The ultimate problem with merit pay is a fair way to evaluate merit. I am not against it, but you venture into potentially more corruption and cheating.

georgemc80;739404 wrote:The ultimate problem with merit pay is a fair way to evaluate merit. I am not against it, but you venture into potentially more corruption and cheating.

At the risk of sounding like a broken record...welcome to life in the private sector.

fan_from_texas;739359 wrote:If I understand your position, the people with merit would get paid more, and the people without merit wouldn't go into the profession, correct? How is that a problem? That looks like a sure-fire way to (1) pay teachers more and (2) get rid of bad teachers.

didnt say it was a problem i was just saying that you are getting a lot of teachers each year younger than 5-6 years for a low price and i doubt that could continue with merit pay. i am assuming that many will hit their goals and evaluations therefore earning more than they would have under the current system. in order to save you have to pay someone else less. in many districts a lot of teachers pay will be tough to lower if they are cool with the principal and the parents and over 98 percent of the kids pass. which is most of the teachers i would say. would it be a quota of how many you could have at each level?

georgemc80;739404 wrote:.... but you venture into potentially more corruption and cheating.

Exactly.

georgemc80;739404 wrote:The ultimate problem with merit pay is a fair way to evaluate merit. I am not against it, but you venture into potentially more corruption and cheating.

BRF;739476 wrote:Exactly.

I'm willing to bet that that happens NOW, so what's the point, again? Not really trying to be rude here, but please, let's not act like your scenario will be something new.
Have the unions and collective bargaining stopped that from happening so far???

CenterBHSFan;739518 wrote:I'm willing to bet that that happens NOW, so what's the point, again? Not really trying to be rude here, but please, let's not act like your scenario will be something new.
Have the unions and collective bargaining stopped that from happening so far???

Sure it happens RIGHT NOW. The difference is that someone with JOB SECURITY (thanks to the Union) has the right to object to, for example, policy, without fear of losing their job...and, thus, the kiss ass when merit pay comes in to effect. Contrary to what some may think, most tenured teachers do a great job. If they are not doing a good job, there are ways to get them out.What if you have a "bad boss"? There is no good way to measure "merit" for pay, imo. Edit: And I am only talking about the teaching profession.

BRF;739547 wrote:Sure it happens RIGHT NOW. The difference is that someone with JOB SECURITY (thanks to the Union) has the right to object to, for example, policy, without fear of losing their job...and, thus, the kiss ass when merit pay comes in to effect. Contrary to what some may think, most tenured teachers do a great job. If they are not doing a good job, there are ways to get them out.What if you have a "bad boss"? There is no good way to measure "merit" for pay, imo.

Bull.

Millions of people work in a merit based system every day without any problems. Are you telling me supposedly intelligent people who teach children can't help come up with and then adapt to a similar system?

If that's really the case, then just quit now. You're probably worthless in the classroom, anyway.

Writerbuckeye;739548 wrote: If that's really the case, then just quit now. You're probably worthless in the classroom, anyway.

Dang, man. Could you be a little more harsher? For what it's worth, I will retire next year with 35 years. Fortunately, none of this bull shit will affect me. Now, I am only talking about the teaching profession here, so could you tell me how your own "merit pay" would work?

BRF;739554 wrote:Dang, man. Could you be a little more harsher?

I know not all teachers teach English, but one would hope that any teacher would have a general educational foundation that equips one with grammatical faculties to not say something like that.

In any case, I lol'd.

BRF;739554 wrote:Now, I am only talking about the teaching profession here, so could you tell me how your own "merit pay" would work?

If I could do that by myself, I'd be independently wealthy. Moving from a grossly broken system can still be a good thing, though, even if the new system isn't flawless, so long as it is an improvement.

As has been said ad nauseum in these threads, there are many, many jobs in the private sector that do not play any traceable role in determining the bottom line for the employer ... and yet, this system functions quite well as it is. The hiring and training process, financial burden aside, is a time-consuming endeavor, and it requires more energy than not firing someone does. Thus, if you are getting fired, and it's not because your position is being eliminated, the person firing you has deemed your presence as an employee of the company more detrimental than the added time and effort to their schedule that it would take to seek, interview, hire, and train someone new.

