Enjoying Your Holiday? Thank a Union Member!
Replies
-
So Unions exist to protect workers and make sure everyone gets a fair shake eh?0 -
http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/10/us/illinois-chicago-teachers-strike/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
Thank you Unions!!!
Chicago offered teachers a 16% pay increase over the next 4 years. Most people would be happy just to work in this economy. Many of us took pay decreases to keep our jobs. What do Chicago teachers do? They go on strike.
I read the article. The strike is not about pay.
This is directly from the article.
"Sticking points for the union and the school system included issues such as compensation, job security, merit pay and an evaluation system."
So two of the three issues deal with pay. I grouped merit pay with an evaluation system since they go together.
The article also said they were close on most issues, except the evaluation system.
We also have a dispute between our provincial government and teachers in Ontario. I don't know about Chicago, but here, teachers have been used as political footballs for years. Whenever a government picks a fight with public employees, I always figure that there's something else going on and they're looking for a distraction for the public to take away attention from other issues.
The evaluation system used in Chicago Charter schools is more stringent then the one the union teachers are fighting against. The Charter schools in Chicago consistently out perform the unionized schools in Chicago. They want bonus pay but they don't want to be held accountable for when their students don't pass. Their whole existence in that job is to make sure their students pass the grade they are in. If they can't do the job there are a whole lot of people that would line up to make 75k per year for 10 months of work. Good thing they have a union to protect them. Oh wait! It's the children that are being protected!0 -
Tying teacher pay to test scores is fundamentally flawed. Many factors beyond the control of the teacher go into how students perform. On top of that, there's the fact that standardized tests don't really demonstrate much of anything apart from how well someone teaches to a test. I suppose that might mean something if I EVER encountered a standardized test outside of high school, but that hasn't happened yet.
You can't assume that when students fail that teachers are to blame. They might be. There are absolutely bad teachers out there. It's probably why ALL union contracts have remediation language. Go figure. I love how people who like to talk about teachers unions have never actually been in one and actually looked at the contract. It's cute.0 -
Tying teacher pay to test scores is fundamentally flawed. Many factors beyond the control of the teacher go into how students perform. On top of that, there's the fact that standardized tests don't really demonstrate much of anything apart from how well someone teaches to a test. I suppose that might mean something if I EVER encountered a standardized test outside of high school, but that hasn't happened yet.
You can't assume that when students fail that teachers are to blame. They might be. There are absolutely bad teachers out there. It's probably why ALL union contracts have remediation language. Go figure. I love how people who like to talk about teachers unions have never actually been in one and actually looked at the contract. It's cute.
A teacher's pay is not tied to test scores. If a teacher makes 75k per year they will make that much regardless of what they do. Teachers want bonuses. In order to provide teachers with a bonus they need to be evaluated. Rahm wants to evaluate teachers with 40% of their score relying on standardized test scores. Charter schools evaluate their teachers with 50% of their score relying on standardized test scores. 1/6 of children in Chicago go to Charter schools with non union teachers. Whether the union likes to admit it or not they are competing with Charter schools in Chicago.
I agree with you about standardized tests. I will go one step further and say that standardized testing is a bane on public education but we have NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND so it is what it is.
I am curious how you would evaluate teachers?0 -
Tying teacher pay to test scores is fundamentally flawed. Many factors beyond the control of the teacher go into how students perform. On top of that, there's the fact that standardized tests don't really demonstrate much of anything apart from how well someone teaches to a test. I suppose that might mean something if I EVER encountered a standardized test outside of high school, but that hasn't happened yet.
You can't assume that when students fail that teachers are to blame. They might be. There are absolutely bad teachers out there. It's probably why ALL union contracts have remediation language. Go figure. I love how people who like to talk about teachers unions have never actually been in one and actually looked at the contract. It's cute.
