After the last agreement in the teaching partnership, the Province decided to implement the Perfect Assistance plan to pay additional awards. According to representatives of the Argentine Union of Private Teachers (Sadop) in Rosario, this system is similar to the presenteeism of the 90s and will generate a 40% increase in private school fees.
The general secretary of the guild in the city, Martin Luceromaintained that the regulations in Santa Fe establish that personnel must be paid in “same conditions, specialty and position” as public establishments. Thus, he anticipated a strong adjustment since May in the cost of the services provided by schools.
Why is Sadop opposed to teacher awards for perfect attendance in Santa Fe?
“Presentism never again”, expressed the head of Sadop Rosario when rejecting the measure of the provincial Ministry of Education. The leader stated that the system is unfair because it excludes from the awards those who request leave due to pregnancy and illness, among other reasons.
On the other hand, Lucero affirms that the awards will have a negative impact on the value of the dues of the establishments where the staff works. “Private schools cannot choose whether to pay or not something that rewards teaching activity,” he argued.
The union member warned this Tuesday that the portfolio led by Jose Goity have a “gross ignorance of the functioning of the educational system”. Then he pointed out that the Province’s initiative could generate a judicial conflict with the unions and establishments.
Amsafe Rosario denounced “extortion” with the Perfect Assistance awards
Sadop Rosario’s position against the Perfect Assistance program is consistent with the rejection of the Santa Fe Teachers’ Association (Amsafe). The secretary general Juan Pablo Casiello considered that the Government is starting a “offensive” so that teachers lose the right to licenses.
According to the head of the public schools union, the awards implemented by decree are a “extortion” of educational personnel. He then opined that the system is “identical to the presentism of the 90s” and a “return to the worst” of that era. “The replacements could not add even a day of seniority because they were not called,” he recalled.
Casiello considered that “the situation is very serious” and the issue should be part of the joint discussion with the Province. Against the official approach, the leader maintained that Being absent more than once a month is equivalent to “losing part of your salary” with this economic incentive plan.
“Evidently there was money”, commented the Amsafe leader about the salary negotiation closed the previous week. He then asked that the additional money “be incorporated into the basic” and the pay scale be repeated.