Oh, To Be a Teacher in Wisconsin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

Many teachers have to prepare and grade tests and papers outside of school hours, as well as buy lots of supplies out of their own pockets.

TX schools seems to be out of session only 2 months, not 3 months.

Teaching is for most cases a shitty job, with, eg, TX teachers quitting teaching after 5 years.

---

The nut jobs don't want to hear that. My spouse regularly buys extra supplies and loads up on things that she knows that some kids will not be bale to bring from home. She often tells me of kids who wear the same clothes everyday and that they smell terrible. The same kids qualify for free breakfast and lunch so they at least get to eat. She buys snacks and other things for her kids..

don't tell wc or darrin that teachers do work during the summer and they go back to school up to 10 days prior to the students.. it wouldn't fit their narrative..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Not bad for working 9 months out of 12.

---

how many hours a year do you think the average school teacher works?

lol...I never got 3 months off. If I was lucky, I might have been away from campus for 3 weeks...maybe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blake

how many hours a year do you think the average school teacher works?

---

he'll have to go to a right wing blog to find the answer..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by George Gervin's Afro

if you have a problem with it then change the school year..

---

Then they would demand even more.

Realistically, they probably work 10/12 months. That average I think is low, probably includes part time positions. When I look at the Centennial district for Oregon, the 10th percentile for preschool teachers is at $25,510, probably part-time. The 90 percentile for High school teachers is $72,620. These are 2009 numbers. Now unlike most working Americans, they get a platinum edition health plan at zero deduction from their check. They also have an equivalent 6%(I think 6%) of their income into PERS (public employee retirement system.) This is enough to guarantee them a very nice retirement income, sometimes more than they earned working, subsidized of course by tax payer dollars because the agreed 6% would never grow that well, but is given an 8% minimum guaranteed rate of growth. Yes, PERS does work that way.

Lets assume a career teacher is at a nominal $60k rate, working 10 months for it. For any of us to retire as well as they do, we would have to contribute a max 15% to a 40kk system or better. To get as nice a health insurance package as they get, we would have to shell out maybe $4,000 a year or more. I shell out just under $2,000 annually, for a basic quality health plan.

What do we have...

$60,000 income
$4,000 insurance
$11,300 equivalent employer retirement paid (sold to the tax payer as $3,600)

Total...

$75,300, for 10 months work.

Now...

divided by 10 and multiplied by 12 is an annual equivalent of $90,360, or $43.44 per hour.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blake

how many hours a year do you think the average school teacher works?

---

1680 hrs plus/minus a few hrs a year without getting overtime. Of course, I already removed the paid holidays. the full time, 40hr a week job is 2080 hrs minus holidays, or about 2016 hours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Then they would demand even more.

Realistically, they probably work 10/12 months. That average I think is low, probably includes part time positions. When I look at the Centennial district for Oregon, the 10th percentile for preschool teachers is at $25,510, probably part-time. The 90 percentile for High school teachers is $72,620. These are 2009 numbers. Now unlike most working Americans, they get a platinum edition health plan at zero deduction from their check. They also have an equivalent 6%(I think 6%) of their income into PERS (public employee retirement system.) This is enough to guarantee them a very nice retirement income, sometimes more than they earned working, subsidized of course by tax payer dollars because the agreed 6% would never grow that well, but is given an 8% minimum guaranteed rate of growth. Yes, PERS does work that way.

Lets assume a career teacher is at a nominal $60k rate, working 10 months for it. For any of us to retire as well as they do, we would have to contribute a max 15% to a 40kk system or better. To get as nice a health insurance package as they get, we would have to shell out maybe $4,000 a year or more. I shell out just under $2,000 annually, for a basic quality health plan.

What do we have...

$60,000 income
$4,000 insurance
$11,300 equivalent employer retirement paid (sold to the tax payer as $3,600)

Total...

$75,300, for 10 months work.

Now...

divided by 10 and multiplied by 12 is an annual equivalent of $90,360, or $43.44 per hour.

---

The health benefits my wife gets suck... platinum?:lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

lol...I never got 3 months off. If I was lucky, I might have been away from campus for 3 weeks...maybe.

---

Different states are different.

Did you get paid more for time spent outside the school cycle?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by George Gervin's Afro

The health benefits my wife gets suck... platinum?:lmao

---

Then maybe you should consider moving to Oregon.

So now salary is supposed to be congruent to actual labor hours.

What is fair pay for a corporate executive playing golf once a week during work hours?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Different states are different.

Did you get paid more for time spent outside the school cycle?