A teacher's pay is not tied to test scores. If a teacher makes 75k per year they will make that much regardless of what they do. Teachers want bonuses. In order to provide teachers with a bonus they need to be evaluated. Rahm wants to evaluate teachers with 40% of their score relying on standardized test scores. Charter schools evaluate their teachers with 50% of their score relying on standardized test scores. 1/6 of children in Chicago go to Charter schools with non union teachers. Whether the union likes to admit it or not they are competing with Charter schools in Chicago.
I agree with you about standardized tests. I will go one step further and say that standardized testing is a bane on public education but we have NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND so it is what it is.
I am curious how you would evaluate teachers?
Bonuses are a form of compensation. Thus their compensation is tired to test scores. I see the distinction you're making, I just don't think it's important.
I have fairly strong feelings against charter schools, and since I'm in a pissy mood, I won't go into it. It boils down to a difference of philosophy on some level, though.
If we can agree that standardized tests are useless, then I assume we would also agree that basing any compensation on those useless test scores would likewise be dumb.
As you point out, the question of evaluation remains. It's actually pretty complex and variable. It's not pretty and tidy as test scores, but not everything we do can or should be summed in a way just because it's easier to think about. Most educators want a comprehensive evaluation system. They want feedback from all parties involved so that the "truth" of the learning experience can be understood. This would include getting feedback from students, parents, administrators, the teachers themselves, fellow instructors. We should look at an entire portfolio of information that includes lesson plans that don't just include a snapshot of teacher performance. Additionally, teachers should also be evaluated by people who have expertise in their field.
So that's not a simple, complete, or succinct answer to your question, but that's the nature of it. There's quote I like from a teacher in MN: “If we use just one criteria, like test scores, it wouldn’t tell the whole picture. If doctors were only evaluated on their outcomes, we would have too many obstetricians and not enough oncologists.” Morbid and overly simplified but so are standardized test scores.0 -
Bonuses? Raises? What are those? Do they really exist? I hear we are getting one this year, but I'm almost afraid to believe it's true as I have never seen the wonders of this thing called a raise.... People in the real world actually get them?0
-
If a teacher makes 75k per year
Where in the world is this? :laugh:0 -
Tying teacher pay to test scores is fundamentally flawed. Many factors beyond the control of the teacher go into how students perform. On top of that, there's the fact that standardized tests don't really demonstrate much of anything apart from how well someone teaches to a test. I suppose that might mean something if I EVER encountered a standardized test outside of high school, but that hasn't happened yet.
You can't assume that when students fail that teachers are to blame. They might be. There are absolutely bad teachers out there. It's probably why ALL union contracts have remediation language. Go figure. I love how people who like to talk about teachers unions have never actually been in one and actually looked at the contract. It's cute.
Agree so very much with all of this!
I'd hate for my teachers to be judged by my test scores....or by me in any way whatsoever. I was a high school drop-out...and before I dropped out, I skipped school. A lot. I mouthed off for no reason other than I thought it was funny, turned in almost no homework, did almost no schoolwork, and made little dot photos out of my standardized tests. I simply did not care about school in any way. Sure, I did have some bad teachers...but looking back on it, I had some great ones that no matter how hard they tried, I was too stubborn to take advantage of their help. I cringe at the thought that their career and pay is judged by students like me. Or rather...how I USED to be.0 -
If a teacher makes 75k per year
Where in the world is this? :laugh:
Apparently in Chicago...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/09/10/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-chicago-teachers-strike-in-one-post/
http://www.teacherportal.com/teacher-salaries-by-state/0 -
Georgia recently had a scandal where teachers were changing answers on standardized tests in order to meet their goals so that they would get their bonuses. Good Times!
If evaluations are too cumbersome or impossible to quantify for every condition then remove evaluations and bonus pay. Make up the difference in regular pay.0 -
Georgia recently had a scandal where teachers were changing answers on standardized tests in order to meet their goals so that they would get their bonuses. Good Times!
If evaluations are too cumbersome or impossible to quantify for every condition then remove evaluations and bonus pay. Make up the difference in regular pay.
