They ALL should have their benefits cut. Many of the people in those industries are overpaid. If you work for the government, chances are you are overpaid.
I’m up & down about that. The down is that the relationship between a public employee union and government is an incestuous one. The government is playing with house monopoly money and really have no one to answer to because there’s no financial bottom line like a private business has. They are negotiating with a substantial voting block and generally very strong lobby group. As a result, the bargaining agreement tilts to the union. I mean, who wouldn’t want to retire, potentially, at age 52, collect 110% of their pay and have free healthcare for life? I mean, hell, sign me up!! But is it really fair and fiscally sound? Of course not. On the other hand, given the fact teachers have to pay so much out of their pockets for Masters degrees, Continuing Education, hundreds of dollars yearly for classroom items… and then have to build their own retirement via a 401K? Again, I don’t think so. I also am deep set against state governments tearing into collective bargaining agreements that are in place, like we’ve been seeing. So, to me, I think the answer lies in between. Say, a good matching 401K program and a small government retirement stipend. For example, when I worked at Farmers Insurance, they took the equivalent of 10% of our pay each year and it went into a 401K if we contributed 5%. In addition, we got a retirement set aside worth $100 per year of employment (it took 7 years to get vested), up to a max of 30 years, or, $3,000 per month + our 401K upon retirement. One had to be 65 to collect the retirement stipend pay. In so doing, the company could easier control and plan retirement costs and still maintain a healthy business. I see no reason the states and union couldn’t work something out like that.
False. The private sector has to take ups and downs with the economy that teachers don't have to worry about... mass layoffs, firings, pay cuts, etc, etc. Teachers are already being compensated for the limitations you're claiming.
That's up to the individual districts, taking time-in-grade, cost of living, and negotiated compensation into account. Just like exists in most places today. Define "tenure". Should they be paid, like all other governmental employees, due to time-in-grade? The idea that older, more experienced teachers are "harder to fire" is bogus. But yet and still, do you want good teachers fired because they make too much money, as happens in the corporate world? There's a reason these people make a career out of this profession. Define "performance". And you'd have to start a whole new thread to argue about THAT one.
In Portland, an average school teacher makes $51k a year. http://www.ehow.com/info_8062537_average-teacher-salary-portland.html Is that too high, too low, or just right.
after 5 years, you get tenure. Then you can't be fired. http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2008-05-06-teachers-tenure_n.htm
Two ways to measure, perhaps concurrently 1. student performance. If the job of the teachers is to teach and the students don't learn, then they should be fired. 2. review by principle and administrators- they can review poorly performing teachers and terminate those that do not have their students learn. if the students don't learn, let's not kid ourselves, then they're just babysitters.
I'd say that's probably a little low, given the cost of living in Portland. And that's the MEDIAN... meaning there are teachers making far more and far LESS.
I think its not bad. 50k in Portland is pretty middle class, isn't it. Its certainly a pretty inexpensive place to live. Sure, you're not going to be living in Lake Oswego, but its a comfortable living. They also have "average" salary which is about the same. Give me a number then. BTW, that's around the median salary of all workers in Portland. Given the extra benefits and less number of work days/hours, its not a bad deal.
Exactly. A guaranteed retirement that is funded by taxpayers would be nice. I certainly wouldn't be bitching about how tough I had it. As a small business owner who works on a contractual basis, I have none of that security. Then again, since I don't depend on private sector money, and I instead pay for public servants like teachers, I feel a certain amount of ownership of how they perform in their jobs. The problem is, public teacher unions have created a political wall that makes it near-impossible to weed out bad teachers. There are 25 teachers in my kids' elementary school. In three years of having them there, there has been zero turnover outside of one teacher who "retired" in her mid-50s, yet still subs from time to time.
I spent 14 years working in the corporate world, with 3 of the companies being Fortune 500. I hated every freaking day of 1 of the jobs (my last prior to working for myself), but I learned so much on what not to do in terms of motivating employees and also encouraging creativity from individuals. The freedom of working for myself, and the responsibility associated with attaching my name to my company, still energizes me like it did that day I decided to dramatically change career directions and follow my own path. I'm less than a year into it, but the business contacts, creativity, and pure entrepreneurism that I have sought, and at times, stumbled into have totally changed my outlook on how business should work. I guess the point is this. Instead of making a video complaining about my job that I hated, I took the initiative and the risk to start my own project. In doing so, I've never been more happy in my professional life.
If you can't afford the miniscule share of your taxes that pays their salary, why don't you look for a different job. You're obviously underpaid for your potential to be scraping by so badly.
The same is true of healthcare professionals, auto mechanics, air traffic controllers, most self-employed people who are good at what they do... People who serve an important purpose in society will always be kept busy. But the private sector is where the worst of the worst, the laziest of the laziest, the least competent of the incompetent, dwell. It is only logical that this ocean of floaters and coasters should be the first rats thrown overboard. If you are part of a mass layoff it's most likely because you: A. Chose a career that does not provide anything of significant value and importance to people. or B. Are not valued as an employee by your employer.
That's a backwards way to look at what is really a decline in private sector benefits and wage protection over the last 45 years. Teachers are not better compensated now than they were in 1965. But most workers in the private sector are making about 1/4th what they would have made on the same job in 1965, allowing for inflation. The destruction of unions has led to job-killing agreements like NAFTA which pit American wages against those in slave labor camps and child sweatshops overseas.
Are you that desperate for an arguement? My post is plainly stated and easily verifiable. What part has made you so emotional?
It is also one of the biggest recipients of government subsidies in US history. The very reason our economy tanked. The bulk of our current deficit. There are not enough teachers to fire in all of America to make up for the tax-paid bailout of maxiep's industry.
You can't actually address the question because you don't believe in individual responsibility. We don't all choose to move to Lapine, which means living below the poverty level, and thus pay no taxes while leaching off the government.
