ccrunner609;683971 wrote:^^^^^http://www.teachforamerica.org/learn-more/

Thank you.

ccrunner609;683680 wrote:Sure i read some, but I dont care what you think will work.......if you arent in there daily you have no clue. What i posted was why it wont work and you cant post anything that will make me feel differently.

Education is very political, teachers are walking on eggshells with that union contract. Now its gonna be a job that nobody wants.

Do you guys realize what this is going to do to the teacher pools? Smart HS kids arent going into education anymore. The overall teacher pooll is going to be dumbed down a little. I dont know about you but I want smart people going into education, medical and legal areas.

So you're saying that only teachers have the right to decide how their salaries are allotted? You realize that if you ask almost any profession the people working in that field will tell you theirs is of utmost importance and worth more money.

There are plenty of professions that don't directly produce items or generate profit that are able to hire and fire people and give pay increases based on merit. No one is suggesting we pay teachers based on the test scores of their students or their students success. We're suggesting that we pay good teachers more and move to eliminate poor teachers. Like in ever other field. The idea that there is no way to identify good teachers from bad is insane.

ccrunner609;684178 wrote:had a buddy go to Houston and teach for 2 years...said it was pretty cool cause he never thought he would teach but couldnt get a job doing what he went to school for.

I went to school, but not really for a career. What I mean is, I went to school to be a more well-rounded, educated human being. The major I picked was actually because I had a bone to pick with a certain ideology ... but that kind of backfired.

I considered living in Indiana at one time, as I believe the qualifications to teach are different there. However, when I got engaged, that went out the window.

I don't mean to sound gruff or vicious on this topic, but it's a thorn in my side.

I moved to North Hill about two years ago. Since moving here, my eyes have been opened to just how broken the system is. Embarrassingly poor education ... or none at all ... often takes place in the classrooms, and it doesn't have anything to do with the kids. Entire classes are neglected by teachers who just don't seem to give a shit anymore. I've met them, and talked to them. I've talked to their students, and I've "taught" some of their students in my time after work.

I love the kids in this community. I want to see them succeed ... especially in a neighborhood where success is rare. That's why, to me, there just needs to be a way to compensate GOOD educators and bad educators differently. I'm more than happy with a teacher making a better salary than I do, with a better benefit package than I have, if he or she is a good educator who cares about the kids' education. I take GREAT exception with a teacher making even minimum wage, with no benefits, if he or she is not a good educator or does not care that much about the kids' education.

The kids deserve the utmost effort from their educators. If those educators are giving it, they should be rewarded with good, healthy salaries and a comforting benefit package (relative to the economic times, of course). If educators are NOT giving it, they should not be compensated just as much as an educator who is genuinely helping the kids who want to learn.

That's why, and I'm sorry if it sounds harsh, I think it's bullshit that every teacher is paid the same, based on length of time they've at least done enough to avoid getting fired. If you want to do the bare minimum, you should get paid the bare minimum. If you do more, you should be paid more.

Do you realize that most other professions have performance evaluations and reviews throughout their career not just at the beginning?

I Wear Pants;684245 wrote:Do you realize that most other professions have performance evaluations and reviews throughout their career not just at the beginning?

Every one I've heard of has had either six-month reviews or annual reviews.

ccrunner609;684402 wrote:as do teachers, I get evaluated also.

Do your raises/pay increases hinge on these evaluations?

Do these evaluations currently have criteria which you must meet? What about some kind of tier structure?

"Do your raises/pay increases hinge on these evaluations?"

Or layoffs?

My wife's company just cut 15 people in a local office of about 100 - How many school districts routinely cut 15% in a year, let alone a month?

O-Trap;684740 wrote:Do your raises/pay increases hinge on these evaluations?

Do these evaluations currently have criteria which you must meet? What about some kind of tier structure?

It's all fluff and smoke screens to make the public "think" that teacher performance is being evaluated. The truth is teacher pay and their relatively generous retirement programs are based on union thugism....not the merit of individual teacher performance.

