I didn't think teachers could strike

[A_A_G]

76k? Damn my wife would dream of that.

That's poverty in Chicago.

[CJ]

16% payraise isn't enough? Who cares if it's over 4 years that is good for essentially a governmental employee.

And since when do schools have CEOs?

In my opinion government employees pay should ONLY increase based on a percentage directly corresponding to private industry pay rates. We pay for government, government does not pay for government. There should never be a situation where a government worker makes more than a private industry worker of the same profession.

[bcoop]

There should never be a situation where a government worker makes more than a private industry worker of the same profession.

Agreed. But in my experience, a lot of private school teachers make shit for salary. Which I don't understand, given the rates they charge.

[grove rat]

In my opinion government employees pay should ONLY increase based on a percentage directly corresponding to private industry pay rates. We pay for government, government does not pay for government. There should never be a situation where a government worker makes more than a private industry worker of the same profession.

as a government worker i actually agree on the last part you said 100%... but i dont make nearly as much as what i would in the private industry, not even fucking close. i am not money hungry though, that's why i enjoy working for a university/hospital and taking the cut in pay

[CJ]

as a government worker i actually agree on the last part you said 100%... but i dont make nearly as much as what i would in the private industry, not even fucking close. i am not money hungry though, that's why i enjoy working for a university/hospital and taking the cut in pay

That is usually the case in right to work states. Government doesn't produce a product, it is a very dangerous situation when you make government jobs more desirable over private industry, because you offset the quality of the workforce.

[grove rat]

makes sense. like i said i dont have a real problem with working for the government otherwise i'd quit. even after i get my degree i plan on staying here. only other place i would go to would be another school or hospital

[CJ]

makes sense. like i said i dont have a real problem with working for the government otherwise i'd quit. even after i get my degree i plan on staying here. only other place i would go to would be another school or hospital

Are you staying with the university because of tuition benefits?

[grove rat]

Are you staying with the university because of tuition benefits?

i'll be using the VA and certain scholarships for submariners for most of my schooling. UT will pay for school but only if it is towards what you do now

even if they didnt pay for school i would still want to work here. might sound a bit liberal but i'd rather work for a place that helps people directly instead of making someone else rich. of course there are people here who make money from the university but a lot of the effort that is put in by the employees can be directly seen in the research labs/patients/students

[Venom]

Agreed. But in my experience, a lot of private school teachers make shit for salary. Which I don't understand, given the rates they charge.

I'm going to teach at a private/christian school after this school year. The liberal population of public education and the continued downward spiral of society really pisses me off on a daily basis. I will probably take a pay cut but it will be worth it to teach kids that are respectful, want to learn and are happy to be there.

[Dlachance]

In my opinion government employees pay should ONLY increase based on a percentage directly corresponding to private industry pay rates. We pay for government, government does not pay for government. There should never be a situation where a government worker makes more than a private industry worker of the same profession.

This would not work in todays world. Private school teachers in this aea make 1/2 of what public school teachers do. How many teacers will we ahve witha 50% pay cut?

[CJ]

This would not work in todays world. Private school teachers in this aea make 1/2 of what public school teachers do. How many teacers will we ahve witha 50% pay cut?

The reason that example is a problem is because government runs education in this country. Whenever government intervenes into private industry there is three things that are constant. Quality drops, expenses increase, and government expands. There is no competition because you can't compete against government. Private schools are a business, and the teachers are paid what can be sustained in a capitalist system. This is why people have been trying to enact vouchers for the longest time. The pay of a particular occupation in the private industry is the true measure of the value of that occupation. Since government doesn't have to make a profit, and does not "fail" using government as the standard for valuation of an occupation is inherently flawed.

But, to further reinforce this constant - Which offers higher quality education - private, or government education?

[grove rat]

here is a question though CJ, who can afford private education?(i'm assuming we are talking k-12)

[CJ]

here is a question though CJ, who can afford private education?(i'm assuming we are talking k-12)

It's simple supply and demand. Because government controls education private education is considerably more expensive because it works outside of the government domain. If education was privatized quality would increase, costs would drop, and government would shrink. It's a difficult comparison to draw because one operates in the private industry, and one in the government. Like I said before, one works in the private industry - it must provide measurable results or it fails. Government is not mandated to provide any measurable results - it cannot fail. In the end the children are the ones that are the victims.

This same situation occurred with the mortgage bubble crash. Government intervened into private industry and disrupted the balance of the private industry.

Here is one important thing to consider which proves the concept. The question posed was about how government education employees (teachers) make considerably more than private industry teachers. This clearly does not correlate to quality of education since private education has a considerable higher measure of quality in the students education.

[bcoop]

The reason that example is a problem is because government runs education in this country. Whenever government intervenes into private industry there is three things that are constant. Quality drops, expenses increase, and government expands. There is no competition because you can't compete against government. Private schools are a business, and the teachers are paid what can be sustained in a capitalist system. This is why people have been trying to enact vouchers for the longest time. The pay of a particular occupation in the private industry is the true measure of the value of that occupation. Since government doesn't have to make a profit, and does not "fail" using government as the standard for valuation of an occupation is inherently flawed.

But, to further reinforce this constant - Which offers higher quality education - private, or government education?

Private offers better education, by leaps and bounds, but for varying reasons. #1 reason is there is no standardized testing. So the students learn material, rather than memorizing a test. You know, ACTUAL education.


You can't sit there and convince me that teachers, the ones who shape and mold the futures of tomorrow's leaders deserve to make $24,000/yr with no benefits like 401k and insurance (in reference to your vaulation comment). And yes, parents should be the ones shaping and molding the futures of their children. But let's be realistic. In the majority of cases, they aren't. And that's not only present in poverty stricken areas. That's among all classes of people.

[CJ]

Private offers better education, by leaps and bounds, but for varying reasons. #1 reason is there is no standardized testing. So the students learn material, rather than memorizing a test. You know, ACTUAL education.


You can't sit there and convince me that teachers, the ones who shape and mold the futures of tomorrow's leaders deserve to make $24,000/yr with no benefits like 401k and insurance (in reference to your vaulation comment). And yes, parents should be the ones shaping and molding the futures of their children. But let's be realistic. In the majority of cases, they aren't. And that's not only present in poverty stricken areas. That's among all classes of people.

I'm not saying that. When you go into "deserve" you're removing yourself from the capitalist system. I am saying private industry works, it has always worked. I have faith that it will work. What I was saying is the pay for private industry teachers are artificially low because of government intervention. The quality of education is higher for private schools, yet the teachers make half the wages. What exactly is the focus of education, students or teachers? It's something you have to ask yourself. Without government intervention teachers in a private system would make considerably more, because you would remove an absolute ton of wasteful spending. The capitalist system is the best determination of the value of an occupation. If you're worth more than you're paid then someone will steal you away and pay you that. Government introduces unnatural aspects to an economic system where people can and are paid more than they are truly worth because the entity in itself cannot fail. It is not required to produce results or risk bankruptcy. I'm not saying teachers are overpaid - I do not know what is true. But what I do know is if it was private industry they would truly be paid their value. Teachers would be paid more based on their abilities and not their time on the job.