Democratic senators bail ship

[gypsyman]

XD, I'll give you my opinion on a wage. Just starting out, a teacher should make $25,000 a year, NO benifits. Have the school system their in, evaulate there job success.(How many students in that persons class made A's-B's-etc. and how many failed) If a majority of the students had C's or better, a $3,000 raise for the second year, still no benifits. Do the same again at the end of the second year. If a sucessful class was passed, they get, on a 1099 a $2,000 bonus for the 3rd. year, to do with what they want. They can blow it on a vacation,set up a health care account,(like my wife and I have), or whatever. It's their's. After the 5th. year, $35,000 plus a $5,000 bonus on a 1099. Hey, their teachers, their smart, let them invest it the way they want. And, depending on the school system their in, raises and bonus's on how much money in available form the tax payers.  My .02 worth. gypsyman

[Cheesehead]

Gov Walker is not being very honest about his intentions, the audio is very interesting.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110223/ap_on_re_us/us_wisconsin_budget_unions

Cheese

[jimster]

I'm not talking about Wisconsin. I'm talking about salaries for teachers in general .-.What do you think would be a fair salary for them?

Whatever the tax payers in the area can afford.  Period.  If it turns out school is like "Little house on the prarie"...I guess that's life after taxes.  If the tax payers are either broke, or gone...maybe think about reversing the direction the country has been going in the last 30 years, start voting for people that think like Dave Ramsey when it comes to budegts, or more logical minded people.

Or you can keep going the way you are and let it all shut down like they did in Detroit...I personally don't care anymore.  The people get what they voted for in the end.

Far as questions go...I have some.  Why do we argue over something we do not have? Money.
And why after watching what happened in Michigan...would people in other states want to keep doing the same thing?  Kind of dumb ain't it?  Look what the unions did to Detroit...you want them to have enough power to bulldoze your cities under after they milk it and then leave?  Why ruin it all over ideology when everyone can just use common sense instead? 

Teachers should get paid what the tax payers can afford...period.  No more, no less.
If they don't like that, they can find something else to do for money in the private sector with all their vast knowledge.  Same goes for anyone working off tax dollars.  Same goes for the private sector, but they are already doing that on their own. 

Who represents the tax payers anyway?  Anyone?  Kinda hard to find representation for us with union money buying representatives the last few decades.  Our own tax dollars have been used against us. 

[guzzijohn]

Quote from jimster:

Teachers should get paid what the tax payers can afford...period.  No more, no less.
If they don't like that, they can find something else to do for money in the private sector with all their vast knowledge.  Same goes for anyone working off tax dollars.  Same goes for the private sector, but they are already doing that on their own. 

Then explain to me why an engineer or as my past wife a computer programer with a BS degree gets to make twice what I do as a teacher when they work in private sector aerospace BUT on all military contracts which are paid for by TAXPAYERS just like the schools?
GuzziJohn

[beerbelly]

Alabama is a right to work state and I for one am glad we are! If not all the auto factories that have located here in the last few years would have went some where else. So we got those good paying jobs because they didn't have to deal with the criminal thug unions! Quite a few other companies have located here for the same reason.
   Now if we can get rid of the teacher union black mail, we will be doing pretty good!

[carbineman]

I was asked at the Support Scott Walker Rally last Saturday, about what I thought the minimum wage should be? It was a trap question from what I could tell as the questioner had an answer all thought up to my reply of "there shouldn't be a minimum wage".

Instead I replied that the minimum wage should be $60 per hour, because then everyone would be treated fairly. You could have dropped an elephant on the woman as she was floored and did not have a pre-rehearsed answer for me.

Mr. Ms.or Mrs. XD40SC, My answer is that the teacher should be paid by his/her skill level and merit raises determined by the boss of them all, whoever that maybe.

The state should not be involved, the state should not be involved with collecting union dues, negotiating with any entity, and most state agencies abolished and the private sector eventually taking over most government employees tasks. You take care of yours, and I'll take care of mine, then we shouldn't need most of these McGoverninks mucking up the works.

Let the government get back to the business it was originally tasked to do. Especially the Feds who can not even seal our borders. What a joke!

[powderman]

guzzi. I'm really saddened to learn that you are a teacher and influencing our youth. POWDERMAN. 

[Pat/Rick]

Teachers in WA D.C. were offered a chance at almost doubling their salaries. Drop tenure and get paid by performance, merit, results and efficiency (Kinda like in the real world). The teachers unions blocked a vote from happening.   NOW who's fault is it??

