Teacher Compensation

[rightwinger]

Did you ever think of the other side of the story?

Unions make it possible for good Teachers to make a decent wage, Health benefits and Security that some Superviser can give their job to a friend, as they can with out a Union?

Do you really want your kids, grandkids to go back to a one room School where the Teacher has to live with a family, bring in the firewood,etc?

That way of thinking is why this country is going backward today.

With that idiot at the EPA rolling back Standards, giving his $50 a night landlord a Pipeline deal. While flying around the country on your tax dollars first class,trying to rent a private jet for $100,000 a month.

And your choice of President spending 3 million a week flying to his Golf courses, sucking money into his business.

And you are bitching about Teachers wanting a raise?

That is ridiculous.
Unions do no such thing for teachers anymore.
You can't say "teachers aren't paid enough!"...and then turn around and say that the unions are why they get paid so much.

You just took a couple of words from my post, made up your own tale.

Oh puhleese....you say without unions teachers would have to go back to living with families and carry in firewood and you say I am making stuff up.
Unions were once a VITAL part of the American society as a whole. Unions are what built the middle class, for that, there is no argument. We all owe an enormous gratitude to unions of the early-mid 20th century. Including teachers.
However after the 1970's....unions became a negative factor instead of a positive one.
And this is especially true for the teachers union. The single largest factor today is protecting teachers from responsibility. Making it practically impossible to fire teachers based on low performance. And that makes our system suffer.
Private schools without unions...not only pay teachers better, but out perform public schools almost 100% of the time.

Since the demise of unions
Worker pay, benefits and job security has plummeted

I agree, but that is not to say they are intrinsically related.
One thing I know we both agree on, and IMO, every American should agree on left or right - is corporatism has been a damning force for the middle class and almost exclusively benefits only a tiny percentage of the population.... the wealthy.
But this is about teachers unions.

There is nobody to stand up to corporate America in defense of the workers

Republicans have instituted an “every man for himself” mentality and the workers have suffered as corporate America gets a compliant workforce

 

[rightwinger]

For most people and for most situations, Unions are inappropriate and destructive.

Think about it: An employment contract is one of the most important agreements in one's life. I agree to do some work, and another person or entity agrees to compensate me for it. If the compensation is unacceptable, I don't agree. If my work is found to be unacceptable, the other party can terminate the contract. If I find that my work is worth more than my compensation, I can bargain for better compensation, or take my services elsewhere, so that I can receive what I am worth. 90% (roughly) of the people in the private sector live their work lives according to these simple rules.

By introducing a Union into this scenario, a number of insidious factors come into play. It is not MY work that determines may compensation, but the value of EVERYONE's work, from the best to the worst. The best workers are discouraged from performing to their potential, because there is no advantage to doing so. The worst workers find ways of doing as little as possible (and sometimes even sabotaging the work), because they know that they are very unlikely to see any ramifications for their laziness. Personal advancement is discouraged because "standing out" is socially unacceptable in the union community.

Government employment is a lot like Union employment to start with, but then, when you formally adopt collective bargaining along with the "right" to strike, it becomes near evil. In true collective bargaining, both sides must be reasonable. If the Union demands (and gets) too much, the viability of the enterprise is threatened, and everybody loses. When a government union demands too much, management representatives are incentivized to make a good showing of "hard bargaining," but there is never any threat to the enterprise if the contract unreasonably favors the Union, so the end result is a gradual inflation of Union compensation to a level that has no rational relationship to what is being "produced" bye the Union members.

In our public dialog, one thing seldom mentioned is the outrageous generosity of the pensions. The reason it "flies under the radar" is that the outrage is not the monthly or annual AMOUNT of the pensions, it is the DURATION of them. Many government employees (especially teachers) are able to RETIRE in their EARLY 50's! This is insane! They will be, on average, on the public dole for 30 or more years while producing nothing! So when we talk about "low" teacher salaries, remember that their full compensation is more than twice that annual amount, because they will be on the pension-dole for AS LONG AS THEIR WORKING LIVES.