I suspect that if you are cordial, professional (don't discuss religion or political affiliations at work), and good at what you do, your superior would have neither grounds, nor reason, nor even desire to get rid of you.

fish82;739463 wrote:At the risk of sounding like a broken record...welcome to life in the private sector.

haha and just remember, it was the private sector that help destroy the economy with the banks, auto and housing industry.

fan_from_texas;739359 wrote:If I understand your position, the people with merit would get paid more, and the people without merit wouldn't go into the profession, correct? How is that a problem? That looks like a sure-fire way to (1) pay teachers more and (2) get rid of bad teachers.

no, people WITH merit wouldnt go into the profession because the starting pay would be even lower than now. unless the city raises taxes(which nobody likes), the school will never be able to hire good young teachers.

OK, O-Trap, ya got me. It's the old Wayne County lingo. (kinda like how I'm typing right now! I didn't know that as a Social Studies teacher I would be "graded" like that on the OC........perhaps it would count against me in the "merit" system! ha ha!)

ANYHOW............(and I hope that's permissable in the merit system to start a sentence like that)..............I hesitated quite a while to post on here, while reading most all the posts. I pulled the trigger and now I am paying the price.

As a 34 year veteran in the teaching profession (which I realize that many of you will spit on as "worthless"), I would just like some of you to take a step back and think about what it feels like for someone to have gone through all the hoops to get where they are and then be faced with the carpet being yanked out from under them (and I'm talking about the veterans with say 28, or 32 years of service).

I think we can all agree on one thing: It's a WHOLE new ball game. Speaking of ball game..............Go Tribe!

BRF;739612 wrote:As a 34 year veteran in the teaching profession (which I realize that many of you will spit on as "worthless"), I would just like some of you to take a step back and think about what it feels like for someone to have gone through all the hoops to get where they are and then be faced with the carpet being yanked out from under them (and I'm talking about the veterans with say 28, or 32 years of service).

I think we can all agree on one thing: It's a WHOLE new ball game. Speaking of ball game..............Go Tribe!

1. Nobody, at least here on the forum, believes that at all. I'm sure that there are people who believe that, but I don't think you'll find it here.

2. Many people in the private sector knows what it's like to have the rug pulled out from them. Doesn't matter if they're new on the job or been there for years - decades, it still sucks.
But, why should a group of jobs and in cases certain individuals be more protected than others?

3. I agree, on both accounts!

Gblock;739169 wrote:yes but once you go to merit pay you no longer will have first year teachers stuck making 32000 or less. i think that many of the ones i see are excellent and will quickly move up the merit pay scale...if they reach their goals they will move up the ladder more quickly. it will also i assume raise starting pay for teachers as you will need to attract good people to the field. no one is going to want to work for 30000 and get a masters without some assurance of getting more money. so really the savings might not be as much depending on how they structure the merit pay, but rather a shift in who gets how much. the step system was more of a "rookie wage" scale imo to weed out those who may not be very good and i think people accepted lower pay because they were deferring some compensation in both salary and benefits for the future. now that you take away good benefits you are going to have to raise at least the starting pay for teachers and probably all teachers if you want to keep good teaching candidates. it took me 8 years to hit 40,000 under merit pay im sure i would have hit that the first year.

I thought many against SB5 were preaching that pay for teacehrs would be maxed out at $35k a year. LOL, so much for that fear tactic. Now anti-SB5 people are stating first year teachers will be making more on a merit based system? And you are against this why? See below quote.

Glory Days;739611 wrote:no, people WITH merit wouldnt go into the profession because the starting pay would be even lower than now. unless the city raises taxes(which nobody likes), the school will never be able to hire good young teachers.

See above quote. Merit based pay will pay people more.

BRF;739612 wrote: As a 34 year veteran in the teaching profession (which I realize that many of you will spit on as "worthless"), I would just like some of you to take a step back and think about what it feels like for someone to have gone through all the hoops to get where they are and then be faced with the carpet being yanked out from under them (and I'm talking about the veterans with say 28, or 32 years of service).

This has been happening in the private sector for decades. Also, I am not quite sure how the carpet would be yanked from underneath anyone.

Edit*Center beat me to it

Glory Days;739611 wrote:no, people WITH merit wouldnt go into the profession because the starting pay would be even lower than now. unless the city raises taxes(which nobody likes), the school will never be able to hire good young teachers.

IMO, a very good point!