To add insult to injury, the teachers unions have the audacity of expecting the rest of us to throw more taxpayer dollars at them and claim that if we do not, it will be detrimental to the education of our children. They complain about "class size" but fail to admit that perhaps more teachers could be hired if their own salary and lucrative benefits packages were more in line with what the market will bear.

But screw economic realities as long as those union dues keep rolling in. Screw the kids as long as mediocre performing teachers get to retire with full bennies after 20 years of disservice.

"the teachers unions have the audacity of expecting the rest of us to throw more taxpayer dollars at them and claim that if we do not, it will be detrimental to the education of our children."

This plus 1,000,000,000,0000.

A lot of folks have accepted cuts. My wife's company used to have a 50% 401(k) match, it was taken away in '09 due to the recession....it was a fairly big benefit, upwards of what, a $6,-7,000 year match? That is an important benefit. Her attitude wasn't "well our customers will suffer because I'm being paid less or have to receive fewer benefits" - if it was she'd be in the unemployment line. What would her point be? That she'd do a shittier job because she's compensated less? What are teachers' points?

Manhattan Buckeye;684862 wrote:"the teachers unions have the audacity of expecting the rest of us to throw more taxpayer dollars at them and claim that if we do not, it will be detrimental to the education of our children."

This plus 1,000,000,000,0000.

Sorry MB. I deleted my original post....this crap gets my undies in a bunch. My wife's parents are retired teachers and I've had many heated conversations with them about these very issues. Their arrogance about it drives me insane.

believer;684867 wrote:Sorry MB. I deleted my original post....this crap gets my undies in a bunch. My wife's parents are retired teachers and I've had many heated conversations with them about these very issues. Their arrogance about it drives me insane.

Welcome to the club - father is a retired teacher, I love the guy to death but he lived through 4 recessions (late 70's, 'early 90's, post 9/11 and the current) with never taking a pay cut (when many of the citizens in the district were unemployed), never taking a pay freeze, had awesome benefits and always worked a steady schedule and enjoys a pension that with benefits is over $70K/year that is transferable to his spouse (my mother) in the event of his death - from an actuarial standpoint it is easily a $1M+ pension. Never funded. He was never rich by any means, but always comfortable and NEVER worried about job security.

I'm not sure if it is the arrogance or ignorance that grinds my gears more - probably the latter. These are college graduates that are entrusted to teach our children, and many are clueless as to how their stakeholders (read, taxpayers) live and are able to pay their salaries. The goose that has laid the golden eggs has been killed - why is it so difficult for them not to understand this?

Manhattan Buckeye;684875 wrote:I'm not sure if it is the arrogance or ignorance that grinds my gears more - probably the latter. These are college graduates that are entrusted to teach our children, and many are clueless as to how their stakeholders (read, taxpayers) live and are able to pay their salaries. The goose that has laid the golden eggs has been killed - why is it so difficult for them not to understand this?

Exactly. My wife's parents retired from the Columbus school system about 8 years ago. They built and paid cash for a new house 1/2 mile from the beach in Wilmington, NC. They both just paid cash for brand new convertibles, their health care is all but 100% paid (and they complained when they recently had to start paying a $10 co-pay for doctor's visits), and they take home far more monthly income than they ever contributed into the PERS.

I told them that I appreciated their dedication to teaching our kids but they couldn't understand why I thought their retirement was way out of line with economic realities. They honestly believe they earned the right to have a better standard of living in retirement than they had while they were actually teaching.

I asked them if they realized that most of the people who are paying for their cushy retirement can only dream of having half of what they're enjoying...that their relatively luxurious retirement is at the expense of the very people they criticize for voting down school levies.

Amazing mindset.

ccrunner609;684970 wrote:That means staff.

I'm probably being dense, and if so, please forgive me, but do you mean that the staff took paycuts or that staff members were cut?

O-Trap;685005 wrote:I'm probably being dense, and if so, please forgive me, but do you mean that the staff took paycuts or that staff members were cut?

