West Seattle Blog...

WSB Forum » Open Discussion

(91 posts)

Not bad for 9 months work.......

Started 1 year ago by Smitty
Latest reply from JoB

Smitty
Member Profile

http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/03/101091-average-annual-compensation-milwaukee-teachers

Strike!

And please, no "conservative media" comments without disputing the facts. The odds of NPR the NYTs, WaPo or MSNBC running this are slim to none, so it's tough to find a link!

Posted 1 year ago #
redblack
Member Profile

good for them! that's what a good negotiator can do for his union members. that kind of pay and benefits almost allows a family to save for its future without racking up a lot of debt.

(according to fox "news" presenters, that almost makes them middle class.)

anyway, according to the article, that's a salary of $59K (which is exactly what numerous other sources have reported) and $41K in benefits. maybe if the cost of health care wasn't so artificially inflated by insurance premiums, we could reduce the cost to the school districts.

the article is pretty thin, though, and i understand that teachers have agreed to fund more of their own health insurance and pensions. i wonder what the actual taxpayer obligation is.

not bashing your source so much as pointing out that the presentation leaves more questions than answers.

Posted 1 year ago #
Smitty
Member Profile

Fair enough.

Good for them is right - unless they are holding my kids' education hostage to get it. That is their only leverage though, I suppose.

Regarding the 41K in benefits, I (personally) would take that mix in a heartbeat for the lower tax burden.

A two teacher family does pretty darn well I think we can agree.

Another thing that seems to always get lost in this discussion is the fact that teachers salaries have been an issue (real or imagined) FOREVER! Don't choose a profession that has been "underpaid" forever and then complain about it. I guess that's the part the gets me the most. I went to college in the 80's and if you chose that path you KNEW the compensation.

Posted 1 year ago #
dobro
Member Profile

Did you know that 400 people hold more wealth, assets, property than half of all Americans combined? That is, 400 people control more wealth than 155 million other Americans combined.And that many of them benefited greatly from the taxpayer funded bailout?

Outrageous, huh? but let's hold those teachers salaries down. Leeches, right?

Posted 1 year ago #
DP
Member Profile

redblack: Do I detect a note of reflexive liberalism here? I think you might be missing Smitty's point . . .

The issue isn't whether a salary package of 100K is fair in absolute terms. The issue is whether the teachers' appeal to the public is going to find a sympathetic ear, considering the amount they make relative to the average taxpayer/voter.

Let's say I'm an average Wisconsinite, and I'm getting paid a combined pay/benefits package of $40,000 a year. How much sympathy do you expect me to have for a public employee who's getting more than twice as much as me?

(I pulled the $40,000 out of my butt; I don't know what the average Wisconsinite makes. But I suspect it's considerably less than $100,000.)

dobro: You have a good point. It's necessary to point out the hypocrisy on the right. However, I think the best way for the left to get what it wants is to take a compromise position on this.

They say: Budget's tight. We've got to cut services and public worker salaries.

We counter: OK. We'll take some cuts; you take some cuts. Let's make it proportional. We let you cut 10% of public employee bennies, and you give up 10% of your tax breaks.

See how that works?

Politics is about compromise, so you can't just say: "No. We're not giving up anything. You give up something instead." —Even if that would be the fair thing to do.

Posted 1 year ago #
dobro
Member Profile

BTW Smitty- since you think they're doing pretty darn well for 9 months work-what do you think would be a truly fair salary for a high school science teacher?

Posted 1 year ago #
dobro
Member Profile

"We let you cut 10% of public employee bennies, and you give up 10% of your tax breaks.See how that works?"

The way it seems to work nowadays is the public workers give up their 10% and then then the gov. says that's not enough, I think we're going to have to lay you off and, by the way, I'm instituting more tax breaks for the rich. What are you gonna do about it, suckers?

Posted 1 year ago #
Smitty
Member Profile

I think the 100K combined(60K/40K benefits) salary and benefits is pretty darn good, so let's stick with that. The pension most receive far surpasses the average 401K payout - which is almost entirely funded by the employee, by the way. Medical is WAY better too.

Of course, that would/should have regional adjustments for cost of living as well.