Anyone reading this who goes on cruises will note how many of your fellow cruisers are retired teachers. There are a couple reasons for this: (a) they make a good retirement income, and (b) they are healthy are retired for two or three times as long as their private sector counterparts who retire at a normal 65 or 66. For most people, the time to "have fun" is 8-10 years between retirement and, say 75, at which time activities are significantly curtailed due to the normal ravages of age. But if you retire at 53 (normal for a teacher), you have over 20 years of. healthy, well compensated retirement before you have to significantly slow down.

Unions institute the power of collective bargaining. All for one and one for all. The individual has the power of the masses

Every man for himself allows the employer to play one worker off the others

 

[iamwhatiseem]

That is ridiculous.
Unions do no such thing for teachers anymore.
You can't say "teachers aren't paid enough!"...and then turn around and say that the unions are why they get paid so much.

You just took a couple of words from my post, made up your own tale.

Oh puhleese....you say without unions teachers would have to go back to living with families and carry in firewood and you say I am making stuff up.
Unions were once a VITAL part of the American society as a whole. Unions are what built the middle class, for that, there is no argument. We all owe an enormous gratitude to unions of the early-mid 20th century. Including teachers.
However after the 1970's....unions became a negative factor instead of a positive one.
And this is especially true for the teachers union. The single largest factor today is protecting teachers from responsibility. Making it practically impossible to fire teachers based on low performance. And that makes our system suffer.
Private schools without unions...not only pay teachers better, but out perform public schools almost 100% of the time.

Since the demise of unions
Worker pay, benefits and job security has plummeted

I agree, but that is not to say they are intrinsically related.
One thing I know we both agree on, and IMO, every American should agree on left or right - is corporatism has been a damning force for the middle class and almost exclusively benefits only a tiny percentage of the population.... the wealthy.
But this is about teachers unions.

There is nobody to stand up to corporate America in defense of the workers

Republicans have instituted an “every man for himself” mentality and the workers have suffered as corporate America gets a compliant workforce

Oh like no Democrats have taken part in turning America into a corporatocracy ...really RW?
C'mon. The name Larry Summers mean anything to you? Robert Rubin? Timothy Geithner? The entire Agri-Business? The corruption of the entire finance industry took place over the past 30 years....both sides have taken part, no way only one side could have so thoroughly polluted the system.
And I know you already know this.

 

[MaryAnne11]

It is a case of priorities of your state and you get what you pay for

These states look at education as nonessential and are willing to hire those who may not be the best available. The bottom of the barrel is good enough to educate their youth

The best of the best do not major in education

Define "best".

Would you or anyone coming out of college work in a field that pays so poorly? It's called dedication.

I see nothing funny about my post

A Teacher was just on.

36 students in his class and 10 of them do not have Math books.

I hope every Teacher in every state marches.

I see nothing funny about my post. I do see a bunch of brainwashed older people who do not give a damn about the future of our young.

They are too busy hating on the things that gave us the Middle Class that the Oligarchy is squeezing out of existence.

I am very happy not to be one of them.

 

[MaryAnne11]

You do realize many of those things you posted are the reason we find it hard to get or keep good Teachers.

We have 2 Teachers in the family. One left to go into computer technology. The other went into the Medical field.

No doubt.
It is devastating to employee moral when they see people getting paid exactly, or even more than they are but do half the work or less.
It is way way way way past time for our education system to expel permanently teachers unions that are poisoning the entire system.
Our education ranks EMBARRASSINGLY lower than virtually all other major western civilizations. And to think we STILL have a system that refuses to fire bad teachers.
You would think good teachers would be demanding this to change, but as you can see by the "Admiral" here too many will instead demand it stays the same.

Did you ever think of the other side of the story?

Unions make it possible for good Teachers to make a decent wage, Health benefits and Security that some Superviser can give their job to a friend, as they can with out a Union?

Do you really want your kids, grandkids to go back to a one room School where the Teacher has to live with a family, bring in the firewood,etc?

That way of thinking is why this country is going backward today.