[guzzijohn]

I am still waiting for an answer to my question from post #137. I am just discussing teacher salary and benefits, not unions. For What it is worth I only belonged to a teacher union during my first year of teaching in 1977. There are too many things that I am uncomfortable with concerning the unions including much that has been posted in this thread.
GuzziJohn

[carbineman]

I am still waiting for an answer to my question from post #137. I am just discussing teacher salary and benefits, not unions. For What it is worth I only belonged to a teacher union during my first year of teaching in 1977. There are too many things that I am uncomfortable with concerning the unions including much that has been posted in this thread.
GuzziJohn

guzzijohn, The answer you are looking for does not exist, life is not fair. I know farmers and truck drivers that ask the same question as you.

My only comment is that if you need to make more money, you had better switch fields. A teacher once told me that she was glad that teaching was not the highest paid profession, because she liked teaching. She felt if the money was considered large, many would go into it just for the money and I have to agree.

Like Willie Sutton said about why he robbed banks, It was because that was where the most money was.

In the 1980's I was in sales and was very good at it if I have to say so myself. I made what was considered a fortune at the time, but was extremely unhappy. I was gone all the time, my marriage fell apart and life was miserable. Nothing I purchased could make me happier and then six months later you would set it out on the curb and look for something else to make you happy.

I set about on a different course,  eventually remarried and now have a wonderful wife and live a very frugal lifestyle. We tell people that we are so poor that even our rainbows here at Poverty Paradise are in black and white. We are starting to get eaten up by inflation but are still holding our own. We are still living our dream but we pay for it ourselves. We advise everyone else to do so also. Get the government out of our lives.

[Pat/Rick]

I suppose its kind of like weldors and fabricators getting paid less, than the engineers whose designs often have to be changed on the shop floor because they don't work. I call it comparable efficiency. Why does an architect supposedly deserve more money than carpenters? Because they have the ability to draw a house, yet not the ability to build it? Where does the stigma come from that says a college educated person should get more than a trade school graduate? Who often does their job better and more efficiently than the person who went to a four year school. I suppose it all falls to the person(s)  who decides the marketability of jobs. I would say, Its just the way it is, and will probably always be. If everybody made the same there would always be those who say, My job is worth more than their job and versa visa. All arguable points, but folks are paid what the market stands. Why are lawyers paid almost triple and quadruple of other folks? I suppose there's reasons, but all are arguable at best.

[dukkillr]

Quote from jimster:

Teachers should get paid what the tax payers can afford...period.  No more, no less.
If they don't like that, they can find something else to do for money in the private sector with all their vast knowledge.  Same goes for anyone working off tax dollars.  Same goes for the private sector, but they are already doing that on their own. 

Then explain to me why an engineer or as my past wife a computer programmer with a BS degree gets to make twice what I do as a teacher when they work in private sector aerospace BUT on all military contracts which are paid for by TAXPAYERS just like the schools?
GuzziJohn

I admit, I don't understand why this is so hard.  An engineer has a set of skills worth X dollars (depending on type of education, experience, intelligence, etc).  A teacher has a set of skills worth Y dollars based on the same type of evaluation.  Both those skills however, may be paid entirely different amounts than what they are worth since they both get paid by the govt (one state, one presumably federal).  Teachers, like all professions should be paid exactly what they can get for their skills on the market.  In this case it would be the amount the state is willing to pay them, inclusive of benefits.  And, at least in my opinion, they should have every right to work together in establishing those benefits.  But they SHOULD NOT have special protections by law.  If, as a whole, they demand more than they are worth they should simply be fired.  If parts of the group can be redeemed, so be it.  But laws governing union contracts and negotiations distort the exchange to provide the teachers a value higher than they actually have.

My own personal experience, as the son of teacher (retired) son in law of a teacher, and brother in law of 2 teachers, is that they make more than they are worth on the open market.  It has become a dumping ground for moderately talented people with little drive and a fantastic sense of entitlement.  I'll add that as best I can tell they all get masters without doing a damn bit of work... 

But my opinion isn't the one that matters.  The one that matters is the one of the people in Wisconsin.  They voted for a guy who was and is hostile to the teachers union.  I wish him and his supporters the best of luck.

As to the comparison with federally contracted workers in aerospace, I've got no experience there.  Based on the intelligence required, I'd figure they should be worth more than a teacher, particularly a teacher who teaches non-math or science course or one that teaches younger kids.  It's simply a more difficult set of skills to find and/or amass.

If your thesis is that they get paid too much because they do not compete in the open market, you may be right, but as always, the "someone else does it worse" defense does not affect your own situation.  For whatever reason, those hostile to govt spending tend to turn a blind eye to all spending that is military related. 