A married couple each making a 60K base salary can do pretty well anywhere in the country - especially if they don't have to put away a huge amount of that for retirement (higher take home) and - if they choose - can take on summer work to supplement their income (fish in Alaska, etc.).

edit: dobro - I take back the use of that term. It felt right at the time, not so much now. Not sure how to remove though. My bad.

Posted 1 year ago #
DP
Member Profile

The way it seems to work nowadays is the public workers give up their 10% and then then the gov. says that's not enough, I think we're going to have to lay you off and, by the way, I'm instituting more tax breaks for the rich. What are you gonna do about it, suckers?

Right again, dobro. And it sucks, and I hate it. But for someone making $100K a year, or maybe even for someone making much less than that, compromise and dialogue are still the best way forward. (This does not preclude strikes and other mass actions, and I am totally behind the Wisconsin workers in theirs.)

Maybe compromise and dialogue won't work, and things will keep sucking harder and harder until they approach the breaking point, as they nearly did in the 1930s.

When enough people are literally starving and freezing to death, the broad masses will get out into the streets, taking over public buildings and occupying the McMansions, and worse. At that point, we're talking 'bout a revolution . . .

Don't get me wrong. A little revolution can be a good thing now and again. But in general I like to avoid it — because revolutions, like wars, have uncertain endings.* And they often involve bloodshed, which I am also against, old fogey that I am.

—D.P.

*Loose paraphrase of Elizabeth I from the film "Elizabeth" starring Cate Blanchet. Don't know whether QEI actually said this or not, but if she didn't, she should have.

Posted 1 year ago #
JoB
Member Profile

Whoa nelly...

lets compare apples to apples instead of peanuts to watermelons...

I am not up to doing the research this morning but i am pretty much betting that 100K in combined wages and benefits is pretty much average for the kind of worker to whom you would want to entrust the safety and well being .. not to mention education... of your children.

Keep in mind that a good chunk of those benefits are delayed benefits that are being stripped from public employees left and right... yes, even from our public safety workers.. as state budgets crunch and people look for an easy target.

After all.. never mind that they negotiated their compensation package based on deferred wages .. we don't need retired workers any longer so they become easy targets.

Smitty..

do you make more than 100K in salary and benefits?
If you make more than 60K in wages and have any benefits at all which would include employer matches to your 401K.. i am betting you do.

after all .. you know what you are worth.

What you don't seem to know is what the people you entrust the education of your children to are worth.

Holding your children's education hostage? not hardly.
They are providing the education your children are going to get.
If that's not worth investing in.. then what is?

Posted 1 year ago #
JoB
Member Profile

smitty...

i have to ask?
do you really believe some of the stuff you post?
You seem like a smart guy.

I am positive you know that an inflammatory article like that is full of holes you can drive a mack truck through and that is why you wouldn't find it on "NPR the NYTs, WaPo or MSNBC".

yet you post it as though it had some kind of special value because it wouldn't be posted on NPR.

What are you thinking?
Or are you just hoping nobody else will?

Posted 1 year ago #
JanS
Member Profile

do any of you personally have friends that are teachers? Have you talked with them about their "nine month" year? Have you talked with them about the planning , and the days that they spend during the summer preparing for the school year? A good portion of their "summer vacation" is dedicated to that, not going off somewhere for 3 months. How about have you talked with them about the money that they personally spend out of their own pockets for supplies, etc., because the school district doesn't provide?

I say..these are the jobs that are probably the most important out there, and we should be thankful that they decided to become teachers, and we should be paying them accordingly. What a thankless job they have at times. I know I, for one, couldn't do it.

Posted 1 year ago #
SpeakLoud
Member Profile

School gets out mid-June and the teachers have to pack-up, finish papers and have meetings etc...so they aren't actualy done until the end of June. July and most of August are probably 'off' so that say 6 weeks 'vacation' then by the mid to end of August they have to start preparing for September-most schools go back anywhere from the last week of August to the first or second week of September. And yes they get some time during the school year too-a few days here and there-but they probably work 'at least' 50 hours a week.
It is NOT a 9 month job-it is a lifetime career.

