This is kinda true. But it's not just greed. You can't outdo unions because of the market they're in. Their existence depends on "more" always. It's not very likely that unions would die just because employers pay more. Unions would still try to outdo that more with more more. And as I've said, it's not practical with the current system just to pay them more. And that's why, if I were president of the universe, I would ban unions from public institutions, because the payers of salaries, the tax payers, are not represented in that negotiation. It should be illegal. But I digress. Teachers don't get paid more because people are taxed enough already, and school systems want to/have to spend money other things like walnut lined walls in administrator's offices, and meeting the federal unfunded mandates like the standards of "free appropriate public education", and defending against lawsuits for not meeting often unrealistic standards.
-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Go Red for Ed(ucation)!
- Thread starter ATOMonkey
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
This is kinda true. But it's not just greed. You can't outdo unions because of the market they're in. Their existence depends on "more" always. It's not very likely that unions would die just because employers pay more. Unions would still try to outdo that more with more more. And as I've said, it's not practical with the current system just to pay them more. And that's why, if I were president of the universe, I would ban unions from public institutions, because the payers of salaries, the tax payers, are not represented in that negotiation. It should be illegal. But I digress. Teachers don't get paid more because people are taxed enough already, and school systems want to/have to spend money other things like walnut lined walls in administrator's offices, and meeting the federal unfunded mandates like the standards of "free appropriate public education", and defending against lawsuits for not meeting often unrealistic standards.
So let me see if I have this right. Average work week is 5 days/week and we'll say average vacation is set at 2 weeks/yr. leaving a total of 250 days (50x5)
Teacher 50k/yr
185 days work=$270/day
Unpaid leave, time off, vacation, whatever you want to call it = 65 days (250-185=65) or 13 weeks not counting the aforementioned 2wks standard.
50k/yr = $961.54/wk
Regular Job 50k/yr
250 days work= $200/day
Unpaid leave, time off, vacation, whatever you want to call it=0 days (250-250=0) or no extra time off except or the aformentioned 2 wks standard.
50k/yr=$961.54/wk
So unless I'm missing something a person with a regular job is lucky to find out he only has to work an extra 65 days to keep up with a teacher who is underpaid for their service. I wonder what other things I could be doing with all of the extra time, but lets be clear that time off is UNPAID !
Why's that seem so difficult? If we were talking about teachers making 100k and their pensions bankrupting the state (Illinois) then you'd hear me barking on the other side of the debate. As it stands now we are in no danger of that.
Saying a 45k starting salary seems reasonable for teachers, if we are paying them well and they still feel forced to join their union then we'll cross that bridge when we come to it. As it stands now they feel forced into the union as that's the only way they are even getting what they do. They dislike unions protecting incompetent teachers as much as anyone else.
So let me see if I have this right. Average work week is 5 days/week and we'll say average vacation is set at 2 weeks/yr. leaving a total of 250 days (50x5)
Teacher 50k/yr
185 days work=$270/day
Unpaid leave, time off, vacation, whatever you want to call it = 65 days (250-185=65) or 13 weeks not counting the aforementioned 2wks standard.
50k/yr = $961.54/wk
Regular Job 50k/yr
250 days work= $200/day
Unpaid leave, time off, vacation, whatever you want to call it=0 days (250-250=0) or no extra time off except or the aformentioned 2 wks standard.
50k/yr=$961.54/wk
So unless I'm missing something a person with a regular job is lucky to find out he only has to work an extra 65 days to keep up with a teacher who is underpaid for their service. I wonder what other things I could be doing with all of the extra time, but lets be clear that time off is UNPAID !
Average starting teacher salary is 35k in Indiana
His post was in reply to Coaches. The average teacher salary is indeed ~50K/year in Indiana. He wasn't necessarily talking about starting salary for a teacher. So comparing apples to apples, the numbers say pretty much what they say.
