patrick.net

Vicente says

I don't know if you've noticed, but the "entire summer" is now 6-8 weeks in most areas. During which you don't get paid. Or you can choose to stretch your paycheck over 12 months for convenience. Either way it's not a "paid vacation" for teachers.
The point of furloughs is saving money during budget cuts and nothing more. It has to do with MATH, a difficult subject for many. Last year we gave you X, now we are giving you X-2 so cut on supplies or teach more students with fewer teachers so the budget balances.
As has been said elsewhere:
If teaching is such a road to the fatcat life, why aren't YOU in the applicant line.
This thread is chock full of lamebrain statements.

My sister makes over $80K a year with full benefits 12 months a year as a teacher here in Sac. Somehow she makes it stretch for 12 months and is free to get a part time job in the summer if she wants. She also gets paid vacation/holidays on top of that. Her total compensation package is $125K a year. And she gets the summer off. Maybe teachers are not going to get rich off that but the package is better than 90% of the private sector packages offered in CA.

Vicente says

Why should I bother? Whatever I say, it'll go in one ear and right out the other.
You aren't here to actually LISTEN to ANYONE.
Me, I've learned a few things on this forum. I've even admitted I'm wrong sometimes. Your type? Never.

Because maybe I am right. If I am not then prove me wrong.

marcus says

Okay, you got me. I'll respond. Some of the furlough days occur during holidays.
And yes, it's true that unions try to preserve hard won pay gains (that were achieved prior to 2008.) We're now paid less than 2008 because of the furlough days, but the salary schedule is still the same, so that in the event the economy comes back a little we won't have to fight up to those 2008 levels again. (They will just stop the furloughs)
It's a crime that those selfish teachers are hoping that maybe in 2012 or 2014 they might be able to receive their full 2008 pay again. Fucking selfish greedy teachers.
Sorry everyone, I'll try not to unignore again.

You did not answer the question. How does teachers agreeing to teach less days benefit the students who need teachers to learn in the classroom? I'm sorry that I don't sympathize with unions who are unwilling to ask members to make sacrafices. The teachers can always go teach some where else if they feel they are being mistreated by the public they have choosen to serve, can't they?

Lying trolls are going to cause some of the people that we learn from around here to leave this forum. It's tiring and annoying, even just the task of not allowing the troll's lies stand.

marcus says

Lying trolls are going to cause some of the people that we learn from around here to leave this forum. It's tiring and annoying, even just the task of not allowing the troll's lies stand.

Calling someone a "troll" doesn't make your agruments any stronger marcus. If you can not support your agruments with facts then maybe you should leave marcus. I thought you were more intelligent than that.

Vicente says

Why should I bother? Whatever I say, it'll go in one ear and right out the other.

You aren't here to actually LISTEN to ANYONE.

Me, I've learned a few things on this forum. I've even admitted I'm wrong sometimes. Your type? Never.

“Eagles are dandified vultures” - Teddy Roosevelt

Please stick to the topic instead of content-free personal attack. Even if you put in a few barbs in the middle of pointing out where you think my analysis is wrong, I'd be okay with that.

marcus says

Lying trolls are going to cause some of the people that we learn from around here to leave this forum. It's tiring and annoying, even just the task of not allowing the troll's lies stand.

Content-free name-calling is essentially admitting that you are running out of argument. If you have any thing substantive to say about my analysis, I'm all ears.

From Wikipedia

In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.[4]

What I usually mean by "troll" is specifically this part: "with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.[4] "

About 80% of the posts, and 50% of the comments from our king of the Patrick.net Trolls (Shrek) fit this description. On the topic of unions, we now seem to have a few trolls. Although it may be just one or two under various identities.

Vicente is right. These guys know nothing about education, except what they have been told on right wing talk radio. And they certainly aren't going to learn anything from me.

If readers of this forum choose to believe their lies, and stupidity, that is their choice. I can't worry about it.