Cut. Like emo style, slit wrist, cut.

Manhattan Buckeye;684845 wrote:"Do your raises/pay increases hinge on these evaluations?"

Or layoffs?

My wife's company just cut 15 people in a local office of about 100 - How many school districts routinely cut 15% in a year, let alone a month?

The only thing wrong with comparing school districts to private industry is that private industry depends on demand for their product in order to continue operating at certain levels. Unless a great migration occurs, the school districts have a never-ending supply of new product (students). It's hard to have a 15% RIF when the incoming student population remains the same, unless you like having a 10th-grade English class with one teacher for 75 students.

stlouiedipalma;685232 wrote:The only thing wrong with comparing school districts to private industry is that private industry depends on demand for their product in order to continue operating at certain levels. Unless a great migration occurs, the school districts have a never-ending supply of new product (students). It's hard to have a 15% RIF when the incoming student population remains the same, unless you like having a 10th-grade English class with one teacher for 75 students.

Like I've said before, districts might be able to fix that student-teacher ratio if salaries and benefits were a little more in line with economic realities.

So is the solution to reduce pay and benefits to teachers to the point where you can hire more of them?

No one wants kids in classes with 35 kids (although the class size is a bigger problem at the younger ages, in some schools 35 kids wouldn't be undoable at the high school level. Some schools, not all or most) but there needs to be some give and take done here and many of us haven't really seen any giving on teacher's parts/the union's part.

I Wear Pants;685270 wrote:No one wants kids in classes with 35 kids (although the class size is a bigger problem at the younger ages, in some schools 35 kids wouldn't be undoable at the high school level. Some schools, not all or most) but there needs to be some give and take done here and many of us haven't really seen any giving on teacher's parts/the union's part.

You haven't? I've heard of a lot. With so many districts, it's tough to generalize a statement like that.

The "gives" I've seen have been things like 1% yearly raises as opposed to whatever they'd normally get in their contract. Forgive me if I am not tearing up from that sort of "sacrifice".

I Wear Pants;685304 wrote:The "gives" I've seen have been things like 1% yearly raises as opposed to whatever they'd normally get in their contract. Forgive me if I am not tearing up from that sort of "sacrifice".

Same here.

ccrunner609;684970 wrote:Are you clueless, almost every district in the state has cut a ton in the last 2 years........My district cut over a million out of the anual budget and we are a small school. That means staff.

I think the point some are trying to make here is that if it wasn't for the unions and the CBA, instead of cutting staff, salary and benefits could be cut until revenue increased again. Salary and benefits are normally around 80% of the budget. That is a huge percentage. I find it funny that unions are supposed to stick together, but instead of everyone taking a financial hit, often members tend to let other members (with less seniority) get laid off. Where is the comradery? I have been in that situation before and witnessed it with various departments within the local government in my area, so much for union solidarity.

dwccrew;685549 wrote:I think the point some are trying to make here is that if it wasn't for the unions and the CBA, instead of cutting staff, salary and benefits could be cut until revenue increased again. Salary and benefits are normally around 80% of the budget. That is a huge percentage. I find it funny that unions are supposed to stick together, but instead of everyone taking a financial hit, often members tend to let other members (with less seniority) get laid off. Where is the comradery? I have been in that situation before and witnessed it with various departments within the local government in my area, so much for union solidarity.

The solidarity exists as long as the union dues keep rolling in.

The pay and benefits I guess I can deal with as teachers are highly educated in most cases. (Though that doesn't mean the pay and benefits should be set in stone like they are now). I think the thing that sticks with most people is the unsustainable retirement. It doesn't work when you think about it.

If a teacher is that highly educated (and I have no doubt of this for most of them) then they are educated enough to not have to need somebody else speak for them, they should/are educated enough to speak for themselves articulately.
Also, since they are teachers and no stranger to engaging challenging questions, that gives them even further knowledge on how to handle what can be a stressful thing such negotiating their own pay.