This is where we begin to disagree. I am not in favor of arbitrarily setting teacher pay higher. I'd rather let a truly free market figure that out, but we're talking about public school here, where consumers don't have a direct decision in the transaction. Our decision possibilities are few: which board member to vote for and yes or no on whether to increase my property tax. So making up arbitrary numbers is not practical. We have to live within the world we have. It's a closed loop system. If you don't like the way the world works currently, we have to change that world to something that works the way we want it to. And the world as a closed loop system, is a lot more complicated than just picking one parameter, like teacher pay, to control on.
For example, what I said about the IDEA Act. We have parents who insist on "significant progress" for their special needs kids, and that costs orders of magnitude more than teaching one traditional student. On one hand, these parents support spending more money to give teachers more money. And they support spending more money to ensure their kids have "significant progress". But then when the referendum comes around they vote no. Keeping expenses equal with revenue is the thing to control on. Something has to give. Taking administrator's walnut lined walls helps just a tiny bit. The thing that gives has to be significant enough to offset the teacher pay.
You don't want an 'arbitrary' number, 35k is enough to you? You don't have an opinion of whether 35k is enough? 35k is enough if they can find anyone willing to do the job for 35k? You're introducing vagueness for some reason where im fine talking specifics. We've establish public education is inherently not a free market.
I dont understand this attitude that because we dont make the decisions we shouldn't throw out numbers. That and I was responding to someone who wanted specific numbers.
Also why do we keep saying it's a zero sum game between taxes and teacher salary, I'm saying we take money from other places the state spends it and put it in education, along with things at the local level like getting rid of iPads for 4th graders and other reforms that are needed.
So let me see if I have this right. Average work week is 5 days/week and we'll say average vacation is set at 2 weeks/yr. leaving a total of 250 days (50x5)
Teacher 50k/yr
185 days work=$270/day
Unpaid leave, time off, vacation, whatever you want to call it = 65 days (250-185=65) or 13 weeks not counting the aforementioned 2wks standard.
50k/yr = $961.54/wk
Regular Job 50k/yr
250 days work= $200/day
Unpaid leave, time off, vacation, whatever you want to call it=0 days (250-250=0) or no extra time off except or the aformentioned 2 wks standard.
50k/yr=$961.54/wk
So unless I'm missing something a person with a regular job is lucky to find out he only has to work an extra 65 days to keep up with a teacher who is underpaid for their service. I wonder what other things I could be doing with all of the extra time, but lets be clear that time off is UNPAID !
Does the regular person have to have a college degree? Do they have to have two college degrees to do the job as I do? Do they have to have a clear criminal record? Do they have to have their driving record check in order to drive some kids on a field trip or athletic event? Do they have to be certified in CPR? Do they have to report child abuse if they see signs or face criminal charges? Does the other job get judged based on the performance of teenagers of even younger children?
In 1995 when I started in my current job I was paid $29,700 per year with a 4 year degree. A friend of mine with a high school diploma with earned $69,000 that year. He was older and in a good job so not apples to apples. He answered no to all of the questions posed above. I answered yes to all of them.
So of us teacher are paid what we are worth. Some are not. People do not go into this job because it pays very little for a long time and it is hard work despite the time off.
Anyone who thinks it is an easy job just come and try it for awhile. But go through the process to be allowed to try first.
I encourage anyone who asks to go do a different line of work. If you have the brains and talent to be a good teacher you should go do something different and get paid for that talent and hard work. Both of my kids have been told from day 1 that they will not waste their time in education.
I do not think taxes need to go higher to fix this issue. I think school should manage their resources better.
Hatin Since 87
Bacon Hater
You keep using 35k like that’s the average pay. It’s their starting pay. I’m willing to bet that’s close to, if not more, than a lot of people started their career at. More experience, more pay. Pretty basic. 50k a year average for 180 days of work isn’t horrible. It isn’t outstanding, but according to the BLS average American income is $48,685.
Clark & Addison
Plinker
Well said Coach.