Posted 1 year ago #
JoB
Member Profile

Lost in this is the continuing educational requirements just to keep your job.... not to mention those required to advance...

and the daily overtime during the 9 months.. a teacher's workday doesn't end when the school bell rings...

speakloud.. is suspect a 50 hour week is a gross understatement...
every bit of homework for every child in every class is read and graded by their teacher... who turns their homework in on time.
not to mention extracurricular activities and parent conferences and....

and.. the assumption that teachers all come from two parent homes where there are two salaries to draw from.

hmmm... i wonder where THAT came from?

Posted 1 year ago #
Smitty
Member Profile

Can we all just agree that whether it's a 9 or 10 month stint, it is shorter than most private sector jobs they are compared to?

50 hour weeks? Join the club, that's not unique. What is unique is all the time off during the school year. Must be at minimum of another 4 weeks to go with the 8 weeks of summer. I get three.

And yes, I know many teachers - five of whom make a pretty fair wage fishing Bristol Bay in the summer - something I cannot do.

Posted 1 year ago #
JoB
Member Profile

Smitty...

how much of your time off do you spend catching up on your work load and fulfilling continuing education credits just to keep your current job?

Oh.. and do you have to work a second job during your time off to support your family on the wages you recieve?

Time off doesn't necessarily mean leisure time off.. does it?

Posted 1 year ago #
dobro
Member Profile

"And yes, I know many teachers - five of whom make a pretty fair wage fishing Bristol Bay in the summer - something I cannot do."

do they make that wage in the summer to supplement their less than adequate wages to support their family, maybe try to put their own kids thru college, or just for fun?

"Can we all just agree that whether it's a 9 or 10 month stint, it is shorter than most private sector jobs they are compared to?"

No, we can't agree to that because it doesn't factor in all the extra time that teachers put in that isn't on the clock. And if, as you say, you know some teachers, ask them about that.

Posted 1 year ago #
Smitty
Member Profile

"No, we can't agree to that because it doesn't factor in all the extra time that teachers put in that isn't on the clock. And if, as you say, you know some teachers, ask them about that."

And that's unique to teachers? Really?

"how much of your time off do you spend catching up on your work load and fulfilling continuing education credits just to keep your current job?"

A lot catching up on my work load, non fulfilling continuing education credits that RESULT IN AN INCREASE IN SALARY. I can only wish.

Posted 1 year ago #
DP
Member Profile

Folks, the point here is not whether teachers earn their pay. The point is that 100K (even when you consider that a big chunk of that is non-cash) looks like a lot of money to most people.

It sure as hell does to me.

Whenever the Republicans bash bloated government salaries, remember that there are a lot of folks making a lot less than 100K a year out there listening.

. . . baristas
. . . Wal-Mart cashiers
. . . struggling small-business owners

They're listening and they're nodding their heads.

I'd hoped those same people would be listening and nodding when we were talking about taxing the wealthy (I-1098). Unfortunately, they weren't.

Not this time around anyway.

Posted 1 year ago #
elikapeka
Member Profile

I don't have a problem with the wage and benefit package. Teaching takes a fair amount of education, it's long hours, a pretty much thankless job, and I certainly wouldn't be any good at it.

I think the argument is going the wrong way. Why is everyone pointing to the public sector employment package and trying to drag them down, rather than bringing yourselves up?

These are benefits that used to be quite common with private sector jobs. When I got my first job out of college I had a reasonably good paycheck, a defined benefit pension plan funded by the company, an excellent medical plan with dental and vision included, sick pay, 10 paid holidays, seven weeks of vacation at top seniority, long and short term disability, life insurance, profit sharing, and stock options. And I wasn't an executive - I was a union member.

By the time I left that job, the company had been bought out and we were nonunion. The pay was marginally better, but the pension plan was terminated and we ended up with a 401(k) with no employer match, a crappy medical plan that we had to pay into, lost two weeks of vacation, and had ten total days a year for sick time/personal time off, no life insurance, no disability, no profit sharing, and the stock options were worthless after bankruptcy. But the executives made out really well.

So again, I ask - why are we trashing people for having what we used to have instead of standing together to get it back?