BRF;739612 wrote:OK, O-Trap, ya got me. It's the old Wayne County lingo. (kinda like how I'm typing right now! I didn't know that as a Social Studies teacher I would be "graded" like that on the OC........perhaps it would count against me in the "merit" system! ha ha!)

ANYHOW............(and I hope that's permissable in the merit system to start a sentence like that)..............I hesitated quite a while to post on here, while reading most all the posts. I pulled the trigger and now I am paying the price.

As a 34 year veteran in the teaching profession (which I realize that many of you will spit on as "worthless"), I would just like some of you to take a step back and think about what it feels like for someone to have gone through all the hoops to get where they are and then be faced with the carpet being yanked out from under them (and I'm talking about the veterans with say 28, or 32 years of service).

I think we can all agree on one thing: It's a WHOLE new ball game. Speaking of ball game..............Go Tribe!

People who support SB5 don't automatically think all teachers are bad. And what exactly will be yanked out from under someone with 28 years of service?

dwccrew;739640 wrote:Edit*Center beat me to it

Ninja'd!

dwccrew;739640 wrote:




This has been happening in the private sector for decades. Also, I am not quite sure how the carpet would be yanked from underneath anyone.

Edit*Center beat me to it

Your first sentence is basically moot. And on your second sentence: I am talking about someone who is at or around 30 years of service following all the rules and regs to get where they are. I know lots of them and they truly do feel like the carpet has been yanked out from under them.

We are seeing the end of the public school system. Who would want to go into the teaching profession under SB5? I wonder what is happening right now in the colleges with the kids that thought they were going to one day become a teacher. Flipping fries and working hard for a while to become a manager might not be a bad choice.

BRF: Take a look at what you wrote and how defeatist it sounded. Does that sound like it should be coming from a 34 year teaching veteran -- someone I would HOPE would be about as confident in his abilities as anyone when it comes to being in a merit system.

Yes, what I wrote was harsh. It needed to be. Honestly, some of the stuff I've seen written on here by teachers is SAD. It comes across as whining, whimpering and defeatist.

Honestly, I think that's what happens when people are in a union setting for so long. They become complacent and lazy. They know their job will be there (with raises) almost regardless of how they do -- short of getting caught with child porn on their computers or something equally egregious.

It also promotes an atmosphere of entitlement that you don't deserve. Nobody does, not if we want this country to figure a way out of the hole we've dug for ourselves and hope to get things at least even so the kids in school now will have at least a decent shot of making a good life for themselves when it's their time to be in charge.

I understand that feeling and have been seduced by it (in a civil service job and a member of the union). I could easily have stayed in that setting and probably put in my 30 years and had a decent retirement. But along with the faux security (it isn't real) comes a stifling of creativity and expression that comes from having a job that challenges you every day.

Because of that, I left that system and took a position that was not only supervisory (not union) but wasn't even civil service; it was as an appointee. Basically, I went to work every day knowing that my boss or the governor's office could fire me for wearing the wrong shirt and tie -- that's how little security there was in an unclassified post.

Not only did I thrive in that slot...I was kept on by the three following administrations (obviously both Republican and Democrat) because each succeeding administration wrote a book on employees and told whether they were worth keeping or not. I obviously got rave reviews (I know I did because I was told so).

My (long-winded) point is that I thrived under a merit system with more pressures than most private sector folks have on them because my job was literally political in nature.

There's no reason teachers and other public employees today can't do the same.

None.

WebFire;739651 wrote:People who support SB5 don't automatically think all teachers are bad. And what exactly will be yanked out from under someone with 28 years of service?

Oh, maybe their RETIREMENT package, for example?

Whatever.................let's just put all the burden of our problems on the middle class. Tax them more. You all might be interested to know that I am a Republican and was always proud of it until now (except one time during my college days when I voted for McGovern!). I am about ready to renounce my party, BUT before I do that, I will just say that I will NEVER again vote for a GOP who supports this kind of stuff. I tip my hat to the Republicans who voted against this bull crap.

BRF;739680 wrote:Oh, maybe their RETIREMENT package, for example?

Whatever.................let's just put all the burden of our problems on the middle class. Tax them more. You all might be interested to know that I am a Republican and was always proud of it until now (except one time during my college days when I voted for McGovern!). I am about ready to renounce my party, BUT before I do that, I will just say that I will NEVER again vote for a GOP who supports this kind of stuff. I tip my hat to the Republicans who voted against this bull crap.