Oh I didn't say they were impossible. I said they were complex. I think it's completely possible, but not when people keep buying into the lie that test score somehow must reflect teacher effectiveness by necessity.0 -
Georgia recently had a scandal where teachers were changing answers on standardized tests in order to meet their goals so that they would get their bonuses. Good Times!
If evaluations are too cumbersome or impossible to quantify for every condition then remove evaluations and bonus pay. Make up the difference in regular pay.
Oh yeah.. That was in the news for a while here. Because the superintendant when that happened had moved to the De Soto school district and it came out not long after she was hired.... Needless to say, I don't believe she is the superintendant of De Soto anymore.0 -
If a teacher makes 75k per year
Where in the world is this? :laugh:
Where I live too. Teachers base salary is 45K, starting out, first year, 23 years old. When I graduated in 2005, we have 4 principles each making over $100k a year for my school about about 1500 students. They make very good money here.
A lot of people in IN complain that kids are getting bad educations, considering something like 80% of students can't find the USA on a map. Kids aren't dumb because they don't have technology, it's because they think a young teacher driving a Volvo teaching kids how to scroll with 2 fingers on a touchscreen is insufficient. But then pro-education people say that more funds are necessary for ipads, computers, smartboards...How about a freaking MAP and a chalkboard?
Our governor is a bad man for cutting a bloated education budget because they are having to fire so many teachers because of lack of fund and the kids are suffering... :grumble: I'm waiting for the day for someone else to realize that the kids are suffering because the teachers unions are fighting for MORE money that should be going towards the kids and their actual education.0 -
If a teacher makes 75k per year
Where in the world is this? :laugh:
Where I live too. Teachers base salary is 45K, starting out, first year, 23 years old. When I graduated in 2005, we have 4 principles each making over $100k a year for my school about about 1500 students. They make very good money here.
A lot of people in IN complain that kids are getting bad educations, considering something like 80% of students can't find the USA on a map. Kids aren't dumb because they don't have technology, it's because they think a young teacher driving a Volvo teaching kids how to scroll with 2 fingers on a touchscreen is insufficient. But then pro-education people say that more funds are necessary for ipads, computers, smartboards...How about a freaking MAP and a chalkboard?
Our governor is a bad man for cutting a bloated education budget because they are having to fire so many teachers because of lack of fund and the kids are suffering... :grumble: I'm waiting for the day for someone else to realize that the kids are suffering because the teachers unions are fighting for MORE money that should be going towards the kids and their actual education.
If a young teacher is driving a Volvo, it's pretty certain they borrowed it from their parents.
Mrs Azdak, after earning a Master's Degree, a couple of extra certifications and with about 20 hr of Post-MA credits, and with 5 years of service, makes $65,000/year. (And the only reason she makes that much is that 3 yrs ago they doubled the health insurance premiums, so the teachers got a few extra dollars to help make the transition). Taking into account the actual hours she works, it comes to about $17/hr. And that doesn't include the $1000-$2000 she spends every year to buy books and supplies for her classroom and students.
And BTW, it's not the teachers demanding the iPads and technology. That stuff is shoved at them, usually without any input, by administrators. The teachers would be just as happy with enough books and basic supplies.0 -
Our school district is rolling out an iPad program that issues them to all the teachers and high school students... I haven't heard anything negative about it or how it goes, as this is the first school year they are doing it.... I was talking to my BFF who teaches in this district and she said she is happy about it because they will be able to have the most updated textbooks instead of having to wait ten years for the next to be evaluated and passed out.
But to be honest, our school district is also one of the top rated districts in the state... they also spend much less per student than many of the failing schools in the state.... They also weren't in the bind of hiring teachers from grant funds and then having to lay them all off again a couple years down the road like just about every district in the area and State.0 -
If a teacher makes 75k per year
Where in the world is this? :laugh:
Where I live too. Teachers base salary is 45K, starting out, first year, 23 years old. When I graduated in 2005, we have 4 principles each making over $100k a year for my school about about 1500 students. They make very good money here.
