will be a nation of hollowed out people.

Here, on Long Island, teachers make more per hour than other professions (such as engineering).

I'm curious to know. Do they make more than doctors, lawyers?

Oops, answered my own question, starting teaching salary is $48,000. Given the cost of living, that's not much. Starting salary for an engineer on Long Island, roughly $100,000. Amazing the research you can do on the internet, fast too.

So why are you pushing this blatant bullshit out there?

Plus all the benefits.

How long has that teacher been teaching? And yes, it is for 170 days per year, probably more like 174. But really, teachers work far much more than that. Most teachers work not only the school days, which are somewhere between ten and twelve hours long, but also weekends, when they play catch up with grading, lesson planning, IEP's, various reports and on, and on. During the summer, when they are supposedly on vacation, teachers start planning for next year, collaborate with colleagues, attend various conventions, engage in continuing education, get their rooms broke down, then set them back up again, deal with new texts, on and on. Yeah, it's not a twelve hour day, seven days a week, but it certainly isn't a vacation.

And the benefits, oh my, the benefits. A decent pension plan, a decent health care plan, gee, those benefits that professionals and non-professionals all used to have. But since others have had those benefits stripped away, you want to take that away from teachers as well. My, my. . .

Currently we are ranked 38th in the world in terms of education. You want to be number one? Of course you do. Then we need to start following the example of those countries that are top rated, places like Finland and Japan. You know what they pay their teachers? High five, low six figure salaries for beginning teachers, with the pay going up from there for experienced teachers. They also give their teachers respect, and most importantly, they put people who've had educating experience in charge of making education decisions. Not businessmen, or financial analysts, not religious fundies or others with an ax to grind, but educators.

Oh, and for every teacher that has a salary of $100,000 or more in this country, there's ten who are getting paid twenty to thirty thousand. Anecdotal evidence doesn't equal truth.

with similar levels of experience.

looks like average teacher in Suffolk county makes about 70k with 14 years of experience.

looks like average teacher in Nassau county makes about 75k with 13 years of experience.

but hey, the important thing is to have our children taught by the lowest bidder.

they will thank us later.

one teacher I checked out in Suffolk county, the one that was NOT a good teacher, was making around 110k for ten years experience. My friend's son's kindergarten teacher is the same. But you know averages, the new hires are low and the older ones are much higher, so I can understand getting 70k as an average. BTW, our superintendent gets $275k.

IF you figure out an hourly rate, they do make more than most engineers, who don't come out of school making 100k, unless they're very very lucky. I know this because I was in that business and know from experience. I was a manager and knew salaries.

I'm not saying that teachers don't deserve a living wage here on LI, but our property taxes are thru the roof and nearly everyone has it in their mind to leave at some point. It's really sad to see so many friends leave.

For a 1700 sq ft house, my property taxes are 10k, and I don't even live in one of the sought after districts. Every year it goes up around $500. At this rate, it will be 20k in no time. That's when we may have to just leave as well.

a few anecdotal examples aren't average.

got it?

well, you might want to get it before you regale us with your statistical abilities.

I don't understand your point.

What average are you talking about? Teachers or engineers?

And can't we have a discussion without getting emotional?

and offered anecdotal examples of ONE teacher, probably gotten secondhand, and an administrator --which is not actually a teacher.

and you want to be taken seriously in this thread?

this isn't about emotion, it's about you arguing honestly and credibly --which you are not.

and i have wasted my time arguing with your nonsense, so the least i can do is point it out for others who don't want to wade through your nonsense themselves.

I am suffering from a head cold, so can you point out where I disagreed on averages? I actually thought I agreed....

It all depends on where you live.

Here's an article that cites averages in one school district in Suffolk county
http://standardli.com/2012/01/five-towns-teachers-average-111691-annual-salary/


And, just so I'm clear, I NEVER said that I'm against what teachers here make, I'm just saying how it affects the area in regard to our taxes. If the private sector can rise up, ideally, then there's no problem. As it is today, it's really not sustainable. I'm just stating a fact. People are leaving solely due to property taxes.