What's already there won't be taken away. And their retirement being on par with the private sector and saving millions of tax dollars in the future is NOT a bad thing. It just affects you, so you can only view it as bad.

BRF;739680 wrote:Oh, maybe their RETIREMENT package, for example?

Whatever.................let's just put all the burden of our problems on the middle class. Tax them more. You all might be interested to know that I am a Republican and was always proud of it until now (except one time during my college days when I voted for McGovern!). I am about ready to renounce my party, BUT before I do that, I will just say that I will NEVER again vote for a GOP who supports this kind of stuff. I tip my hat to the Republicans who voted against this bull crap.

Oh yes, because SB5 is going to take away your retirement. Tell me, do you have any thoughts of your own or do you just spew whatever the Unions(read: the real people that will lose their jobs and retirement) tell you.

Writerbuckeye;739667 wrote:BRF: Take a look at what you wrote and how defeatist it sounded. Does that sound like it should be coming from a 34 year teaching veteran -- someone I would HOPE would be about as confident in his abilities as anyone when it comes to being in a merit system.

Yes, what I wrote was harsh. It needed to be. Honestly, some of the stuff I've seen written on here by teachers is SAD. It comes across as whining, whimpering and defeatist.

Honestly, I think that's what happens when people are in a union setting for so long. They become complacent and lazy. They know their job will be there (with raises) almost regardless of how they do -- short of getting caught with child porn on their computers or something equally egregious.

It also promotes an atmosphere of entitlement that you don't deserve. Nobody does, not if we want this country to figure a way out of the hole we've dug for ourselves and hope to get things at least even so the kids in school now will have at least a decent shot of making a good life for themselves when it's their time to be in charge.

I understand that feeling and have been seduced by it (in a civil service job and a member of the union). I could easily have stayed in that setting and probably put in my 30 years and had a decent retirement. But along with the faux security (it isn't real) comes a stifling of creativity and expression that comes from having a job that challenges you every day.

Because of that, I left that system and took a position that was not only supervisory (not union) but wasn't even civil service; it was as an appointee. Basically, I went to work every day knowing that my boss or the governor's office could fire me for wearing the wrong shirt and tie -- that's how little security there was in an unclassified post.

Not only did I thrive in that slot...I was kept on by the three following administrations (obviously both Republican and Democrat) because each succeeding administration wrote a book on employees and told whether they were worth keeping or not. I obviously got rave reviews (I know I did because I was told so).

My (long-winded) point is that I thrived under a merit system with more pressures than most private sector folks have on them because my job was literally political in nature.

There's no reason teachers and other public employees today can't do the same.

None.

Someone I know who works for the school as a non-teacher told me that a bunch of teachers were in the lounge bitching about SB5, as they were bringing in food and firing up the TV for the NCAA tournament. It wasn't during lunch. That pretty much sums it up.

BRF;739680 wrote:Oh, maybe their RETIREMENT package, for example?

Whatever.................let's just put all the burden of our problems on the middle class. Tax them more. You all might be interested to know that I am a Republican and was always proud of it until now (except one time during my college days when I voted for McGovern!). I am about ready to renounce my party, BUT before I do that, I will just say that I will NEVER again vote for a GOP who supports this kind of stuff. I tip my hat to the Republicans who voted against this bull crap.

Without changes being made, that retirement system wasn't going to be there AT ALL, or don't you read the papers?

Oh and again I say BS. NOTHING about SB5 was taking away anyone's retirement in the public sector. Maybe they'd have to work a few more years and contribute a few more dollars, but it was still going to be there and you know it.

As for your last comment: enjoy being a Democrat and the system they want you to be a part of -- lots of entitlements, a declining quality of life for everyone, and more taxes (oh and not just on the "rich" either. What Dems want can't be sustained without a lot of taxes going up).

Writerbuckeye;739667 wrote:BRF: Take a look at what you wrote and how defeatist it sounded. Does that sound like it should be coming from a 34 year teaching veteran -- someone I would HOPE would be about as confident in his abilities as anyone when it comes to being in a merit system.

I love my subject and I love to teach it. That's why I got in the game. My "defeatist" attitude comes from what I see everyday in my younger colleagues. I believe that I would do well in a merit system. (but there is no fairness to it because of what kind of students you have and how many, etc.......but that's another subject).

Maybe you could take back that comment to me that I am "worthless". That kinda hurts.