It is a zero sum game. It doesn't matter where the money comes from, if you spend more on x, there's less money for y. An exception would be if funding for one doesn't come from the same pot as the funding for the other. But it's not that way. And I'm not sure it should be that way.
It gets back to what I said before about priorities. I'll go ahead and say the obvious, if they're not getting paid what you think they should, it's not a priority to enough people, or the right people. You think that teachers should be paid $45K starting pay. Okay. Noted. Now what? Teacher pay seems to be up there pretty far with you. It's just not a priority for everyone else and you're wondering why. And while I think teachers probably aren't making as much as they're worth, I really don't know what they should be paid.
The average person with a master's degree in Indiana is ~$75K/year. Likely, that average is brought down by teachers because they make far less than that. I think the job is undervalued. But it's that way for the reasons I've posted previously. And that's not going to change unless some things change:
- We could vote to give school districts more money through approving tax increases.
- We could change the way we fund schools, or at least the way we fund teacher's pay. Perhaps push teacher's pay up to the state level, but that's still going to require some kind of increase.
- We could change school spending priorities. At the federal level, maybe we should rethink the unfunded mandate of the IDEA Act. Maybe administrators don't need walnut lined walls and premium furnishings in her office. Could probably fire all the "diversity officers" and the savings would likely be more than the sum of their compensation.
Experience is valuable, but it's not everything. Experience should account for a lesser portion of their pay increases than performance. It's really easy to tell who the good teachers are and who the bad teachers are. One doesn't necessarily have that much to do with the other. A ****ty teacher can be ****ty from day one through retirement, where experience hasn't really made an impact on performance. On the other hand, a really good teacher who starts out good from day one will only get better, because each year that teacher is looking to make incremental improvements in their game.
Hatin Since 87
Bacon Hater
I’m not saying teachers shouldn’t make more than they do. I’m just saying it isn’t like they’re poor, in comparison to the average U.S. citizens income they’re a smidge higher. I would also point out that the salary of teaching is pretty well known, so if you’re willing to pay for schooling to make that salary, well, I think you know where I’m going...
As was already said numerous times tho, I’m all for paying teachers more, by cutting the overhead costs in schools, not by me paying more taxes. Or, we can cut food stamps and welfare and give teachers and police/firefighters the share we cut from that.
Edited to add: I also agree with the experience statement. Usually tho, experience pays more. But, I think we’ve all worked with someone that has years of experience, and their performance is mediocre at best.
As was already said numerous times tho, I’m all for paying teachers more, by cutting the overhead costs in schools, not by me paying more taxes. Or, we can cut food stamps and welfare and give teachers and police/firefighters the share we cut from that.
Edited to add: I also agree with the experience statement. Usually tho, experience pays more. But, I think we’ve all worked with someone that has years of experience, and their performance is mediocre at best.
Yawn. The engineers I know all say the CEO makes too much compared to engineers. They recognize the problems.
Of course I'm joking, but there is some truth to that. Individual contributors tend to think people in leadership roles are overpaid. And a lot of them are. As a practical matter, administrators' pay is not gonna change. And getting back to the priority issue, the most likely thing that's changeable is the thing that has the least possible number of people who could oppose it. Bumping the funding to state level? Not popular, not in Indiana. Tax increases? Not gonna happen. Reducing admin's pay? Probably not.
It's not a zero sum between teacher salaries and taxes, it's a zero sum between teachers salaries, taxes and other state expenditures, I'm saying don't pay for a new swine barn and use the money for teacher salaries.
Also your argument seems to be that it is what it is so that's how it should be. Explaining to me why teachers get paid what they do doesn't have any bearing on what we should be paying them.
Last edited:
Maybe I misunderstood your objection, but it seemed like you were saying it’s not a zero sum game. You’re really not saying anything different from what I said. You have a pot of money. The spending of that money is divided among competing interests. Schools. Pig barns. Whatever. You spend more on one, there is less for the others. I didn’t say the zero sum is between teacher salaries and taxes. The taxes are the pot of money. If you want more money for teachers, priorities must change.