That can make a big difference if your assumptions are wrong.

coastal engineering, transportation, enviromental, urban engineering, water

The job category was listed as "civil engineer". It didn't break it down any further. But it does show that yes, teachers make less than other professionals, which is what I was originally responding to.

True. And that's a shame because they often have to work a few jobs and that is detrimental to the kids. I guess I should have been more clear and said tenured teachers.


I don't have the answers. I have kids who go to school and I want what's best for them as well as everyone else. With that said, our property taxes are just too high. Eventually we'll have to move.

i'm pretty sure i'm not going to like an answer which says that teachers work by the "hour".

but let's give it a shot anyway.

Outside of teaching, historically gov jobs were lower paid than private industry where there were truly equivalent work. As the economy has tanked, private salaries went down and gov ones remained stable. Additionally there is retirement. Gov retirement plans are still heavily defined benefit, vice the defined contribution that is the norm in private industry, and not subject to stock market rises and declines. IMO today gov employees are probably better paid in equivalent jobs than the private sector, previously they were not.

Teaching is another matter. Private school teachers have never had the pay or benefits public school teachers have successfully bargained for in many areas.

There are also any number of jobs that are inherently government, so comparisons to private industry is not possible, including public safety.

I can't believe the number of people who are upset about inflated teaching salaries. Walker is running on a divide and conquer tactic right now in Wisconsin. In most states, state employees' salaries are public record, and often they're online. I can see what teachers are making, and I can say that they're not overpaid.

Now as for police officers that get to retire after 20 years of service and spend the last 2-3 years working so much overtime in order to pad their pensions, I can understand the public outcry there.

for decades, private industry promoted itself by what was once termed "fringe benefits", basically providing full company-paid pensions, vacation time, "sick periods", and a full range of health benefits paid for by the company (i.e., no co-pays). Meanwhile, public employees always contributed to pension or healthcare. When the private sector saw that, they started their current greed mode, phasing in similar employee-contributions.

It's basically been a race to the bottom since.

I guess I should try to do that then.

Those ten-twelve hour school days, when teachers take home work from school and are up until midnight with it.

Then there are the weekends, where most teachers put in six to eight hours each day playing catch up from the previous week, and getting ready for the next one.

But wait, they get holidays to, just like most professionals. A Monday here, a Friday there. Yes, yes, teachers get a couple of weeks holiday at Christmas, a week of spring break, during which they generally spend three quarters of it working ahead or playing catch up, or attending meetings, oh boy!

But what about summer you say, well what about summer. Sure, they're not in the classroom, well, not very much, a couple of weeks before school starts and after it ends. But that time in between? Filled with continuing ed, meeting with parents, working with colleagues, planning for the next year, grading all those wonderful standardized tests, writing reports, the work really is endless. They just don't get paid for it.

And those benefits, oh my, those "luxurious" benefits. A decent pension plan, a decent health care plan, my state even has a campground that is teachers only, those bastards. All those benefits that used to be enjoyed by professionals and non-professionals alike that corporations have taken away. And now you, in a fit of jealousy, want to take away from teachers. My, my. . . As far as tenure goes, all tenure does is insure the teacher a fair hearing before they are terminated. That teacher can still be fired, still be fucked with if the administration wants to fuck with them. Ooo, what a benefit.

It is obvious that you have no idea what teachers do, what teaching is like. You just see the superficial aspects, and believe the RW spin. I suggest that if you think that teaching is so cushy, you give it a try. Just remember, the job is so cushy that most teachers stay in teaching for *gasp* five whole years before fleeing the profession.

Who's the "you" in your rant?

You will see that I'm replying to Far Center. Please, do try to keep up.

Please, do try to limit the belittling "keep up" comments. It's rude.