A lot of people in IN complain that kids are getting bad educations, considering something like 80% of students can't find the USA on a map. Kids aren't dumb because they don't have technology, it's because they think a young teacher driving a Volvo teaching kids how to scroll with 2 fingers on a touchscreen is insufficient. But then pro-education people say that more funds are necessary for ipads, computers, smartboards...How about a freaking MAP and a chalkboard?
Our governor is a bad man for cutting a bloated education budget because they are having to fire so many teachers because of lack of fund and the kids are suffering... :grumble: I'm waiting for the day for someone else to realize that the kids are suffering because the teachers unions are fighting for MORE money that should be going towards the kids and their actual education.
Clearly, the car a teacher owns is so very important. Do teachers who take the bus to work, whether voluntarily or involuntarily, teach better? Worse?0 -
If a teacher makes 75k per year
Where in the world is this? :laugh:
Where I live too. Teachers base salary is 45K, starting out, first year, 23 years old. When I graduated in 2005, we have 4 principles each making over $100k a year for my school about about 1500 students. They make very good money here.
A lot of people in IN complain that kids are getting bad educations, considering something like 80% of students can't find the USA on a map. Kids aren't dumb because they don't have technology, it's because they think a young teacher driving a Volvo teaching kids how to scroll with 2 fingers on a touchscreen is insufficient. But then pro-education people say that more funds are necessary for ipads, computers, smartboards...How about a freaking MAP and a chalkboard?
Our governor is a bad man for cutting a bloated education budget because they are having to fire so many teachers because of lack of fund and the kids are suffering... :grumble: I'm waiting for the day for someone else to realize that the kids are suffering because the teachers unions are fighting for MORE money that should be going towards the kids and their actual education.
Clearly, the car a teacher owns is so very important. Do teachers who take the bus to work, whether voluntarily or involuntarily, teach better? Worse?
I can't imagine why a hyper fiscal conservative would even care about what kind of car a person drives so long as they paid cash for it. People can save their money and buy whatever they want, right? Oh. Unless you want to make a fallacious judgment about what that says about their pay grade, then it's a problem.0 -
So Unions exist to protect workers and make sure everyone gets a fair shake eh?
Could not have said it better. Labor unions are dead or worse than dead, they are unpopular. No longer liked, even by the democrats it seems (thank you Rahm Emanuel for bringing that fact out of the dark mists this week). Unions are the bad guy. Okay - rest in peace.
To those dancing on union graves, two questions. Who else in this economic system advocates for the worker - low skilled, high skilled and everywhere in between? What benefits that the union coalitions achieved for workers should be willingly given back?0 -
If a teacher makes 75k per year
Where in the world is this? :laugh:
Where I live too. Teachers base salary is 45K, starting out, first year, 23 years old. When I graduated in 2005, we have 4 principles each making over $100k a year for my school about about 1500 students. They make very good money here.
A lot of people in IN complain that kids are getting bad educations, considering something like 80% of students can't find the USA on a map. Kids aren't dumb because they don't have technology, it's because they think a young teacher driving a Volvo teaching kids how to scroll with 2 fingers on a touchscreen is insufficient. But then pro-education people say that more funds are necessary for ipads, computers, smartboards...How about a freaking MAP and a chalkboard?
Our governor is a bad man for cutting a bloated education budget because they are having to fire so many teachers because of lack of fund and the kids are suffering... :grumble: I'm waiting for the day for someone else to realize that the kids are suffering because the teachers unions are fighting for MORE money that should be going towards the kids and their actual education.
Clearly, the car a teacher owns is so very important. Do teachers who take the bus to work, whether voluntarily or involuntarily, teach better? Worse?
I can't imagine why a hyper fiscal conservative would even care about what kind of car a person drives so long as they paid cash for it. People can save their money and buy whatever they want, right? Oh. Unless you want to make a fallacious judgment about what that says about their pay grade, then it's a problem.
I've had "friends" tell me that I shouldn't complain about anything, because I have a new car, so I can't be "that bad off." My car apparently tells the story of my entire life.