With that idiot at the EPA rolling back Standards, giving his $50 a night landlord a Pipeline deal. While flying around the country on your tax dollars first class,trying to rent a private jet for $100,000 a month.

And your choice of President spending 3 million a week flying to his Golf courses, sucking money into his business.

And you are bitching about Teachers wanting a raise?

That is ridiculous.
Unions do no such thing for teachers anymore.
You can't say "teachers aren't paid enough!"...and then turn around and say that the unions are why they get paid so much.

You just took a couple of words from my post, made up your own tale.

Oh puhleese....you say without unions teachers would have to go back to living with families and carry in firewood and you say I am making stuff up.
Unions were once a VITAL part of the American society as a whole. Unions are what built the middle class, for that, there is no argument. We all owe an enormous gratitude to unions of the early-mid 20th century. Including teachers.
However after the 1970's....unions became a negative factor instead of a positive one.
And this is especially true for the teachers union. The single largest factor today is protecting teachers from responsibility. Making it practically impossible to fire teachers based on low performance. And that makes our system suffer.
Private schools without unions...not only pay teachers better, but out perform public schools almost 100% of the time.

Go ahead,live in your fantasy world. I refuse to.

 

[rightwinger]

You just took a couple of words from my post, made up your own tale.

Oh puhleese....you say without unions teachers would have to go back to living with families and carry in firewood and you say I am making stuff up.
Unions were once a VITAL part of the American society as a whole. Unions are what built the middle class, for that, there is no argument. We all owe an enormous gratitude to unions of the early-mid 20th century. Including teachers.
However after the 1970's....unions became a negative factor instead of a positive one.
And this is especially true for the teachers union. The single largest factor today is protecting teachers from responsibility. Making it practically impossible to fire teachers based on low performance. And that makes our system suffer.
Private schools without unions...not only pay teachers better, but out perform public schools almost 100% of the time.

Since the demise of unions
Worker pay, benefits and job security has plummeted

I agree, but that is not to say they are intrinsically related.
One thing I know we both agree on, and IMO, every American should agree on left or right - is corporatism has been a damning force for the middle class and almost exclusively benefits only a tiny percentage of the population.... the wealthy.
But this is about teachers unions.

There is nobody to stand up to corporate America in defense of the workers

Republicans have instituted an “every man for himself” mentality and the workers have suffered as corporate America gets a compliant workforce

Oh like no Democrats have taken part in turning America into a corporatocracy ...really RW?
C'mon. The name Larry Summers mean anything to you? Robert Rubin? Timothy Geithner? The entire Agri-Business? The corruption of the entire finance industry took place over the past 30 years....both sides have taken part, no way only one side could have so thoroughly polluted the system.
And I know you already know this.

Republicans have made it part of their platform to destroy unions

Workers have suffered

 

[Unkotare]

...... I was smart enough not to have kids. ......

Yeah.....that's why......

Yes unlike you who couldn't even tell me why you have kids
You just did the mindless go to school get married have kids routine all the other automatons do

Yeeeeaaaaah.......that’s it...... : rolleyes:

 

[Skull Pilot]

...... I was smart enough not to have kids. ......

Yeah.....that's why......

Yes unlike you who couldn't even tell me why you have kids
You just did the mindless go to school get married have kids routine all the other automatons do

Yeeeeaaaaah.......that’s it...... : rolleyes:

Of course that's it

You're no different than any other sheep

 

[Unkotare]

So sad...^^^^^^^

 

[boedicca]

When I was in retailing many years ago (with Hill's Department Stores), we had a job that needed to be done. Empty boxes of incoming stuff and stock the shelves. We were an absolutely-self-serve discount department store, so the most convenient time to do this was the middle of the day. We employed a small army of WOMEN under the following employment paradigm: You work from 10:00am to 2:00pm, with one 15-minute break, at slightly over minimum wage. No benefits, no vacation, no raises, no nothing. We were absolutely clear with applicants that this was the deal.

