As Croke Park I created a divide between the then INTO members and the future INTO members, members of the union took a much closer look at the impact any agreement or disagreement on Croke Park II would have on both present and future members.

By rejecting Croke Park II, the INTO have shown a strong front against future divisions within its members, most particularly senior members and people in leadership roles in school staff rooms.

For newly qualified teachers like me, Croke Park II was an admission from the government that these graduates had been treated unfairly in the previous agreement. Within Croke Park II, there was a small step towards equalisation in pay (though much later in a teacher’s career) and less of a delay on future increments for teachers who are on the lower pay scale-one incremental freeze rather than two.

Whilst this may seem like a victory for Newly Qualified Teachers (NQTs), it is a ‘victory’ which should never have been necessary. By creating a two-tiered pay system in Croke Park I, Croke Park II aimed to slightly improve the lower scale rather than equalise it completely which should be the main goal of the union over the next few difficult budgets.

For many NQTs, the improvements offered to them in Croke Park II may have been enough of a reason to vote yes. From a larger perspective, Croke Park II created a new division within primary education and would have led to a three tier pay system where senior teachers and people who were responsible for school management and leadership would be cut much more severely.

I can understand why the Yes vote got some support from NQTs but it is clear that the majority of the union are refusing to accept another division within their own staff and have realised the further damage that accepting cuts could do to primary education as a whole.