[guzzijohn]

Teachers should get paid what the tax payers can afford...period.  No more, no less.
If they don't like that, they can find something else to do for money in the private sector with all their vast knowledge.  Same goes for anyone working off tax dollars.  Same goes for the private sector, but they are already doing that on their own.

Once again it is not my intent to complain that I do not make enough money. I am referring to the statement above and some sense of equity. Lets say both the the engineer that is working for a defense contractor and the teacher have the same level of education, both are paid by taxpayer dollars, than why is it that people seem to not have near the problem with what that engineer is getting paid but seem to have a problem with what the teacher is getting paid?
GuzziJohn

[Pat/Rick]

Market sustainability.

[dukkillr]

Teachers should get paid what the tax payers can afford...period.  No more, no less.
If they don't like that, they can find something else to do for money in the private sector with all their vast knowledge.  Same goes for anyone working off tax dollars.  Same goes for the private sector, but they are already doing that on their own.

Once again it is not my intent to complain that I do not make enough money. I am referring to the statement above and some sense of equity. Lets say both the the engineer that is working for a defense contractor and the teacher have the same level of education, both are paid by taxpayer dollars, than why is it that people seem to not have near the problem with what that engineer is getting paid but seem to have a problem with what the teacher is getting paid?
GuzziJohn

I recall answering that.

[guzzijohn]

Dukkiller,
Your last sentence of your explanation probably summed it up. I guess many see building bombers and tanks as more important than educating our kids. That may last until there is none left with the education to design and build those things. I am afraid that good science and math educations will suffer until a talented person in those fields is paid enough to make it worth leaving aerospace or whatever for teaching.
What irks me is that more state boards of education are not willing to allow talented people who retire from industry, especially in the science, math and engineering to fast track into teaching. What a resource we are wasting and many of those would probably not be all that concerned about the pay.
GuzziJohn

[dukkillr]

Dukkiller,
Your last sentence of your explanation probably summed it up. I guess many see building bombers and tanks as more important than educating our kids. That may last until there is none left with the education to design and build those things. I am afraid that good science and math educations will suffer until a talented person in those fields is paid enough to make it worth leaving aerospace or whatever for teaching.
What irks me is that more state boards of education are not willing to allow talented people who retire from industry, especially in the science, math and engineering to fast track into teaching. What a resource we are wasting and many of those would probably not be all that concerned about the pay.
GuzziJohn

No question on the science and math guys.  I was one.  I have degrees in biology and chemistry and taught those, plus math (and swimming) all through high school and college.  I loved teaching and I care about the material, but I had opportunities to do other things that would have other advantages.  To me, good math and science teachers should be dealt with apart from other teachers.  Anyone can teach PE.  Not anyone can teach AP Calc 2.  Their value on the open market is simply higher than their co-workers.

But your ridiculously over-broad statements are as bad as theirs.  We aren't going to stop having teachers.  We aren't suddenly not going to be able to read.  The deal is pretty good for the type of person who takes it now.  It will still be good enough to attract people when this is over, and if it's not, guess what?  They'll raise it!  That's what the open market value is.  If teachers were irreplacable this would all be a moot point.

And yes, some people have never even considered the budget implications of defense spending, and some simply consider it a sacred cow.  My own personal impression?  I think they tend to be short sighted ideologues who aren't smart enough to evaluate the things they like as fairly as the things they don't like...  and they like bombs (honestly, who doesn't like watching that cruise missle footage?)...  but I've got nothing to back that up besides my own personal observations.

Again, just because someone else also makes too much (and/or unfairly) does not mean teachers should too.  "The other guy did it worse" is never a defense to your own behavior.

[guzzijohn]

Good comments dukkiller. I agree that there needs to be some leeway in teaching compensation so as to be able fill the shortages better. That is definitely where I see the teaching unions being unreasonable, blocking this possibility. Speech pathologists are very hard to find and many can make more working for hospitals, etc. They also need some incentive to go into or to stay in the schools.
I also find it kind of funny that in many high schools the highest paid "teachers" are the football and basketball coaches. In some cases they make more than the principal. School sports appear to be looked upon like defense spending, we need to make cuts but don't you dare cut the military or the sports spending.
GuzziJohn

[XD40SC]

Alot of people here believe that teachers should be paid on the success their students have. That comes from the 19th century idea that education was modeled after industry. Product in- product out. Good product= get a raise. Bad prosduct= get fired.The problem is that when working with living organisms; there are too many variables. Here is what I mean. Teacher A has a class of well motivated students. This class tests out with all A's and B's on standardized tests. He is a tremendous teacher in alot of peoples eyes. The following year his schedule is changed and he gets a class of unmotivated students, who are more interested in partying and working  for a car than academics. These students tests out with mostly D's and several F's. Now this teacher isn't doing his job,  and should not get a raise, maybe even put on probation for being a poor teacher. What has changed. What is the only variable. That would be the quality of the students he had to teach. That is the problem with merit pay. Poor teachers with motivated students would be rewarded and excellent teachers with unmotivated students would be penalized. 