Who would take such a job? Happy housewives wanting a little extra money, moms who wanted to work a schedule that allowed them to continue being full-time moms, "retired" women. We had no trouble finding and keeping women to take these positions, and turnover was negligible. They required minimal supervision, and got the job done.

At around the same time, a friend of mine was an elected State Representative in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives. His salary was about $6,000/yr, with minimal benefits. It wasn't a full-time job, but the commitment was pretty-much full time, due to constituent needs.

Who would take such a job? Mostly lawyers, but also business owners who had flexible schedules, farmers, people with other sources of income (a working spouse?), people who had retired from their careers. The occasional crook.

In both of these cases, you have a "job" that DOES NOT PAY A LIVING WAGE. People considering that "job" have to assess, in advance, whether it satisfies their personal needs, and if it doesn't, they need to look elsewhere. There is nothing unreasonable about this, on the part of the employer. The employer, in structuring the job in this way, recognizes that MOST PEOPLE will not be willing to take the job under these constraints, so they are passing on possibly the "best people for the job," but it's a tradeoff.

Not surprisingly, the legislators in Pennsylvania gradually over many years declared that Representative was a FULL-TIME job, and they have paid themselves accordingly, including splendid benefits, and a pension to die for, if you will excuse the totally inappropriate metaphor.

And now we come to TEACHERS.

In many states, the State has decided, wisely or not, to compensate their teachers at a wage that is significantly less than what an exemplary college graduate might make at a full-time job in the private sector (or even in Government). Why would they do such a thing? Well, there's June, July, and August, and the fact that it's arguably not a "full-time job" in the other months of the year (after the first couple years).

But it doesn't really matter WHY they pay their teachers what they do. Maybe they have made a decision, based on the best information they have available, that they can staff their schools adequately at this wage. Maybe they know that at that wage, they will not get the most economically ambitious grads, they will not get many STEM graduates, and High Schools Chemistry in, say, West Virginia, will be taught by History majors who have taken a couple of college Chem classes, rather than a grad with a degree in Organic Chemistry.

But there is no deception here. Applicants for teaching positions in those states know exactly what they will be making, and there is no promise of riches down the road. They have to decide whether that wage and those benefits will meet their needs, and if it doesn't, they need to look elsewhere. The State knows that many would-be teachers will go into another field or leave the state. But they have made that decision, and so be it. (One might point out that the teachers in states where teachers are WELL paid are rarely Phi Beta Kappa material either).

So massive strikes against such State Education Systems are bullshit. As with collective bargaining, they are a Leftist-led assault on the hapless taxpayers, in the name of "fairness."

Since when is it unfair to keep one's promises, as the respective States have done? If you don't like it, if you can't live on those wages, then go somewhere else. Most people in the Real World do this periodically throughout their working lives, with little trauma or gnashing of teeth. The state schools will have NO TROUBLE replacing each and every teacher who departs.

Becoming a teacher costs money and tuition has risen to the level that paying your bills and student loans back exceed what a teacher makes. So you end up with teachers making the following decision. Do I work at something I love and live in poverty or take what I know and go into the private sector. I know because I have two daughter that chose teaching as a profession. One stayed and one left. The State of Colorado lost one heck of a calculus teacher who also coached a team to the state track meet and had great success there.

I seems you think teachers should simply accept their fate and not attempt to change it. That ship sailed a few weeks ago.

The sheer anger here on this board is down right stupid.

Envy and greed seem to rule.

The Envy and Greed is on the part of Teachers Unions who hold students hostage in order to extract excessive pensions and benefits.

 

[Unkotare]

It is a case of priorities of your state and you get what you pay for

These states look at education as nonessential and are willing to hire those who may not be the best available. The bottom of the barrel is good enough to educate their youth

The best of the best do not major in education

Define "best".

Would you or anyone coming out of college work in a field that pays so poorly? It's called dedication.

The top 5% of graduating High school students

And it doesn't say much about your intelligence if you "dedicate" yourself to a job that doesn't pay well

Those top 5% of graduating high school students don't become plumbers or auto mechanics either, both of which pay more than teaching.