---

Wow...water is water.

No. I was on a 12 month contract.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Then maybe you should consider moving to Oregon.

---

so why do you post with such certainty ,when in actuality, when you have no idea how it is anywhere else?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coyotes_geek

That's because in the private sector both sides have to deal with economic realities such as the possibility of bankruptcy. Not so in the public services arena. There's nothing wrong with the concept of collective bargaining, but I think it's use should be restricted in the public arena. Especially when dealing with future retirement obligations such as pensions and long term healthcare. Defined benefit retirement obligations for public services have pretty much failed unilaterally across the nation.

---

I could not disagree more with your first statement. There is accountability in both sectors and they need not be the same devices to have the same effect.

The fact remains that public sector employees total compensation is perfectly in line with private sector employees. There have been studies that testify to this.

The idea that the public sector unions are fleecing us all is just a flat out lie.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

1680 hrs plus/minus a few hrs a year without getting overtime. Of course, I already removed the paid holidays. the full time, 40hr a week job is 2080 hrs minus holidays, or about 2016 hours.

---

Your assumptions suck, btw. What about Teachers who work at night grading papers? What about Teachers who work in their classrooms during holidays?

No, not all do/not do this. But it makes mincemeat of your assumptions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

I could not disagree more with your first statement. There is accountability in both sectors and they need not be the same devices to have the same effect.

The fact remains that public sector employees total compensation is perfectly in line with private sector employees. There have been studies that testify to this.

The idea that the public sector unions are fleecing us all is just a flat out lie.

---

What analysis I've seen comparing the two sectors has been far from compelling IMO. I'm not sure CG is making a point concerning fleecing....it's more along the lines of the relationship of the parties to the taxpayer in both populations.

Our society loves to give lip service to how great teachers are but hates to pay them.

And of course you could disagee more, MIG. I've seen you do it.:lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurminator

So now salary is supposed to be congruent to actual labor hours.

What is fair pay for a corporate executive playing golf once a week during work hours?

---

huh?

when has salary not been congruent to actual labor hours?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by George Gervin's Afro

The nut jobs don't want to hear that. My spouse regularly buys extra supplies and loads up on things that she knows that some kids will not be bale to bring from home. She often tells me of kids who wear the same clothes everyday and that they smell terrible. The same kids qualify for free breakfast and lunch so they at least get to eat. She buys snacks and other things for her kids..

don't tell wc or darrin that teachers do work during the summer and they go back to school up to 10 days prior to the students.. it wouldn't fit their narrative..

---

I don't get this at all either. My girlfriend regularly works 70 hour weeks easily, not including weekends. She spends her summers upgrading her lesson plan so that next year will be a better year for her students. If she had "3 months off" I'd bust her ass to get a second job because she doesn't make shit. Between student loans, gas, food, rent, health insurance she can't put anything away which puts a ton of pressure on me. I can't fathom where this hatred of teachers is coming from. Next thing you know they are going to attack crippled veterans for being a weight on the system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

What analysis I've seen comparing the two sectors has been far from compelling IMO. I'm not sure CG is making a point concerning fleecing....it's more along the lines of the relationship of the parties to the taxpayer in both populations.

---

The analysis I've seen shows more compensation through deffered methods such as pension in exchange to lower up front costs. I think CG is making a point about fleecing, however. If there is no fleecing going on then I fail to see how there are flaws in the relationship that are being exploited.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurminator

What is fair pay for a corporate executive playing golf once a week during work hours?

---

The going rate. Playing golf is serious effing business.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

And of course you could disagee more, MIG. I've seen you do it.:lol

---

:lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blake

huh?

when has salary not been congruent to actual labor hours?

---

Salaried employees are paid based on a number of factors... experience, education, skill, revenue generated, level within the company, etc.

Number of hours worked during the week/year is typically not very high on the list.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MIG

The analysis I've seen shows more compensation through deffered methods such as pension in exchange to lower up front costs. I think CG is making a point about fleecing, however. If there is no fleecing going on then I fail to see how there are flaws in the relationship that are being exploited.

---

A flaw is not predicated on an exploit. And there are more than zero that hold a reasoned viewpoint in opposition.

Me, I've got a foot in both camps with this issue. Sucks, really. Like cg, I think there is a fundamental flaw in using a negotiating model designed on private ownership of company vs. public/taxpayer (Yeah I know...kinda Pollyannaish of me), ownership.

You can certainly have a flaw without it being exploited but I have a hard time seeing the relevance of such a flaw.