[XD40SC]

My own personal experience, as the son of teacher (retired) son in law of a teacher, and brother in law of 2 teachers, is that they make more than they are worth on the open market.  It has become a dumping ground for moderately talented people with little drive and a fantastic sense of entitlement.  I'll add that as best I can tell they all get masters without doing a damn bit of work... 
 Wow coming from a lawyer- Your profession also had a bad reputation. What do you charge an hour? Along with charging for every little phone call, postage stamp, drawing things out to get more money. Any dealing I had with an attorney left me feeling I was robbed- and they were "working" for me. You should look into your own profession before attacking others.And yes my niece is an attorney- so I know of what I speak.

[dukkillr]

Alot of people here believe that teachers should be paid on the success their students have. That comes from the 19th century idea that education was modeled after industry. Product in- product out. Good product= get a raise. Bad prosduct= get fired.The problem is that when working with living organisms; there are too many variables. Here is what I mean. Teacher A has a class of well motivated students. This class tests out with all A's and B's on standardized tests. He is a tremendous teacher in alot of peoples eyes. The following year his schedule is changed and he gets a class of unmotivated students, who are more interested in partying and working  for a car than academics. These students tests out with mostly D's and several F's. Now this teacher isn't doing his job,  and should not get a raise, maybe even put on probation for being a poor teacher. What has changed. What is the only variable. That would be the quality of the students he had to teach. That is the problem with merit pay. Poor teachers with motivated students would be rewarded and excellent teachers with unmotivated students would be penalized.

*sigh*  This is such an over used and lame excuse.  The skill of teaching is that of imparting knowledge.  The change from where you start to where you finish is what matters, not the respective start and finish values.  I'll take your example:

Teacher A's students coming in the first year (the smart kid year) will have tested at a standardized value of X upon completion of the previous year.  Since they are smart and motivated they will acheive a score of X+Y at the end of the current year.  The value of Y is the amount of knowledge imparted by Teacher A during the course of the school year.

Now Teacher A gets the less motivated kids in year two.  They will have acheived a score of A at the end of their previous year, and according to hypothetical A will be less than X.  At the end of that year they will have acheived a score of A+B, again with the value of B being the amount of knowledge imparted by teacher A during the course of the school year. 

Now you're probably getting excited... lets assume that B is lower than Y.  Frankly, it may not be, but lets assume that it is for your hypo to make any sense.  The question is: does B represent a value higher or lower than what should be expected of the lesser group?  Well that information isn't impossible to get.  You see there are groups of kids all over the country that will test at level A for any given year.  The question in Teacher A's case is:  is value B higher or lower than other teachers are getting in the same situation?  And the analysis of that data is the answer to your question, and the explanation for why this tired old argument is a waste of energy.  Probably not as excited now...

I'd love to not test kids every year.  It's expensive and takes time.  There are real concerns about teaching to the test.  And it may not be a perfect reflection of knowledge, but no one has yet offered a way to evaluate the quality of work a teacher does otherwise.  Absent that idea, I'll stick by the data every time.

[dukkillr]

My own personal experience, as the son of teacher (retired) son in law of a teacher, and brother in law of 2 teachers, is that they make more than they are worth on the open market.  It has become a dumping ground for moderately talented people with little drive and a fantastic sense of entitlement.  I'll add that as best I can tell they all get masters without doing a damn bit of work... 
 Wow coming from a lawyer- Your profession also had a bad reputation. What do you charge an hour? Along with charging for every little phone call, postage stamp, drawing things out to get more money. You should look into your own profession before attacking others.And yes my niece is an attorney- so I know of what I speak.

Interesting that you know how I do my business, and further that you know I don't "look into [my] own profession".  How do you know that?  I'd invite you to come spend a day with me and see how I run my office, how I treat the people, and the things I do and don't bill for.  You can then report to everyone exactly what you saw, and what you think is and isn't fair.  You'll find great company among the ignorantii around here who agree with you and have just as much actual knowledge...