The fact that you don't understand is more about you than me.

So what?

IMO a plumber or auto mechanic is more important than a teacher

Which proves the danger of being so uneducated.

 

[Unkotare]

I notice that not one pister/basher puts one ounce of responsibility in the students. So if a kid is a complete truant/ disruption and won't do an ounce of work and fall its the fault of the teacher. I believe some of you think all kids just anxiously await to be taught and spend time working at it. What about the growing percentage who do nothing..no studying no work turn in total disengaged. The ones who bring your beloved test scores down? Its the teachers fault correct? You are nuts.

A large percentage of students don’t see the value of education, especially in HS. .....

What percentage? Proof?

Oh, like I’m going to do a study and come up with hard numbers to validate my opinion to an anonymous poster on a message board.

= pulled out of ass

 

[JoeMoma]

I notice that not one pister/basher puts one ounce of responsibility in the students. So if a kid is a complete truant/ disruption and won't do an ounce of work and fall its the fault of the teacher. I believe some of you think all kids just anxiously await to be taught and spend time working at it. What about the growing percentage who do nothing..no studying no work turn in total disengaged. The ones who bring your beloved test scores down? Its the teachers fault correct? You are nuts.

A large percentage of students don’t see the value of education, especially in HS. .....

What percentage? Proof?

Oh, like I’m going to do a study and come up with hard numbers to validate my opinion to an anonymous poster on a message board.

= pulled out of ass

Link?

 

[JoeMoma]

The best of the best do not major in education

Define "best".

Would you or anyone coming out of college work in a field that pays so poorly? It's called dedication.

The top 5% of graduating High school students

And it doesn't say much about your intelligence if you "dedicate" yourself to a job that doesn't pay well

Those top 5% of graduating high school students don't become plumbers or auto mechanics either, both of which pay more than teaching.

The fact that you don't understand is more about you than me.

So what?

IMO a plumber or auto mechanic is more important than a teacher

Which proves the danger of being so uneducated.

Link? Where is the proof!

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Republicans have made it part of their platform to destroy unions

Workers have suffered

Pheh. You mean right to work?
Nothing wrong with that legislation. If enough workers realize that their union does nothing but deduct $$ from their paycheck - why should they be forced to pay the dues in order to work there?
Unions lost their teeth years ago due to three main reasons:

1) The good they did is in the past. I don't mean that negatively. I mean literally. No one can argue, well except for idiots, that unions raised wages for everyone, union or not union. Fought for us to have sick days, holidays, vacation days, pensions (now gone), SS matching, 40 hour work week, overtime...the list goes on. But all of those things were accomplished decades ago. Now this presented unions with a dilemma. They needed to stay relevant. So the result of that was unions bargained for things that were not fair to the company. Like making it extremely hard, if not impossible, for bad workers to get fired. Along with other problematic protections that were not good for the company OR other workers.
2) Off shoring labor. It was bound to happen. Some say it is partly due to unions that made doing business in America so costly that companies didn't have a choice. That is not entirely true, partly, but mostly because it made them more money and Americans don't care where the stuff they buy comes from so why pay $40 an hour in total compensation if you can pay $1 an hour elsewhere.
3) Corporatism. Corporatism is a perfect storm. It needs government collusion to work. It needs government to create favorable regulations and laws to protect their existence. And they get it. On both sides of the aisle. Every time. No matter that in the past 30 years, 16 of them, saw a Democrat President, most years with a Democrat Congress and Senate majority. Little hard to maintain the facade that it is all Republicans when they were not the ones in majority power.