My argument isn’t how you’re characterizing it. I’m not making a SHOOLD argument. I’m making an IS argument. I’m telling you how it is, and what it would take to change it, and that it’s not as simple as just not spending money on pig barns. There are competing factions for the limited pot. They all have different priorities.
You think “we” should just raise the starting salary to $45K, just for a number to throw out there. How will you pay for that? The pig barn fans have as much right to their priorities as you do. This gets back to what I said before. The fewer factions there are to say no, the thing you want to do tends to be more likely to be doable. I think Coach is right, that it’s not so much that the school budget has to be increased, it’s more that the school budget needs to be reprioritized.
Part of that might be getting rid of GWB’s no child left behind bull****. It was ****ing retarded. Get rid of unfunded mandates from the Feds, like the “significant progress” standard of the IDEA act, because it violates the principle of diminishing returns.
Maybe we can talk about 4th graders and iPads. Although I would be one of the factions against getting rid of technology in schools though. But, I do think it’s being done irresponsibly. It seems to me that there isn’t a plan to use technology as a tool. It seems more like they’re using it simply because they think they’re supposed to. They’re using it for the sake of using it. Technology could help fewer teachers teach more kids. It does not appear to me that this is what they’re doing with it. Giving 4th graders iPads should serve a purpose which provides a value greater than the cost. Is it making education more efficient? Not the way I’ve seen them used around here.
33 years ago when I started teaching I knew what the job was and the salary schedule was. 10 years ago I did not know I would go this long without a raise and near doubling my insurance costs with tripling the out of pocket costs of insurance. Non educators dictating education mandates has increased tenfold. This debacle planned at Indy is less about money than it is to get legislature's fingers out of the mandated tests. You know and I know legislature pockets get $$$$ for picking one test format over another. We are told of new mandates and given dates to comply without warnings or ability to react/act. Two years ago legislature decided all students going for general diplomas wouldn't count as diplomas! ? ! Thus our school's graduation rate went from 93% to 40 something. Now they have overturned that decision BUT our school is being visited and on a program due to our low graduation rate! What??? So a lot of it is just bull**** from Indy towards student populations via testing.
Dollars and days, you all went to school so you are experts on teaching/teachers and schools so I won't go into that debate.
My school has cancelled for the 19th due to not enough subs to cover teachers putting in for leave. Me, I'll be at home cutting and splitting firewood or hauling manure. I will be at school the day they require us to be there to make up for this cancelled day.
Coach is very articulate and I agree with his post.
Dollars and days, you all went to school so you are experts on teaching/teachers and schools so I won't go into that debate.
My school has cancelled for the 19th due to not enough subs to cover teachers putting in for leave. Me, I'll be at home cutting and splitting firewood or hauling manure. I will be at school the day they require us to be there to make up for this cancelled day.
Coach is very articulate and I agree with his post.
Site Supporter
Members online
- LeverGunFan
- joncon
- nj4020
- Mongo59
- cobber
- tomcat13
- Matt 22
- wagyu52
- RustyHornet
- Wolfhound
- Kirk Freeman
- spencer rifle
- 85Cosmo
- gvbcraig
- rroeb260
- opus1776
- Mgderf
- Gandalf
- ben142266
- M1 carbine dad
- krvincen
- profjeremy
- Tradesylver
- dweezil
- chezuki
- Malware
- Maverick
- xwing
- Fireman610
- henry0reilly
- dmeadlo
- JimH
- TacOpsGuy320
- rbhargan
- Testypayload81
- radar8756
- sgtmack
- Batchief909
- Cavman
- clelaj
- llh1956
- VERT
- Ingomike
- Jarvitron
- thane
- Myrradah
- nobletucky
- KLB
- pewpewINpewpew
- pitbulld45