0 -
This is kind of an annoying topic for me because my husband is a part-time instructor at a community college. He has the same course load, does more governance than most full-timers, and has equal qualifications, but gets paid at 3/5 the rate of a full time instructor--the administration does get annoyed when you refer to it as a 3/5 compromise, by the way, but it is what it is. And thank goodness for his union or he'd be getting paid even less and have crappier benefits.
Not all teaching situations or teacher unions are the same, by any stretch.
Oh, and he has a terminal master's in his field and doesn't get paid near 75k. So yes, clearly unions are an evil blight that must be done away with.0 -
This is kind of an annoying topic for me because my husband is a part-time instructor at a community college. He has the same course load, does more governance than most full-timers, and has equal qualifications, but gets paid at 3/5 the rate of a full time instructor--the administration does get annoyed when you refer to it as a 3/5 compromise, by the way, but it is what it is. And thank goodness for his union or he'd be getting paid even less and have crappier benefits.
Not all teaching situations or teacher unions are the same, by any stretch.
Oh, and he has a terminal master's in his field and doesn't get paid near 75k. So yes, clearly unions are an evil blight that must be done away with.
Why is he considered a part-time instructor if he works full time?0 -
This is kind of an annoying topic for me because my husband is a part-time instructor at a community college. He has the same course load, does more governance than most full-timers, and has equal qualifications, but gets paid at 3/5 the rate of a full time instructor--the administration does get annoyed when you refer to it as a 3/5 compromise, by the way, but it is what it is. And thank goodness for his union or he'd be getting paid even less and have crappier benefits.
Not all teaching situations or teacher unions are the same, by any stretch.
Oh, and he has a terminal master's in his field and doesn't get paid near 75k. So yes, clearly unions are an evil blight that must be done away with.
Why is he considered a part-time instructor if he works full time?
Probably for the same reason my FIL is considered a part time psychiatrist while working over 60 hours a week, even during holidays and summer break (he works for student health at a local university).... because they don't want to pay him more, but will still push the work load on him. My FIL doesn't even get the "Christmas Ham" at the end of the year like the other full time employees do either at least not until he is a complete and utter *kitten* about it to the administration.0 -
This is kind of an annoying topic for me because my husband is a part-time instructor at a community college. He has the same course load, does more governance than most full-timers, and has equal qualifications, but gets paid at 3/5 the rate of a full time instructor--the administration does get annoyed when you refer to it as a 3/5 compromise, by the way, but it is what it is. And thank goodness for his union or he'd be getting paid even less and have crappier benefits.
Not all teaching situations or teacher unions are the same, by any stretch.
Oh, and he has a terminal master's in his field and doesn't get paid near 75k. So yes, clearly unions are an evil blight that must be done away with.
Why is he considered a part-time instructor if he works full time?
Because course load doesn't determine full-time status. I think we can safely blame the college administration for that one.0 -
This is kind of an annoying topic for me because my husband is a part-time instructor at a community college. He has the same course load, does more governance than most full-timers, and has equal qualifications, but gets paid at 3/5 the rate of a full time instructor--the administration does get annoyed when you refer to it as a 3/5 compromise, by the way, but it is what it is. And thank goodness for his union or he'd be getting paid even less and have crappier benefits.
Not all teaching situations or teacher unions are the same, by any stretch.
Oh, and he has a terminal master's in his field and doesn't get paid near 75k. So yes, clearly unions are an evil blight that must be done away with.
Why is he considered a part-time instructor if he works full time?
Probably for the same reason my FIL is considered a part time psychiatrist while working over 60 hours a week, even during holidays and summer break (he works for student health at a local university).... because they don't want to pay him more, but will still push the work load on him. My FIL doesn't even get the "Christmas Ham" at the end of the year like the other full time employees do either at least not until he is a complete and utter *kitten* about it to the administration.