 

[rightwinger]

Republicans have made it part of their platform to destroy unions

Workers have suffered

Pheh. You mean right to work?
Nothing wrong with that legislation. If enough workers realize that their union does nothing but deduct $$ from their paycheck - why should they be forced to pay the dues in order to work there?
Unions lost their teeth years ago due to three main reasons:

1) The good they did is in the past. I don't mean that negatively. I mean literally. No one can argue, well except for idiots, that unions raised wages for everyone, union or not union. Fought for us to have sick days, holidays, vacation days, pensions (now gone), SS matching, 40 hour work week, overtime...the list goes on. But all of those things were accomplished decades ago. Now this presented unions with a dilemma. They needed to stay relevant. So the result of that was unions bargained for things that were not fair to the company. Like making it extremely hard, if not impossible, for bad workers to get fired. Along with other problematic protections that were not good for the company OR other workers.
2) Off shoring labor. It was bound to happen. Some say it is partly due to unions that made doing business in America so costly that companies didn't have a choice. That is not entirely true, partly, but mostly because it made them more money and Americans don't care where the stuff they buy comes from so why pay $40 an hour in total compensation if you can pay $1 an hour elsewhere.
3) Corporatism. Corporatism is a perfect storm. It needs government collusion to work. It needs government to create favorable regulations and laws to protect their existence. And they get it. On both sides of the aisle. Every time. No matter that in the past 30 years, 16 of them, saw a Democrat President, most years with a Democrat Congress and Senate majority. Little hard to maintain the facade that it is all Republicans when they were not the ones in majority power.

Right to work is just code for right to be paid less

The demise of unions has led to a diminishing of worker compensation, rights and protections

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Republicans have made it part of their platform to destroy unions

Workers have suffered

Pheh. You mean right to work?
Nothing wrong with that legislation. If enough workers realize that their union does nothing but deduct $$ from their paycheck - why should they be forced to pay the dues in order to work there?
Unions lost their teeth years ago due to three main reasons:

1) The good they did is in the past. I don't mean that negatively. I mean literally. No one can argue, well except for idiots, that unions raised wages for everyone, union or not union. Fought for us to have sick days, holidays, vacation days, pensions (now gone), SS matching, 40 hour work week, overtime...the list goes on. But all of those things were accomplished decades ago. Now this presented unions with a dilemma. They needed to stay relevant. So the result of that was unions bargained for things that were not fair to the company. Like making it extremely hard, if not impossible, for bad workers to get fired. Along with other problematic protections that were not good for the company OR other workers.
2) Off shoring labor. It was bound to happen. Some say it is partly due to unions that made doing business in America so costly that companies didn't have a choice. That is not entirely true, partly, but mostly because it made them more money and Americans don't care where the stuff they buy comes from so why pay $40 an hour in total compensation if you can pay $1 an hour elsewhere.
3) Corporatism. Corporatism is a perfect storm. It needs government collusion to work. It needs government to create favorable regulations and laws to protect their existence. And they get it. On both sides of the aisle. Every time. No matter that in the past 30 years, 16 of them, saw a Democrat President, most years with a Democrat Congress and Senate majority. Little hard to maintain the facade that it is all Republicans when they were not the ones in majority power.

Right to work is just code for right to be paid less

The demise of unions has led to a diminishing of worker compensation, rights and protections

All I can tell you friend it is going to take a lot more than unions to reverse the gutting of the middle class and the evaporation of benefits and frozen wages.
Primarily.... B O T H Democrats and Republicans have got to stop being sheep and pawns for their respective party filled with looters and cons. Elected vipers that have not represented our best interest in at least 40 years. Washington is a cess pool. Our parents let it get that way, we maintain it with our blind following and relentless blame games.
As long as Democrats stand blind to their own corruption and demons, and Republicans stand blind to theirs....but always able to see the problems with the other - then we will continue to be a divided nation. WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT THE VIPERS AND CONS WANT. And what Corporatism has very carefully crafted and maintain.

Ask yourself. Are you helping or merely protecting the corruption of "your side".

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Oh puhleese....you say without unions teachers would have to go back to living with families and carry in firewood and you say I am making stuff up.
Unions were once a VITAL part of the American society as a whole. Unions are what built the middle class, for that, there is no argument. We all owe an enormous gratitude to unions of the early-mid 20th century. Including teachers.
However after the 1970's....unions became a negative factor instead of a positive one.
And this is especially true for the teachers union. The single largest factor today is protecting teachers from responsibility. Making it practically impossible to fire teachers based on low performance. And that makes our system suffer.
Private schools without unions...not only pay teachers better, but out perform public schools almost 100% of the time.

