:lolQuote:
Originally Posted by clambake
Printable View
:lolQuote:
Originally Posted by clambake
http://swz.salary.com/SalaryWizard/l...+Antonio%2C+TXQuote:
Originally Posted by coyotes_geek
Quote:
Originally Posted by boutons_deux
Quote:
Originally Posted by coyotes_geek
Here's the thing, aren't they just trying to get what the free market will pay them?
:lmao:lmao:lmaoQuote:
Originally Posted by MannyIsGod
After decades of the War on Employees and union busting, I'd love to see bully Rahm Emmanuel get bullied back and the teachers get 100% of their demands.
I'd jizz my pants if I made 76k a year. I think most people in America would jizz the shit out of their pants if they made that much money a year especially if it was just teaching. Why are these Chicago teachers bitching? Yep, I said Chicago. I'm a racist now because I said Chicago.
Not sure if srs.Quote:
Originally Posted by MannyIsGod
This isn't a free market situation since it's a negotiation between two monopolies, government provider of public education and union provider of public education teachers. Neither party faces a free market threat of competition, let alone a threat of going out of business. Both parties are also playing with a third party's money, that being the taxpayers.Quote:
Originally Posted by MannyIsGod
That being said, sure, the teachers are just trying to get what they can get. The tactic they've chosen to achieve those means is to hold hostage a child's education. Personally, that tactic doesn't sit well with me.
As for whether or not the teachers should get what they're asking for, the school district is already facing a $1 billion dollar budget shortfall, the teachers were already making double the national average, and as CC noted in the OP, the percentage of 9th graders who make it to graduation is basically a coin flip. It's certainly fair to point out that teachers aren't solely responsible for that low graduation rate, but it's equally fair to ask what the taxpayers would be getting for their money? Is paying the teachers more going to have a benefit to someone other than the teachers?
http://www.infoplease.com/business/e...us-cities.htmlQuote:
Originally Posted by Jacob1983
http://www.bls.gov/eag/eag.us.htm
Monopolies are free market entities.Quote:
Originally Posted by coyotes_geek
Incorrect. A monopoly is as anti-free market as it gets.
In any event, my points were just to point out some of the ridiculous inconsistencies that come with the public perception of these situations. When doctors or an organization like the AMA hold our health hostage is not viewed in the same way as what these teachers are doing. I personally think they're wrong but I do also think they're doing the same thing many corporations do on a daily basis which is flex their leverage as much as possible with little regard to the morality of the situation or the consequences outside of their gain.
When people here excuse an action by a company saying that their only looking out for their shareholders well I believe that the teachers are pretty much doing the same type of thing. I think its wrong in both scenarios.
Depends on who's defining free market, CG. If its absolutist such as Ann Raynd then its not. But its not like anyone up for major office cites her as a major influence. (I realize my argument is partially straw but it is mainly rhetorical)Quote:
Originally Posted by coyotes_geek
False equivalence. The AMA isn't a labor union, nor have doctors striked en-mass against the public.Quote:
Originally Posted by MannyIsGod
Its not meant to be a perfect analogy. If you want to look past the forest for the trees then by all means.
I'm tired of how powerful the NEA is. Teachers are paid too much in many places. A quick search showed the the average police officer salary in Chicago is $66k. Why should teachers get paid more than someone who risks their life.
If I'm not mistaken, what they mean by "before benefits" is really "before deductions for benefits are factored in." And apparently they pay quite a bit more for health insurance than most.Quote:
Originally Posted by coyotes_geek
By that logic, why should lawyers get paid more than police officers?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
I'd be pissed too if 40% of my evaluation was worthless standardised test scores of the students. That has to be completely soul-stealing to have to constantly teach the No Child Left Behind test questions that the students get absolutely nothing out of.
Do you make more than a Portland police officer, WC?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
the presidential election is right around the corner and they know it's the right time to demand even more than what they've already got, greed is human's instinct and you never have too much money imho.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacob1983
just another example why the education system is corrupted and a reform is urgently needed, while the majority of college graduates are either unemployed or underpaid, the teachers earn 76k a year on average and still not satisfied.
76k ain't shit in Chicago.
I know several teachers in the Chicago area after living there for a couple of years. None of them make even CLOSE to $76k. That figure sounds pretty far out there, TBH.
private sector is where the money isQuote:
Originally Posted by Cry Havoc
public sector is mainly KPI meeting targets and u get a promotion, if not u get kicked to the curb or sent into the shits of the country to teach...