I guess I am just trying to understand how that happens. I had a brief period in my life when I worked for a supermarket in the deli section. I had many years of experience working in food service and in deli's in hs/college so I wasn't green. I was used to making ~10 per hour for that type of work. Because I had to join a union they were limited to paying me 6 something per hour to start but I had scheduled 25 cent raises! In addition, since I had to join a union my hours were limited to 20ish something per week in order to keep me part time so they wouldn't have to provide me benefits. On top of that I had to provide a tithe to the union in every check. The only thing a union did for me was limit what I could earn at a crappy time in my life.
I see unions as MLMs. Great for people at the top... not so good for the little people.0 -
This is kind of an annoying topic for me because my husband is a part-time instructor at a community college. He has the same course load, does more governance than most full-timers, and has equal qualifications, but gets paid at 3/5 the rate of a full time instructor--the administration does get annoyed when you refer to it as a 3/5 compromise, by the way, but it is what it is. And thank goodness for his union or he'd be getting paid even less and have crappier benefits.
Not all teaching situations or teacher unions are the same, by any stretch.
Oh, and he has a terminal master's in his field and doesn't get paid near 75k. So yes, clearly unions are an evil blight that must be done away with.
Why is he considered a part-time instructor if he works full time?
Probably for the same reason my FIL is considered a part time psychiatrist while working over 60 hours a week, even during holidays and summer break (he works for student health at a local university).... because they don't want to pay him more, but will still push the work load on him. My FIL doesn't even get the "Christmas Ham" at the end of the year like the other full time employees do either at least not until he is a complete and utter *kitten* about it to the administration.
I guess I am just trying to understand how that happens. I had a brief period in my life when I worked for a supermarket in the deli section. I had many years of experience working in food service and in deli's in hs/college so I wasn't green. I was used to making ~10 per hour for that type of work. Because I had to join a union they were limited to paying me 6 something per hour to start but I had scheduled 25 cent raises! In addition, since I had to join a union my hours were limited to 20ish something per week in order to keep me part time so they wouldn't have to provide me benefits. On top of that I had to provide a tithe to the union in every check. The only thing a union did for me was limit what I could earn at a crappy time in my life.
I see unions as MLMs. Great for people at the top... not so good for the little people.
As I said, not all unions are the same, even if we're talking about just public sector employees. All contracts are not the same, or really all the similar. And yet people keep talking about them as if they are.
Unions bad, hulk smash. It's a little frustrating.0 -
This is kind of an annoying topic for me because my husband is a part-time instructor at a community college. He has the same course load, does more governance than most full-timers, and has equal qualifications, but gets paid at 3/5 the rate of a full time instructor--the administration does get annoyed when you refer to it as a 3/5 compromise, by the way, but it is what it is. And thank goodness for his union or he'd be getting paid even less and have crappier benefits.
Not all teaching situations or teacher unions are the same, by any stretch.
Oh, and he has a terminal master's in his field and doesn't get paid near 75k. So yes, clearly unions are an evil blight that must be done away with.
Why is he considered a part-time instructor if he works full time?
Because course load doesn't determine full-time status. I think we can safely blame the college administration for that one.
You could blame the college administration. Seems like this would be a reason you would have a union representing you. To protect you from this type of abuse.0 -
This is kind of an annoying topic for me because my husband is a part-time instructor at a community college. He has the same course load, does more governance than most full-timers, and has equal qualifications, but gets paid at 3/5 the rate of a full time instructor--the administration does get annoyed when you refer to it as a 3/5 compromise, by the way, but it is what it is. And thank goodness for his union or he'd be getting paid even less and have crappier benefits.
Not all teaching situations or teacher unions are the same, by any stretch.
Oh, and he has a terminal master's in his field and doesn't get paid near 75k. So yes, clearly unions are an evil blight that must be done away with.
Why is he considered a part-time instructor if he works full time?
Because course load doesn't determine full-time status. I think we can safely blame the college administration for that one.
You could blame the college administration. Seems like this would be a reason you would have a union representing you. To protect you from this type of abuse.