Vicente says

I don't know if you've noticed, but the "entire summer" is now 6-8 weeks in most areas. During which you don't get paid. Or you can choose to stretch your paycheck over 12 months for convenience. Either way it's not a "paid vacation" for teachers.

Of course it is paid vacation. The annual pay is calculated to be comparable to a worker holding a job all those 12 months. In calculating retirement benefits, each school year is counted as a year of service, not a 3/4 year of service.

If teaching is such a road to the fatcat life, why aren't YOU in the applicant line.

For the same reason that I did not become a realtwhore in the bubble years, and I'm not becoming a banker now. I did actually volunteer teaching after-school at middle school and at community college . . . and I didn't have kids at either place. I wasn't paid in anything except for the kids' appreciations. So I know a thing or two about "giving back." It most emphatically does not involve unions.

This thread is chock full of lamebrain statements.

That's a good comment on some of what you and Marcus have written.

marcus says

Lying trolls are going to cause some of the people that we learn from around here to leave this forum. It's tiring and annoying, even just the task of not allowing the troll's lies stand.

If you can't even engage in intelligent debate and exchange of ideas, how can you be a competent teacher? as opposed to a brain-washer?

cdw7503 says

Because maybe I am right. If I am not then prove me wrong.

Easy you call summer a "vacation" for teachers. It is not, it is unpaid time off, as certain as any furlough, or part-time worker. Most teachers are not fatcatting around Barbados during the summer, they are working as lifeguards or just looking after their own kids. Summer is only a "vacation" for students who are compelled to be at school the rest of the year.

So you could say you were wrong about that.

marcus says

What I usually mean by "troll" is specifically this part: "with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.[4] "

What exactly was the intention of your posting the ridiculously cooked / renormalized graphs? To show your own lack of basic math skills comparing any two linear fucntions?

These guys know nothing about education, except what they have been told on right wing talk radio.

Except my wife was a full time teacher, and I taught on voluntary basis myself for years. On top of that, I do not listen to any right wing talk radio at all. I always leave my radio on NPR when I'm driving, and that's the only time I listen to radio. Yes, I laugh at some of their silly analyses.

Vicente says

cdw7503 says

Because maybe I am right. If I am not then prove me wrong.

Easy you call summer a "vacation" for teachers. It is not, it is unpaid time off, as certain as any furlough, or part-time worker. Most teachers are not fatcatting around Barbados during the summer, they are working as lifeguards or just looking after their own kids. Summer is only a "vacation" for students who are compelled to be at school the rest of the year.

Is this how low the standards are nowadays? They stay home look after their own kids therefore they deserve to be paid by taxpayers at $6k+ per month? What is this? A welfare program? So long as you don't go to Barbados (where I have never been either in my whole life), you can have 3 months a year vacation, getting off at 3pm the other 9 months, and retire after 50,000 hrs of life time work instead of 88,000 like most other people. No wonder there are zillions of certified teacher wannabes looking for jobs.

Here's the easy solution: let's slash the salary in half, let two new teachers in, and the existing teachers drawing double the wage had better prove themselves to be twice as good in teaching; otherwise there is a ready solution to reducing both teacher-student ratio and unemployment rate.

Teachers don't get paid for the months off. They can usually elect to have their salary spread out monthly, or only take their salary during the 8-9 months when they are working.

Besides, ever go up to a C-Suite on a Friday afternoon? It's usually quiet and nobody is around. They're all in the Hamptons or in some Vineyard getting drunk instead of working like the rest of the slobs. Getting paid to get drunk and go golfing with the same guys from their college fraternity.

Vicente says

Easy you call summer a "vacation" for teachers. It is not, it is unpaid time off, as certain as any furlough, or part-time worker. Most teachers are not fatcatting around Barbados during the summer, they are working as lifeguards or just looking after their own kids. Summer is only a "vacation" for students who are compelled to be at school the rest of the year.
So you could say you were wrong about that.

My dad was a HS teacher. He always called it summer vacation. Call it whatever you want does that really change anything?

thunderlips11 says

Teachers don't get paid for the months off. They can usually elect to have their salary spread out monthly, or only take their salary during the 8-9 months when they are working.