But once again, what I do, or don't do, has NOTHING to do with what teachers are worth on the open market, and that is the topic of this thread.

[XD40SC]

My point is- if teacher A is compared to other teachers with the same type students; it would be a fair evaluation. I'm not sure that happens. Since you are smarter than I, do you know of any specific cases where teachers are compared to other teachers with the same caliber of students?The arguments I've heard here were for merit pay. Now if a teacher could receive merit pay for having low test scores because of his particular type of students based on the results of other low performing students- that would be more than fair.The students were low scoring all the way through school and students in the same environment performed the same.This teacher is doing a fine job in spite of the scores achieved. Do you know if it really happens?

[SHOOTALL]

I taught night school to people learning a trade. Passing would insure a raise for them . Many could care less. They came in high and drunk sometimes . If my pay was decided on their grade I would not have wasted my time. Others were a pleasure to guide thru. the course.
As for the senators they are not worthy of their position . They run instead of repensenting those who sent them to do a job.

[jimster]

Then explain to me why an engineer or as my past wife a computer programer with a BS degree gets to make twice what I do as a teacher when they work in private sector aerospace BUT on all military contracts which are paid for by TAXPAYERS just like the schools?

You don't get to get paid the same as all other people, period.  If you don't like your wages as a teacher, then you become an engineer, or whatever.  You are still free to "move on".  All engineers don't get paid the same either. All computer programmers don't get paid the same either.  Nobody gets paid the same, that's life.  This is not about everyone making the same money all over the U.S....this is what the market bears, and that is different all over the U.S.  They don't pay the same in California as Michigan either you know, on any job, but then houses don't cost 800K that are falling apart like in California either. 

So I hope I have explained it somewhat. If your not happy with the public sector as a teacher, move on.  If your not happy in the private sector, move on.  Nothing says everyone gets paid the same as other people in the same field, or different fileds....hope they don't pass a law telling employers everyone has to make the same all over....there will be ZERO jobs then.  Of course if everyone is out of work...the pay will be the same then.  Hope you get that.  By the way...I get paid less on my type of job as people do in Boston, but instead of protesting and screaming and whining...I'd just move to Boston I think. Or switch jobs.  Nobody owes you...or me..a thing.  Nobody! And also try to remember...taxes pay your wages...if they are gone, they are gone. Period.  A private business pays my wages.  When their money gets low, I will be gone as well.  Many already are gone.  Nobody owes me anythng.  I'll move on when it's time.

[XD40SC]

My own personal experience, as the son of teacher (retired) son in law of a teacher, and brother in law of 2 teachers, is that they make more than they are worth on the open market.  It has become a dumping ground for moderately talented people with little drive and a fantastic sense of entitlement.  I'll add that as best I can tell they all get masters without doing a damn bit of work... 
 Wow coming from a lawyer- Your profession also had a bad reputation. What do you charge an hour? Along with charging for every little phone call, postage stamp, drawing things out to get more money. You should look into your own profession before attacking others.And yes my niece is an attorney- so I know of what I speak.

Interesting that you know how I do my business, and further that you know I don't "look into [my] own profession".  How do you know that?  I'd invite you to come spend a day with me and see how I run my office, how I treat the people, and the things I do and don't bill for.  You can then report to everyone exactly what you saw, and what you think is and isn't fair.  You'll find great company among the ignorantii around here who agree with you and have just as much actual knowledge...

But once again, what I do, or don't do, has NOTHING to do with what teachers are worth on the open market, and that is the topic of this thread.

I ment the word "you" as you all.collectively. Maybe I should have used the word yous.Thanks for calling me ignorantii how elitist of you.

[beerbelly]

Well we know that the teachers, at least those on this board and I am sure the rest, think very highly of themselves. I think their problem is the rest of us that pay their salaries do not!

[briarpatch]

Excellent post dukkillr!

[powderman]

As for the senators they are not worthy of their position . They run instead of repensenting those who sent them to do a job.




SHOOTALL. Agreed Sir. I hope they lose pay for this fiasco. POWDERMAN. 

[teamnelson]

I for one would gladly help make teacher's work more fulfilling (as an adjunct professor I'm aware of some of the challenges) and reduce the costs associated by making education competitive, not compulsory. With a 28% national drop out rate at the high school level, not to mention growing truancy rates in primary and secondary, and an even higher drop out rate in college, coupled with skyrocketing student debt and the inherent cost of education, it seems like a lot of folks really aren't as interested in learning as we wish they were.

Of course that means the teachers would have to be competitive as well; only want the best teaching the best.