Since the demise of unions
Worker pay, benefits and job security has plummeted

I agree, but that is not to say they are intrinsically related.
One thing I know we both agree on, and IMO, every American should agree on left or right - is corporatism has been a damning force for the middle class and almost exclusively benefits only a tiny percentage of the population.... the wealthy.
But this is about teachers unions.

There is nobody to stand up to corporate America in defense of the workers

Republicans have instituted an “every man for himself” mentality and the workers have suffered as corporate America gets a compliant workforce

Oh like no Democrats have taken part in turning America into a corporatocracy ...really RW?
C'mon. The name Larry Summers mean anything to you? Robert Rubin? Timothy Geithner? The entire Agri-Business? The corruption of the entire finance industry took place over the past 30 years....both sides have taken part, no way only one side could have so thoroughly polluted the system.
And I know you already know this.

Republicans have made it part of their platform to destroy unions

Workers have suffered

Link to the platform that says that?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

When I was in retailing many years ago (with Hill's Department Stores), we had a job that needed to be done. Empty boxes of incoming stuff and stock the shelves. We were an absolutely-self-serve discount department store, so the most convenient time to do this was the middle of the day. We employed a small army of WOMEN under the following employment paradigm: You work from 10:00am to 2:00pm, with one 15-minute break, at slightly over minimum wage. No benefits, no vacation, no raises, no nothing. We were absolutely clear with applicants that this was the deal.

Who would take such a job? Happy housewives wanting a little extra money, moms who wanted to work a schedule that allowed them to continue being full-time moms, "retired" women. We had no trouble finding and keeping women to take these positions, and turnover was negligible. They required minimal supervision, and got the job done.

At around the same time, a friend of mine was an elected State Representative in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives. His salary was about $6,000/yr, with minimal benefits. It wasn't a full-time job, but the commitment was pretty-much full time, due to constituent needs.

Who would take such a job? Mostly lawyers, but also business owners who had flexible schedules, farmers, people with other sources of income (a working spouse?), people who had retired from their careers. The occasional crook.

In both of these cases, you have a "job" that DOES NOT PAY A LIVING WAGE. People considering that "job" have to assess, in advance, whether it satisfies their personal needs, and if it doesn't, they need to look elsewhere. There is nothing unreasonable about this, on the part of the employer. The employer, in structuring the job in this way, recognizes that MOST PEOPLE will not be willing to take the job under these constraints, so they are passing on possibly the "best people for the job," but it's a tradeoff.

Not surprisingly, the legislators in Pennsylvania gradually over many years declared that Representative was a FULL-TIME job, and they have paid themselves accordingly, including splendid benefits, and a pension to die for, if you will excuse the totally inappropriate metaphor.

And now we come to TEACHERS.

In many states, the State has decided, wisely or not, to compensate their teachers at a wage that is significantly less than what an exemplary college graduate might make at a full-time job in the private sector (or even in Government). Why would they do such a thing? Well, there's June, July, and August, and the fact that it's arguably not a "full-time job" in the other months of the year (after the first couple years).

But it doesn't really matter WHY they pay their teachers what they do. Maybe they have made a decision, based on the best information they have available, that they can staff their schools adequately at this wage. Maybe they know that at that wage, they will not get the most economically ambitious grads, they will not get many STEM graduates, and High Schools Chemistry in, say, West Virginia, will be taught by History majors who have taken a couple of college Chem classes, rather than a grad with a degree in Organic Chemistry.

But there is no deception here. Applicants for teaching positions in those states know exactly what they will be making, and there is no promise of riches down the road. They have to decide whether that wage and those benefits will meet their needs, and if it doesn't, they need to look elsewhere. The State knows that many would-be teachers will go into another field or leave the state. But they have made that decision, and so be it. (One might point out that the teachers in states where teachers are WELL paid are rarely Phi Beta Kappa material either).

