In their demands for more money than the system of supply and demand allows, teachers are not any worse in their introspective ways of thinking than are the absurd sums demanded by doctors and lawyers and politicians. These professions, not jobs, are preceived by most members as noble pursuits, a sacrifice beyond the calling of, lets say, a truck driver or a plumber.
And as such they expect more. They feel slighted if they can’t reap rewards in accordance with their self-considered worth, and so, they thwart the laws of supply and demand and form self-interest unions - the AMA, the Americian Bar Association, and the Teachers Union. (Politicians have their own devices.)
These divisionistic unions restrict supply and hype demand, to the extent of the diminished well-being of other people. Those to whom their members are supposed to serve.
By-in-large the teachers, lawyers, and doctors of these United States have sold out their own once-held noble sense of belonging to a communal group with a common destiny, to raw and abjectly monetary, self-centered greed.
I think a big reason for this is certification. A friend of mine was hired to teach English at a private school, and also to be in charge of the theatre department. He has the same degree that I do (BA Theatre), took most of the same classes, and he was hired to teach English just so the school could have him run the theatre department. This would not have happened in a public school, as he did not have the required skills to teach, according to the state. Therefore, they paid him less than another school would pay a more qualified English teacher.
I would also like to address a point made in the linked article. He states:
This is IMHO completely false. My parents are both teachers (one retired now) and the recent trend toward smaller class sizes has not reduced their work load that much. Now the have the time to spend helping the slower students, or challenging the faster ones, and I can not see how anyone would want the responsiblity of 40 teenagers in one class. Most universities base their adverts around a low prof to student ratio. Should that trend toward more personal education be reversed? Absolutely not.
Just realized this may be a bit off topic. Sorry about that. Even though I am biased (both parents teachers), I think teachers are paid just about the right amount.
On preview: Milum, I find it hard to beleive that your post is serious. My parents together made enough money to raise 2 kids, own a home, a couple of cars, and retire somewhat comfortably. No more, sometimes a little less. Putting them in the same catagory as doctors and lawyers seems a bit over the top. How can someone who makes between 30,000 (lowest) and 50,000 (highest) have the greed-inspired ego that you talk about? How much should they get paid? Does the fact that you make money doing whatever it is that you do make you guilty of the same “abjectly monetary, self-centered greed?”
"The average starting teacher salary for 2002-2003 is $27,860.
This year’s average beginning salary is 14.9 percent greater than the state minimum starting salary of $24,240.
<bolding mine> I correct myself…the min. pay is NOT 23K sorry it’s $24,240/yr.
The average maximum hiring rate on teacher salary schedules is $44,735. The average salary for 20 years of experience is $42,981"
The weighted average teacher salary in responding districts is $39,960 in 2002-2003.
"Although simply completing high school improves earnings outlook, the average high school graduate will earn an estimated average annual income of $30,109 and $1.2 million in a lifetime.
The average college graduate stands to net nearly twice as much, with a $51,097 average annual income adding up over 40 years of earning potential to more than $2.04 million."
Just a few figures I thought were interesting.
Sorry guys, but I can’t raise a family and keep my head above water on 25K a year.
and BTW, I agree there are many teachers that should be elsewhere. Not everyone is capable of being a teacher either. It takes a special something to do it well. Something you don’t learn in school or at college. Oh well, live and learn…g-nite.
I couldn’t raise a family and keep my head above water on $25K a year, either. But when got our of school and started working I made $16K a year without benefits. Starting off at a low rate of pay is part of life unless you’ve got a rich father or a great jump shot.
Just wanted to point out that - at least in a 2-income family, it is a tremendous benefit to have one parent’s work schedule closely parallel their kids’ school vacation schedule.
Of course, that does not include the relatively recent explosion in what I consider largely useless in-service/institute/curriculum/early dismissal/whatever days when the kids don’t attend a full day of school for no clearly discernible reason or purpose. (I have several friends/relatives who are teachers or otherwise involved in the local public schools. All agree that these “teacher” days are a monumental waste of time. Admittedly, mine is a limited sample.
Also, at least in my area, teachers’ benefits and pensions are equal to if not better than any other group I can think of. And, in today’s job market, tenure doesn’t suck.
And, DAMN am I sick and tired about hearing teachers whine about actually having to do work outside of their standard scheduled duty hours. Open your eyes and look around you, folks. That doesn’t exactly make you or your profession unique!
My personal situation - my wife and I are both lawyers. She stopped working full time when our 3d kid was born 12 years ago. She has been teaching business law for the past decade at the local community college. This fall she is going back to school to obtain her secondary education certification. So, apparently, the position has benefits apparent to SOME folks.
In my home state (West Virginia, which notoriously underpays its teachers relative to adjacent states), people joke that if you want to send your kids to good schools, move just over the border into Ohio, Virginia, Pennsylvania or Kentucky.
I feel you’re nitpicking here, whistlepig, and ignoring the gist of SmackFu’s question. Could you answer the question he raised and replace the word “overtime” with “hours”? That’ll get us past the semantic debate and right to the heart of the matter.
I mean, out of the list from the article linked in the OP, how many do you think work from 9 to 5 and then do nothing at home? The list included:
IOW, citing a teacher having to grade papers on the weekends is a non-argument for wage increases (IMO).
