Posted by Grappletech on August 28, 2006, 2:28 pm
It's a slippery slope. The average national teacher salary is a tad over
$50,000 and that doesn't include benefits -- health, dental, summers off,
etc.. If averaged out over their 9 month workyear, that's $5555/month plus
summers off. I don't know about you, but most of the teachers I had
weren't very good or mediocre at best (10 minutes of instruction, then
passed out worksheets for the rest of the period), so they are very well
compensated, probably too well-compensated. Most people don't make what
teachers make.
In Detroit, the teachers are striking due to the cash strapped school
district wanting a 5% pay decrease and requiring teachers to pay a 20%
copay for doctor visits. Why can't the teachers accept this? The economy
is bad in Detroit (ever increasing number of auto factories and other
factories closing). Why can't the teachers acknowledge this and help out
the people of Detroit? A 5% pay decrease would be a minor blip, hardly
noticeable in one's paycheck, unless they are living too far beyond their
means or just at their means. And the 20% medical copay. Everyone I know
has a 20% copay (or more), and most of these people don't make near
$50,000/year. If you only go to the doctors twice a year perhaps, that's
only $40 or so in annual co-pays. Get over it, Detroit teachers.
If Detroit teachers get their way, then what that means is that a lot of
teachers will have to be laid off, creating more work for the remaining
teachers, larger classrooms, more headaches for the remaining teachers,
less learning for the kids. It seems more fair and logical to take a 5%
pay cut than to see a lot of their fellow teachers get laid off and the
reamining teachers' workloads going way up.
I think teacher groups unfairly use their positions and threat of striking
to gain concessions and to negogiate contracts. If the workers in a shoe
factory strike, big deal, shoes just don't get made until the workers start
to get hungry and want to go back to work. But when teachers strike, then
it effects a lot of people. Parents have to scramble to find babysitters
(and pay these babysitters) while their kids are out of school due to
teacher striking. It's similar to when mass transit workers strike. They
realize the power they have to screw up a lot of people's ability to get to
work and thus make a living, so they USE this ability to garner wage
increases. I think it's terrible. New York transit workers made an
average of $50,000/year but wanted more, more, more. They demanded 8%/year
raises over 3 years. So they went on strike. Greedy.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+
Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
Posted by Al Bundy on August 28, 2006, 1:37 pm
Grappletech wrote:
> It's a slippery slope. The average national teacher salary is a tad over
> $50,000 and that doesn't include benefits -- health, dental, summers off,
> etc.. If averaged out over their 9 month workyear, that's $5555/month plus
> summers off. I don't know about you, but most of the teachers I had
> weren't very good or mediocre at best (10 minutes of instruction, then
> passed out worksheets for the rest of the period), so they are very well
> compensated, probably too well-compensated. Most people don't make what
> teachers make.
January 2006 Free Press indicates an average Detroit teacher salary of
$63,900.
Posted by hchickpea on August 28, 2006, 9:21 pm
>It's a slippery slope. The average national teacher salary is a tad over
>$50,000 and that doesn't include benefits -- health, dental, summers off,
>etc.. If averaged out over their 9 month workyear, that's $5555/month plus
>summers off. I don't know about you, but most of the teachers I had
>weren't very good or mediocre at best (10 minutes of instruction, then
>passed out worksheets for the rest of the period), so they are very well
>compensated, probably too well-compensated. Most people don't make what
>teachers make.
>In Detroit, the teachers are striking due to the cash strapped school
>district wanting a 5% pay decrease and requiring teachers to pay a 20%
>copay for doctor visits. Why can't the teachers accept this?
Lemmie put it this way - you couldn't pay me enough to teach in a
Detroit school. $100,000? no way. $200,000? no way. Cold weather,
illiterate kids, gangs, dreary city, etc. If I were there and was
asked to take a pay cut, I'd strike or leave.
Posted by ppp on August 28, 2006, 9:23 pm
wrote:
>It's a slippery slope. The average national teacher salary is a tad over
>$50,000 and that doesn't include benefits -- health, dental, summers off,
>etc.. If averaged out over their 9 month workyear, that's $5555/month plus
>summers off. I don't know about you, but most of the teachers I had
>weren't very good or mediocre at best (10 minutes of instruction, then
>passed out worksheets for the rest of the period), so they are very well
>compensated, probably too well-compensated. Most people don't make what
>teachers make.
Unionism has been abused by people who do not need union protection.
Teachers, nurses, firemen, policemen and all those overpaid public
sector employees. They are well educated, well paid and should be
able to bargain for their own benefits based on their performance, not
because they belong to a union. Unions should be available only to
those who are vulnerable to employment abuse. My solution would be a
law to allow unions only for those employment income categories in the
lowest half of the national median income bracket. Say the median
national income is $40,000 pa. Only those earning $20,000 pa and
under should be allowed to be represented by unions.
Posted by Grappletech on August 28, 2006, 4:49 pm
And I know in some areas, probably Detroit also, discipline is such that
the teacher struggles to keep control of the classroom. I spent half my
childhood in Texas and the other half in California (went back and forth
between 2 divorced parents). In California, in most of the classrooms,
the bad kids disrupted and controlled the classroom. In Texas, if a
student talked without being called upon or gave lip to a teacher, the
teacher would warn them, if the student did it AGAIN. Then the teacher
would call the Principal's office, and a 6'3" assistant football
coach/vice principal type would immediately come down and give the kid
about 3 hard licks with a paddle just outside of the classroom. Tears
would ensue. Then the kid would be taken to the bathroom to wash their
faces and then back to the classroom. Guess what? It works. They don't
do it twice. I never was in an unruly classroom in a Texas school
throughout elemtary, junior high or high school. But most of the
classrooms in CA (where paddling was not allowed) were unruly. Time we
instilled discipline again in the classroom. That would help teachers
out a lot and help keep the decent teachers on the job. And I went to
school in the late '70's until the early '90's. Not in the 50's. Some
people may hear about the paddling of students and assume I went to
school in the 50's or 60's. To those who think paddling is cruel, it's a
lot more cruel to let a few bad seeds destroy the learning and healthy
classroom environment for the rest of the kids. Plus, the discipline the
child learns will benefit them the rest of their lives.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+
Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
XML site map
> $50,000 and that doesn't include benefits -- health, dental, summers off,
> etc.. If averaged out over their 9 month workyear, that's $5555/month plus
> summers off. I don't know about you, but most of the teachers I had
> weren't very good or mediocre at best (10 minutes of instruction, then
> passed out worksheets for the rest of the period), so they are very well
> compensated, probably too well-compensated. Most people don't make what
> teachers make.