Posted 1 year ago #
Julie
Member Profile

How much do we value education?

Posted 1 year ago #
Kelly
Member Profile

OMG, this is such a tired discussion. This is all I have to add at this point:
http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/thu-march-3-2011-diane-ravitch

Posted 1 year ago #
dhg
Member Profile

Politifact (and others) have a very different number:
The latest figures from the National Education Association actually put the average salary for a Wisconsin teacher at $51,264.

The $51,000 salary figure is further substantiated by district-by-district data provided by the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction.

However, according to a spokeswoman for the Wisconsin Education Association Council, the Fox figure for Wisconsin teacher benefits -- $39,000 -- is way too high. Average benefits amount to about $25,000 a year, said Marlena Deutsch, a spokeswoman for WEAC. In total compensation, Wisconsin ranks 23rd in the nation.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/feb/23/eric-bolling/fox-business-news-eric-bolling-says-wisconsin-teac/

Of course, it is not really about salaries, it is about breaking the unions. They want to pit the non union workers against the unions. Kill the middle class, that's their goal.

Posted 1 year ago #
SpeakLoud
Member Profile

I support teachers. I do not support unions-they should break them-they have kept education hostage NOT teachers.

I think I'm going to regret saying that out loud....

Posted 1 year ago #
redblack
Member Profile

The issue isn't whether a salary package of 100K is fair in absolute terms. The issue is whether the teachers' appeal to the public is going to find a sympathetic ear, considering the amount they make relative to the average taxpayer/voter.

no, DP, fairness is exactly the issue that conservatives are attacking. their whole argument is based on the merit of fair, living compensation for public employees, and they regularly tout examples of how the private sector doesn't fare as well in comparison.

"the average taxpayer is suffering," they say, "so why shouldn't public employees suffer, too?" because private sector employees have suffered, it's time for public employees to "share the burden."

the whole argument is duplicitous. it's intended to strike at the very notion of people collectively negotiating for good wages and benefits, whether it's with a government agency or a factory.

and whether they'll admit it or not, the intent of this battle is to debase the pay of anyone who doesn't receive dividends for a living. the fact that people who earn less than wisconsin teachers are making this argument is tragic.

sympathy be damned. claiming that this is about voters' sympathy for teachers only politicizes the debate, and it ignores the larger issue of whether or not we, the people, want to adequately compensate those who benefit our society the most.

[edit: if it really was about taxes, conservatives would be willing to talk about tax breaks for the top 2%.]

Posted 1 year ago #
dobro
Member Profile

"I support teachers. I do not support unions"

If you don't support the union that teachers choose to have then you don't support teachers-you're just paying lip service to the idea.

Posted 1 year ago #
dhg
Member Profile

Were it not for unions your children might still be digging out coal using ponies because the holes are so small.

Unions have brought us a livable wage, the 40 hours work week, the weekend, vacation time and benefits.

Our country was THRIVING back in the days of Eisenhower. We had a top tax rate of 90%, and 30% of the jobs were unionized. Today we are sliding back towards Les Miserables. Don't like unions? You have a right to your opinion but your life is far far better off because of unions.

Posted 1 year ago #
angelescrest
Member Profile

"A married couple each making a 60K base salary can do pretty well anywhere in the country"...
What the heck? How about a single person? Or, do you think teachers SHOULD be married? Better to be role-models while they hold your children hostage.

I want my kids to have great teachers, and a liveable salary must be in place to attract and maintain great teachers. Period. Single or married.

I start hearing echoes of Huckabee, sorry.

Posted 1 year ago #
Smitty
Member Profile

"What the heck? How about a single person?"

Yes, 60K for 9 months work sucks.

Next.

Posted 1 year ago #
dobro
Member Profile

This is another part of the legacy of flim-flam artist Ronnie Raygun- before the 1980s the family model was that one income earner should be able to support a family. Now, after 30-some years of right wing brainwashing its assumed that both parents have to work to gather enough income to support a family.

Posted 1 year ago #
Smitty
Member Profile

"Our country was THRIVING back in the days of Eisenhower. We had a top tax rate of 90%, and 30% of the jobs were unionized."