He does have union representation. He even serves as a part-timer rep for the union. If he didn't (have representation) it would be much worse. Sadly, contrary to apparent popular opinion, his union work has yet to make us fabulously wealthy, though.0 -
Like I said... and it's what I believe... Unions have their good and their bad. Yes, they can protect the workers from abuse from an employer... that part I have no problem with... But I have also seen unions (and my cousins are just as bad) where the workers were complacent and lazy and wanted everything handed to them on a silver platter... and the union reps were no better.... again, this isn't a beef with all unions... Just the ones that are just as greedy as the corporations they say they are trying to protect the workers from. I work for a city, and the Police and Fire departments both have unions (or something similar that isn't exactly a union but it works in a similar fashion)... Anyway, I have worked for the City for 4 years... we have never gotten a raise the entire time I have been here (I live in an area that has weathered the economic decline quite nicely, thankfully)... but apparently a year or two before I got here, Police and Fire both got 10% raises... to which the local paper averaged out and basically stated that "city employees" saw a 5% raise.... which was inaccurate.... Now, I'm not begrudging that Fire and Police got raises... but it would have been nice for there to not be the misconception that we all got raises, for one... and for two I don't particularly find it "fair" that police and fire all got raises, while everyone... mmm... not so much.... because they have the option of collective bargaining, where as we (the civilians) don't... it is explicitely lined out in our policy manual that (though not these exact words) if they catch wind of union talk or collective bargaining talk, we could be fired.... not that I really want to be in a union anyway... again, I come from those that were a part of the Ohio Unions back in the "hay day" and I know my grandparents aren't exactly happy with the same unions now that represented them then.0
-
If a teacher makes 75k per year
Where in the world is this? :laugh:
Where I live too. Teachers base salary is 45K, starting out, first year, 23 years old. When I graduated in 2005, we have 4 principles each making over $100k a year for my school about about 1500 students. They make very good money here.
A lot of people in IN complain that kids are getting bad educations, considering something like 80% of students can't find the USA on a map. Kids aren't dumb because they don't have technology, it's because they think a young teacher driving a Volvo teaching kids how to scroll with 2 fingers on a touchscreen is insufficient. But then pro-education people say that more funds are necessary for ipads, computers, smartboards...How about a freaking MAP and a chalkboard?
Our governor is a bad man for cutting a bloated education budget because they are having to fire so many teachers because of lack of fund and the kids are suffering... :grumble: I'm waiting for the day for someone else to realize that the kids are suffering because the teachers unions are fighting for MORE money that should be going towards the kids and their actual education.
Clearly, the car a teacher owns is so very important. Do teachers who take the bus to work, whether voluntarily or involuntarily, teach better? Worse?
Ok, bad example in a moment of passion. But still, I get tired of here OUR local teachers complain about how they make such a poor living when their salaries are published in a public database and they are making more than police, fire, nurses and other people in similar or even MORE deserving field.0 -
This is kind of an annoying topic for me because my husband is a part-time instructor at a community college. He has the same course load, does more governance than most full-timers, and has equal qualifications, but gets paid at 3/5 the rate of a full time instructor--the administration does get annoyed when you refer to it as a 3/5 compromise, by the way, but it is what it is. And thank goodness for his union or he'd be getting paid even less and have crappier benefits.
Not all teaching situations or teacher unions are the same, by any stretch.
Oh, and he has a terminal master's in his field and doesn't get paid near 75k. So yes, clearly unions are an evil blight that must be done away with.
Why is he considered a part-time instructor if he works full time?
Because course load doesn't determine full-time status. I think we can safely blame the college administration for that one.
You could blame the college administration. Seems like this would be a reason you would have a union representing you. To protect you from this type of abuse.
He does have union representation. He even serves as a part-timer rep for the union. If he didn't (have representation) it would be much worse. Sadly, contrary to apparent popular opinion, his union work has yet to make us fabulously wealthy, though.
I bet the Union boss is fabulously wealthy.
0
This discussion has been closed.