I always thought that teachers had a really tough job, but that the benefits they received (such as long school holidays) successfully balanced the difficultly of the job. But what one teacher had to say, as reported in this Education Guardian article made me think that, perhaps, teachers
have it easier than I thought:

“People aren’t necessarily going to want, after a hard day, to watch teacher telly,” says music teacher Robert Fox. “We shouldn’t be expected to do training outside work time.”

That’s a heck of a cushy job then, if you only work 9-5, Monday to Friday, with thirteen weeks’ holiday, on a starting salary of nearly £19,000, with no requirement for out-of-hours training. That’s nearly £14 per hour.

A £19,000 starting salary is much more than (and I know I’m biased here) a PRHO’s starting salary of £17,935, which works out at an hourly rate of £8.97. And medics have to pay for five year’s tutition too (and will be in around £20,000 debt under the current system – more under the new system) because of this. Is a newly qualified teacher really worth 55% more per hour than a newly qualified doctor? And when did you last hear about doctors complaining about having to do out-of-hours training?

I have the upmost repect for the hardwork teachers do, but I really hope they stop moaning about how much they get paid, especially if they’re going to make comments like that above when a TV service is being provided to make their job easier (at a cost equivalent of 1000 PRHOs, or 346 GPs, or 376 dentists). When so much is spent on making an already attractive job easier, only to be received with comments like the above, it makes me feel really quite angry.

This silicon.com article is actually about the introduction of fingerpint technology for payment in a Washington supermarket, but it makes an interesting point about the controversial introduction of RFID tagging, the backlash against which I commented on last week.

John Davison, VP and research director at analyst house Gartner, said that customers were generally willing to accept technologies, such as RFID, that could infringe their privacy if the benefits of such technology could be ‘sold’ to them.

“Will customers object to RFID? Yes, if you don’t sell it to them,” he said. “Over two-thirds of customers will accept RFID if you sell them the basic utilities.”

However, he added that certain areas of retail were still technology sacred. “The nearer you get RFID to the payment process, consumers get less keen. When you start linking… to their personal information, they’re even less keen.”

This is something I strongly agree with. You cannot sell this kind of new technology to the public by trying to sell the technology to the public: You have to tell them about all the benefits. Telling customers that their shopping will be embedded with microchips (already dubbed ‘spy chips’ by the anti-RFID lobby groups) will be a big turn-off, but telling customers that they’ll save time at the checkout by not having to unload everything from their trolley will be a big turn-on.

Tesco are particularly good at marketing to the public, and I’m sure they’ll do this right, which is another reason why any attempted resistance against RFID by paranoid consumer groups will, surely, fail.

MSN report that MSN Search, my big tip for 2005, has finally launched. This looks like being a good thing.

But the scheme will give travel headaches to commuters in Stockton for 65 weeks from February.

Project organisers say road closures and diversion are unavoidable.

It looks like driving around my area is about to get a lot tougher for a long while. It’s not exactly jam-free at the moment, but it’ll be a nightmare to have to get to all these hospitals from August if the roads are going to be so congested. Lucky me.

There’s free access to The Times Crossword Club today, in celebration of the 75th birthday of, erm, the Times crossword. I’m very much excited about this, and I’m sure you will be too… The one thing I miss from The Times is the crossword – The Guardian’s is okay, but it’s just not the same.