone retiring will be replaced and that the difference between the top and bottom of a teacher's scale is almost double. A teacher coming in will earn approximately £14,000 while a retiring teacher earns approximately £27,000 or £28,000. A saving could be made in this regard. The pension of the teacher retiring and the salary of the person coming in will be equal in the first year. However, as a teacher goes up the scale the gap narrows. The average a teacher spends in retirement is less than seven years. That is unfortunate and we should be aware of it.

I ask the Minister to be flexible. I have letters from people who cannot continue in the job. I am used to people putting words in our mouths as to who should decide for teachers. Like other sections of the community, I believe teachers should be answerable and they should argue their case. There are no winners in a situation where teachers are not able to do their job.

There is a risk in focusing on the negative aspects of teaching, and does not give me pleasure. I have been talking to local communities and small groups of people in far flung corners of Ireland who have said there are problems in their schools and have asked me to do something. I do not have the opportunity or the means to deal with problems when people in local communities have only two options, either sack teachers who have children in third level education and responsibilities and status in the community or allow them to continue doing what they can no longer do to the best of their abilities. If these are the only options, somebody is being irresponsible. I, as a representative of teachers, and Members who spoke tonight, both teachers and non-teachers, said we should be fair and open about this. We would then not have to highlight these problems and would be able to present the profession in a better way.

We are talking about a small number of teachers. I inform Senator Quinn that we are referring to far fewer than 5 per cent. This problem could be dealt with on the basis of a few hundred retirements each year. This is a tiny number. It would be a relief to people to know they have the option of retirement if things get too tough. People who reach the age of voluntary retirement may feel good about waiting until they are 60 or 61 before retiring but it may be psychologically difficult for them if they thought they had to stay working for another six years.

We all understand there is a problem. I regret the Government side put forward this extraordinary amendment. I ask them not to press it and to accept the motion.

Amendment put.

The Seanad divided: Tá, 22; Níl, 21.

Tá

• Bohan, Eddie.
• Byrne, Seán.
• Daly, Brendan.
• Farrell, Willie.
• Finneran, Michael.
• Fitzgerald, Tom.
• Gallagher, Ann.
• Hillery, Brian.
• Kelleher, Billy.
• Kelly, Mary.
• Kiely, Dan.
• Kiely, Rory.
• Lanigan, Mick.
• Lydon, Don.
• McGennis, Marian.
• Magner, Pat.
• Mooney, Paschal.
• Mullooly, Brian.
• O'Sullivan, Jan.
• Ormonde, Ann.
• Roche, Dick.
• Wall, Jack.

Níl

• Belton, Louis J.
• Burke, Paddy.
• Cosgrave, Liam.
• Cotter, Bill.
• Cregan, Denis (Dino).
• Dardis, John.
• Doyle, Joe.
• Farrelly, John V.
• Henry, Mary.
• Honan, Cathy.
• Howard, Michael.
• Lee, Joe.
• McDonagh, Jarlath.
• Naughten, Liam.
• Neville, Daniel.
• Norris, David.
• O'Toole, Joe.
• Quinn, Feargal.
• Ross, Shane P.N.
• Sherlock, Joe.
• Taylor-Quinn, Madeleine.

Tellers: Tá, Senators Mullooly and Magner; Níl, Senators O'Toole and Lee.

Amendment declared carried.

Question, "That the motion, as amended, be agreed to", put and declared carried.