Well, there you have it. No China, no India, no Japan, no Korea. It's a EXACTLY the same except for 90% tax rate and 30% unionization!

Call Obama, get it passed!!!!

Posted 1 year ago #
dobro
Member Profile

Smitty- how much money do you think you should make for nine months work?

Posted 1 year ago #
Smitty
Member Profile

Ask angelcrest. You know my answer.

Posted 1 year ago #
dobro
Member Profile

"Well, there you have it. No China, no India, no Japan, no Korea."

I guess this comment means that since we have competition in world markets now, the solution is to lower all of our standards. There is an alternate solution. What about forcing those other countries to raise their standards by making it cost money (tariffs, etc) for access to our large market. Still the largest in the world I think. What about unionizing their countries? What about businesses taking a patriotic stand of supporting our own country by not outsourcing jobs for the lowest cost?

Pretty radical by today's right wing standards but it just might work.

Posted 1 year ago #
dobro
Member Profile

"Ask angelcrest. You know my answer."

That's pretty obtuse. Maybe you didn't understand my question. I meant how much money do you think you, personally,should make for 9 months work. And another question, what jobs do you think are equivalent to a teachers job and what would the proper salary be for that in your opinion?

Posted 1 year ago #
TDe
Member Profile

Not bad for less than 9 months work... anyone complaining about Congressional salaries?

http://www.thecapitol.net/FAQ/cong_schedule.html

Rank-and-File Members:
The current salary (2011) for rank-and-file members of the House and Senate is $174,000 per year.

Senate Leadership
Majority Party Leader - $193,400
Minority Party Leader - $193,400

House Leadership
Speaker of the House - $223,500
Majority Leader - $193,400
Minority Leader - $193,400

Posted 1 year ago #
SpeakLoud
Member Profile

"If you don't support the union that teachers choose to have then you don't support teachers-you're just paying lip service to the idea. "
Dobro-I don't believe it is a 'choice' to be in a union-if you want a teaching job in the public school you have to join the union (correct me if I'm wrong as I'm sure you will)
And yes I do support teachers-just because your in a union dosn't mean you believe everything they do in your name is right-kind of like being a democrat or republican....I think good teachers want bad teahcers gone so they can have better co-workers and more successful schools which create better environments for children to learn and grow-unions will never let that happen.

Posted 1 year ago #
SpeakLoud
Member Profile

@dhg-I'm greateful for what 30% of workers did way back then. -so how did the 70% of workers manage to survive and if unions were so great why are they not as strong as you think they should be-look, there are many ideas that have come and gone and were GREAT in their time-it's ok to move on. And honestly-I think human right alone ould have stopped my children digging in the coal mines but thanks anyway.

Posted 1 year ago #
angelescrest
Member Profile

I feel like there's something missing here, Smitty:
New teachers--and we want them and we need them, as well as experienced teachers--come into the profession carrying a hunk of student-loan debt. (You probably don't have kids in college yet, I'm guessing.) Five-six years of college, on average, I think. They're at the bottom of the pay scale, and most are SINGLE. And the first few years of teaching are fraught with much stress and anxiety as these new teachers seek to create some magical back-and-forth in their classrooms that becomes knowledge/growth/acceptance/wonderment/pride. It doesn't work for every new teacher. And, because the pay is so low for a beginning teacher, it's hard to make ends meet without a summer job. I'd wager that there are a number of Seattle teachers who cannot afford to buy a home in the city. Or anywhere. It's hard to save up much of anything on a $35-$45K salary.
Oh, yeah, I forgot about those slips at the end of the year that the newest faculty members always seem to receive.

Posted 1 year ago #
dobro
Member Profile

"I think human right alone ould have stopped my children digging in the coal mines but thanks anyway."

you might think that but it doesn't make it true. The fact is people fought and died to get the "human rights" that you're now taking for granted.How do you think anyone got their "human rights" without banding together and fighting for them? Ever read any history books?