Hadn't noticed that feature. Thanks.

But I get a bit touchy when posters refer to a post of mine as a rant. Also, you've been around nearly three years now, you should have the basics down by now

I, obviously, don't have the basics down on DU as you've pointed out. I don't appreciate being publicly humiliated for my ignorance, but I understand it's par for the course here. Well this is about as much as this unwelcoming place that I can handle for today.

Toodles.

not flamebait. I grew up with two teachers in the house. Both have been retired over 10 years, so I am not as familiar with the current environment.

The weeknight work and the weekend work. Grading, lesson plans, etc. How much of that is done on computers vs. by hand now? Is there an integrated system provided by the district? Are you working on your own computer, or one provided by the school?

The reason I ask is that your last paragraph is spot on (except it's not a RW talking point - it's bi-partisan). And I think one of the reasons that it is getting harder and harder for teachers to practice their craft is because our schools are in the dark ages from a tech standpoint. Name me one profession where the office environment looks pretty much like it did 20 years ago other than teaching.

Teacher salaries are not going to be the downfall of education. It's that schools and districts are so far behind the curve as far as tech adoption - and it is only going to get worse.

And most districts that I know of, the actual grading is still done by hand. It has to be, because if you're grading a report, a presentation, anything other than a standardized bubble test, you have to have a human brain interpreting the results and evaluating the result.

Grades are indeed entered into a computer, and whose computer that you're working on depends on where you are. If you're at home, you upload the grades to the school server on your own computer. If you're at the school, then you use the school's computer. However many teachers simply use their own laptop both at home and at the school, because it simplifies their organization by having all the material on one computer, and the fact that in many cases school computers are out of date, ten years old or older.

But grades are also entered by hand into one of those old fashioned gradebooks. This is done for a number of reasons. Primarily it is done as backup, since school computer systems are notorious far crashing, getting bugs, so on and so forth. The gradebook is still the teacher's essential companion, the backup of all backups. If a fire broke out at the school, then all those computerized grades are lost, but the gradebook survives because it is with the teacher.

Tech has its advantages, but schools are still trying to figure out where to apply them. Some are going completely digital, with each student sitting at a computer. But the problem is, computers aren't the be all and end all of teaching, and in some cases computers are a hindrance and drag on teaching. We're still muddling through that question, and unfortunately by the time we figure it out, technology has leaped ahead and we have another tech problem to solve.

How about lesson plans, etc?

The issues you highlighted are gigantic. Think about it. Any company with an annual income similar to a school district would have multiple redundancies to avoid any such issues. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

And the interesting question I have for teachers - since most are generally not working in another office environment - do they really have any idea how much other workplaces have changed? Superintendents and districts have put teachers in a TERRIBLE position. Teach a generation where tech is involved in almost every aspect of their daily life in a way that is basically the same for the last (insert number of years here). I would guess a classroom today looks much the same as when I was in school in the days of disco. At least the ones I have seen are.

The one thing that hasn't changed? 9 times out of 10 there is a well qualified, smart, and caring teacher up in front of the class. And that's the teacher's card in this whole mess. Nobody is better at teaching than a good veteran teacher. We need to give you the environment to do it. But unfortunately that's not in the future through public funds. It would cost an enormous amount of money.

I don't think kids should be in front of computers all day either - recipe for disaster. And probably up until 3rd or 4th grade should probably never see one in a class. But after that - I almost think it's impossible to ask todays kids to be all books and paper. Its not in their nature. Heck we've already dropped cursive writing.

365 - 102 weekends - 15 vacation - 8 holidays = 238.

How much teachers work beyond an 8 hour day varies a lot with the teacher and their teaching role. But the ones that I know, including specifically the one > $100 K, are not putting in over 50 hours per week when school is in session. Their class hours are much shorter than that, and they complete most work in an 8 hour day.