So massive strikes against such State Education Systems are bullshit. As with collective bargaining, they are a Leftist-led assault on the hapless taxpayers, in the name of "fairness."

Since when is it unfair to keep one's promises, as the respective States have done? If you don't like it, if you can't live on those wages, then go somewhere else. Most people in the Real World do this periodically throughout their working lives, with little trauma or gnashing of teeth. The state schools will have NO TROUBLE replacing each and every teacher who departs.

Becoming a teacher costs money and tuition has risen to the level that paying your bills and student loans back exceed what a teacher makes. So you end up with teachers making the following decision. Do I work at something I love and live in poverty or take what I know and go into the private sector. I know because I have two daughter that chose teaching as a profession. One stayed and one left. The State of Colorado lost one heck of a calculus teacher who also coached a team to the state track meet and had great success there.

I seems you think teachers should simply accept their fate and not attempt to change it. That ship sailed a few weeks ago.

The sheer anger here on this board is down right stupid.

Envy and greed seem to rule.

The Envy and Greed is on the part of Teachers Unions who hold students hostage in order to extract excessive pensions and benefits.

So why do we have lousy pensions and crappy benefits?

It is simply because you make shit up based on anecdotal information from places like Long Island and San Francisco where my garage would sell for $1.2 million!

 

[MaryAnne11]

Republicans have made it part of their platform to destroy unions

Workers have suffered

Pheh. You mean right to work?
Nothing wrong with that legislation. If enough workers realize that their union does nothing but deduct $$ from their paycheck - why should they be forced to pay the dues in order to work there?
Unions lost their teeth years ago due to three main reasons:

1) The good they did is in the past. I don't mean that negatively. I mean literally. No one can argue, well except for idiots, that unions raised wages for everyone, union or not union. Fought for us to have sick days, holidays, vacation days, pensions (now gone), SS matching, 40 hour work week, overtime...the list goes on. But all of those things were accomplished decades ago. Now this presented unions with a dilemma. They needed to stay relevant. So the result of that was unions bargained for things that were not fair to the company. Like making it extremely hard, if not impossible, for bad workers to get fired. Along with other problematic protections that were not good for the company OR other workers.
2) Off shoring labor. It was bound to happen. Some say it is partly due to unions that made doing business in America so costly that companies didn't have a choice. That is not entirely true, partly, but mostly because it made them more money and Americans don't care where the stuff they buy comes from so why pay $40 an hour in total compensation if you can pay $1 an hour elsewhere.
3) Corporatism. Corporatism is a perfect storm. It needs government collusion to work. It needs government to create favorable regulations and laws to protect their existence. And they get it. On both sides of the aisle. Every time. No matter that in the past 30 years, 16 of them, saw a Democrat President, most years with a Democrat Congress and Senate majority. Little hard to maintain the facade that it is all Republicans when they were not the ones in majority power.

Right to work is just code for right to be paid less

The demise of unions has led to a diminishing of worker compensation, rights and protections

All I can tell you friend it is going to take a lot more than unions to reverse the gutting of the middle class and the evaporation of benefits and frozen wages.
Primarily.... B O T H Democrats and Republicans have got to stop being sheep and pawns for their respective party filled with looters and cons. Elected vipers that have not represented our best interest in at least 40 years. Washington is a cess pool. Our parents let it get that way, we maintain it with our blind following and relentless blame games.
As long as Democrats stand blind to their own corruption and demons, and Republicans stand blind to theirs....but always able to see the problems with the other - then we will continue to be a divided nation. WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT THE VIPERS AND CONS WANT. And what Corporatism has very carefully crafted and maintain.

Ask yourself. Are you helping or merely protecting the corruption of "your side".

Your parents let it get that way?

Excuse me, what party have you voted for all these years?

Maybe you should just take a look at the greedy generation that is now whining and complaining they do not have the benefits their parents did?

Never entered your head while you were whining your Politicians were busy destroying what made the middle class?

Think about that.