Posted 1 year ago #
SpeakLoud
Member Profile

Oh Dobro-you're gonna love this-NO I did not read history books, not my cup of tea. And that's probably because my underpaid teachers SUCKED. Except that my history teacher was just old and boring and so done teaching, if only he could have been fired for doing such a lowsey uninspiring job I might have had a teacher who took the time to make history connect for me-but I didn't so now you have to deal with my general lack of history knowledge. So hows that union working for you now?

Posted 1 year ago #
dobro
Member Profile

Typical right winger- blaming his teacher because he was too lazy to read a book. And finishing with a Palin para-quote. Do you and MarkAngello go to church together?

Posted 1 year ago #
SpeakLoud
Member Profile

OMG too funny-this is the danger of making personnal aqusations on a computor screen-nothing could be furthur from the truth-it's all in how you perceive it I guess.

Posted 1 year ago #
JoB
Member Profile

speakloud...

you didn't really say this out loud did you?

"And honestly-I think human right alone ould have stopped my children digging in the coal mines but thanks anyway. "

you are aware that there are children working in mines right now.. human rights or no human rights... aren't you?

Posted 1 year ago #
SpeakLoud
Member Profile

yes job I am aware that children are digging in mines right now thank you very much...I'm an idiot, your smarter than me, your not lazy, I am, blah blah blah blah.....I'm done, I give in, I have no right to an opinion, I'll crawl back into my hole now

Posted 1 year ago #
angelescrest
Member Profile

It's what the kids bring to the classrooms from their home experiences.
SpeakLoud--so you had a bad history teacher (of the +/-50 teachers you had in K-12).
But--big but--if you had been engaged in historical discussions at home, were reading novels with historical content or non-fiction, one lousy teacher wouldn't have scarred you for life as it seems your history teacher did. You would have just said, "It sucks". And, it sucks to not have top-notch educators in every classroom. The whole thing becomes more perilous when the home environment is not providing the background training.

Posted 1 year ago #
SpeakLoud
Member Profile

Oh great- so now it's my mom and dads fault. I'll let them know, they'll be so proud.
Teachers don't have to be top-notch to be good teachers-they just need to be interested. From 5 to 16 I had approximatly 30 teachers. One beat me with a ruler for not writing neat enough in my notebook and ridiculed me for not spelling well-I hate reading and writing too but that's also probably my parents fault.
I've done very well for not being an 'academic'-I am living my passion everyday. I don't blame my teachers or my parents for anything-although I do think I could have done more given the right circumstances-but hey who cares-I'm a tax paying, law abiding citizen-I've been churned out of the system and 'I'm OK'.

Posted 1 year ago #
redblack
Member Profile

the teachers in wisconsin have the right not to be in the union.

the caveat is that they have to pay the union a "service fee" for not being represented in the event of a strike, and for providing them with benefits like days off.

fair? maybe not. but the school districts sign these contracts with the unions. the answer is not to let the state do away with collective bargaining altogether, though.

Posted 1 year ago #
angelescrest
Member Profile

And--I'll reiterate: what goes on at home in the early years (and well beyond) profoundly affects learning. It's just the way it is. From vocabulary to history to science and love of reading! music! art! nature!

I do believe that there should only be top-notch teachers in every classroom. I think in no way should poor teachers be protected from dismissal; definitely a problem with our current union contracts. And who makes the decision re: a good vs. bad teacher? Or do we leave that to test scores? (Bleh.)
Class size is growing again (after many attempts to reverse the trend) and is front page news today. Wah!
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/07/education/07classrooms.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=classroom%20size&st=cse

Posted 1 year ago #
dhg
Member Profile

Speakloud (and carry a small stick, hmmmm)

The time for unions is past? Far from it. Unions have led the way for pay rates, benefits, treatment of workers. If we increase the number of union jobs we reduce the workforce available for crummy low pay jobs. When that happens, the low pay jobs are forced to raise their hourly rates to attract decent employees. And when that happens, the community as a whole is raised up.

As for your belief that the unions are protecting the bad teachers: there's no evidence that non unions results in a better pool of teachers. They just get paid less.

Posted 1 year ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.

All contents copyright 2012, A Drink of Water and a Story Interactive. Here's how to contact us.
No photo reuse without permission.
Entries and comments feeds. ^Top^