"As reported by the Wall Street Journal and according to a 2008 report from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), American primary-school educators spend 1,913 hours working a year including hours teachers spend on work at home and outside of the classroom. Data from a Labor Department survey that same year showed that the average full-time employee in the United States worked 1,932 hours spread over 48 weeks. This statistic shows that teachers work about the same number of hours as the average worker in the United States."
http://americansocietytoday.blogspot.com/2011/06/teachers-work-same-number-of-hours-as.html

What you observe in the teachers you know isn't applicable to the profession as a whole.

I don't know of any teachers who've worn pagers and were on call 24X7, for example. There are plenty of IT and engineering employees who do.

Every time I've shown you to be in error, you keep moving the goalposts, why is that?

There is no compensation for calling in or going in nights and weekends.

I've shown you that teachers work just as many hours as other workers, but now you're moving the goal posts to being on call 24/7.

I've worked a number of jobs where I was on call 24/7, and the compensation was either hourly, or if not specially broken out, worked into the overall compensation package via pay or time off.

Frankly I think that you're trying to compare apples to oranges here, teacher work hours/compensation vs on call staff work hours/compensation. Why is that?

Salaried full time employees often work beyond 40 hours per week. 238 days x 8 hours / day would be 1904 hours / year, which would appear to be characteristic of full time hourly paid employees.

An engineer has to be constantly learning, working well past an eight hour day. If there's a problem, as there often is, you stay and work until it's taken care of. In fact, the company my husband works for had a problem with a product, and for memorial day weekend and all the engineers had to work thru it. This is also after working three weeks around the clock (due to this problem).

They also have to take trips that can be an entire week (with no OT pay).

I know I'm only going by my small world experience, but I'm sure that what I see is the norm in this business.

Oh, and often your compensation is a pink slip. I can't tell you how many times we held our breath waiting for the ax to fall.

quality?

bah. these are children we're talking about.

they are just kids, they don't know nothing yet, how smart does a teacher really need to be?

The question is too vague. Subscribing to such a vague question forwards the GOP agenda. What private sector jobs are we considering to be equivalent to teaching jobs, policing jobs, and other service jobs? In what areas of the country are we making the comparison? How are we defining what the worker "makes?" Per hour? Per year? Per time spent actually working? How do we compare dissimilar benefit packages, seniority rewards, and other benefits that may not translate specifically into dollars in the pocket? Lastly, do we include intangible compensation such as job satisfaction, respect, security, or are those not part of the "pay" for the work?

I'm all for simplification of questions when it clarifies an issue. This question does not do that.

-- Mal

The rest of your post wasn't AS offensive; so, I'll respond to clarify.

If you read my OP, I talk about a teacher friend with 10 years of tenure at a high school. I also have a four year degree, but was working at a job that "required" a bachelor's, but many people with HS diplomas were doing the job. I was making more than the teacher. My health insurance benefits were comparable at that time -- low deductible, low co-pays. He was getting more days off, obviously, but working more than 40 hours a week during the school year. I think, at that time, he was making a bit less than $35K a year.

You really need not respond if you continue with your patronizing tone. You'll obviously always be smarter than me. I'm sure that should be enough for you today. Happy Friday.

You pose a question, you supply an anectdote. The question is a general one; the anectdote, I presumed, was background to why you ask the question. I objected to your methodology: I believe the question is too vague.

You're offended because I say that too-vague questions forward the GOP agenda? The GOP are masters at dumbing-down complex questions to where they polarizing issues. I'm guessing that you are drawing the implication that I am accusing you of intentionally forwarding said agenda. It's a fair inference, but it happens not to be the case. What bothers me is that so often those who oppose the GOP's agenda unconsciously reinforce it by the way in which they cast their questions. We are so flooded with media talking points that it sometimes takes a real effort to not define a question in the opposition's terms. A good example of this is how even many Democrats have started to refer to Social Security as an "entitlement."