Then the per hour pay would be even more ridiculous. An $80/yr salary would work out to be $10k/month, only 21 work days in a month, on average 6hrs in a school day! The Monopolist School union salary is obviously set up to be a fully year salary, as most teachers do not have to find another job for summer. When calculating retirement benefits, each school year is also counted as a year, instead of 3/4 a year if it's like some of you insist that they are effectively furloughed for those months.

Besides, ever go up to a C-Suite on a Friday afternoon? It's usually quiet and nobody is around. They're all in the Hamptons or in some Vineyard getting drunk instead of working like the rest of the slobs. Getting paid to get drunk and go golfing with the same guys from their college fraternity.

Leadership and Management are not the same thing.

The Monopoly School equivalent to that would be the school district bosses. They too draw $300k+ salaries and go to vacation at the same places that you listed. The teachers however are the equivalent of line workers and average office workers. Their pay is way more than what the average private sector worker can find in a career: about 57% of the work (50k hrs vs. 88k hrs) and almost double the pay in a life time . . . all because the union holds the kids as hostage for ransom.

Compared to other industrialized nations, US teacher pay is solidly in the median.

I agree about the Superintendents. There is entirely too many functionaries.

Also, the schools are too damn big. Whoever had the brilliant idea of packing 1000-2000 hormone-enthused teenagers into one building was clearly a crack head, or suffering from late 19th century gigantism/Taylorism, but I repeat myself.

Small schools and "small learning communities" have been one of the big attempted reforms. There are some benefits, the big one being that everyone knows everyone.

The upside to the huge schools is more diverse course offerings. Plenty of honors classes and AP course in every subject. So the sky is the limit as to what kids can get out of it if they are willing to apply themselves.

A tiny little charter school isn't going to be able to accommodate the really bright kids. They will have to go to local colleges to get many of the classes equivalent to the AP classes offered at many of the bigger public schools.

Ultimately, I believe that class sizes are going to make a bigger difference than overall "small schools" (ie small schools with huge class sizes).

Troy says

Cook County resident says

Just to be clear, he said this happened in the late 60s.

We haven't had it that good since:

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/UNRATENSA

There were ~2M males turning 18 each year in the 1960s, and we were drafting a big chunk of them, too.

Baby boom was aged 6 to 21 in 1968. Massive demand generation. Credit was only started getting rolling:

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?g=1xQ

I think the unions didn't react well to the demographic changes between the 60s and the 80s. Getting a job was much easier in the 60s.

Another illustration by anecdote:

My brother was working construction and joined the union around 1980. At that time, there was a long slowdown of construction work. There were plenty of second half baby boomers ready to work but the union sent most of the jobs to the guys with seniority. Senior guys who got work easy enough in the 50s and 60s and were still getting work easy enough during the slowdown.

For a while, he's spending his days watching daytime TV and worrying about his bills, including his union dues. So he gives up on the union, gets a non union job in manufacturing and has been working steadily for over 25 years.

So, if his union had acted less like an old boy's network in times of a labor surplus, maybe they'd have more boys around today.

thunderlips11 says

Also, the schools are too damn big. Whoever had the brilliant idea of packing 1000-2000 hormone-enthused teenagers into one building was clearly a crack head, or suffering from late 19th century gigantism/Taylorism, but I repeat myself.

Almost 4000 students there when I was in High School. About 45% white -- mostly working class kids with some higher income, about 45% black -- mostly kids from two parent homes with a job holder and a significant number of inner city kids who were improperly registered by relatives who didn't want their kids in the inner city schools. The balance was mostly second generation Hispanic.

I learned alot there. One of the things I learned is that the kids mostly reflected their upbringing and family's expectations. Kids were smart or not so smart, or they might have had wonderful teachers or not, but whatever, they were likely to end up much like their families and neighbors.

It blows my mind that Math and Science teachers are not payed at a premium.