By asking the question "Do public sector workers really make more than private sector workers," you validate the underlying assumption that they really are overpaid, and thus validate the talking point that they are plundering the public purse. Remember, a surprising number of people don't read beyond the headline -- someone reading your post might say "Hey, look, even the democrats think teachers are overpaid." And that is why I objected to the question.

And a happy Friday to you, too.

-- Mal

I don't come to a progressive board to be told that I'm "forwarding the GOP agenda". Think of the words you used to frame your response. Although you're now back tracking and saying that you're not accusing of me forwarding a GOPer agenda, I don't believe. You're now inferring that I'm forwarding a divide & conquer, anti-union agenda subconsciously. Good grief.

I've been on DU for over ten years, mostly as a lurker. I've been brow-beat over semantics numerous times. I don't know you. You may just be well-meaning, yet tactless. Or you may be trying to bully me. I don't care. You're concerns are noted.

I am not backtracking at all. If I had intended to say you are intentionally forwarding the GOP agenda, I would have said so in just so many words. Please file my objection with my concerns, and bonne chance to you.

-- Mal

Ph.D. scientists, for example, can make a lot more in the private sector than working for the government with a few exceptions, such as Senior Executive Service.

Federal workers were behind the private sector in pay and benefits. In fact, Federal pay had always lagged behind the private sector.
Now, it is the other way around and the Republicans are working to lower the pay and benefits of the now "over paid" Federal workers. That is not the way for an economic recovery.
How are we supposed to finance our wars of aggression if our economy collapses? Maintain our "Defense" budget that is larger than the rest of the world combined? Ain'ta gonna happen if we don't have an economy to support it. The problem here, is if we collapse, the rest of the world will also. A hostile takeover of us, by one or more countries may be the best chance of survivable, if we aren't careful.

public spending? You're exactly right. Defense contractors are going to lose their largest client. The rich aren't payment more in taxes, and the income of everyone else is shrinking. Where will the taxes come from when the ones who have money to be taxed are off-shoring their earnings? You can't get blood out of a turnip.

For example: a friend just got a state job paying $29,500. The private market rate for the position is $37,900 (they list that info in the job description). Yes, the benefits are good, but that is the only real advantage.

removal of collective bargaining rights are teachers. When I explain to anyone, even Republicans, that Walker thinks teachers make too much, they're dumbfounded, incredulous, and skeptical -- to say the least.

According to some here, I guess public school teachers are paid rather well in NYC??? I dunno. Teachers aren't getting rich in the Midwest.

With a few exceptions, like a schools superintendent does make as much as some upper level incomes from private sectors. But only at the bottom of upper class. 150k tops. The only others are SENATORS and our POTUS. Anyone know what the SCOTUS yearly salary is?

A friend of mine was sitting at a bar with her dad watching a football game. Her father works for the Post Office. A gal started talking to them, and asked what they did for a living. When friend's dad said he worked for the post office, the gal's demeanor changed. She started talking about the "great pension" he would get at taxpayer's expense. I guess her father was very nice, and said "Yes, if you think $800.00 a month is great".

Friend said she wanted to lay into the lady for being so rude.

Wow, I cannot stand it when people pretend you are getting something you did not work for! Grrrr....that would have pissed me off bad. I probably would have said something hateful.

I've lived in the Midwest all my life. As the years have progressed, I just can't believe how rude and offensive people have become.

The Repugs are pushing an agenda to paint public employees as overpaid and under worked. I'm tired of this RW lying propaganda, and it doesn't feel as if the Left is combating the lies.

Not that I should, but that I could.

They proved to be sadly, vastly mistaken.

And she is not earning a big salary. She is studying for her master's degree, which will bring her a whopping extra $3,000 a year. I think a master's should be worth more than that.

And her union should have collective bargaining rights.

or a greeter at WalMart. But not as well as a senior manager at a private sector environmental firm.

It was apparent to me that even the lowest paid public sector workers were on par with those in the private sector.