The High Cost of Low Teacher Salaries

[Anonymous]

Yes, yes -- Angela and teachers have it much harder than anyone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that Montgomery County school teachers get paid pretty well, actually. THe salaries that grads said they would teach for in the article are pretty much in line with what MOCO salaries are. Granted they are not on par with the lawyers around, but I think they are fair for a BA or MA in teaching. Of course, I am a social worker so my standards aren't that high for salaries. & the pub school benefits tack on thousands more--they are awesome benefits.

salary schedule: http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/departments/ersc/employees/pay/schedules/salary_schedule_mcea_current.pdf

Really?! I started 6 years ago with a BA making about $43,000. Since then I have gotten an MA and taken a TON of classes(spending a lot of money) to reach the level of MA + 60 credits, and do you know what I earn? $59,922. Yeah, I'm still paid at the level of a 4th year teacher since we haven't had raises in 2 years and I'm still sub $60K. I'm as far as I can get until we start getting step increases again.

A 40% increase in salary in 6 years -- especially when 2 of those years have been part of the worst recession our country has seen since the Great Depression -- sounds pretty incredible to me. I'm in government too (not teaching), and we haven't gotten those types of raises. Granted, I'm further along in my career than you, and most of the biggest advances are when you first start out. But it really is all relative. Most private sector people I know took 20-40% cuts in salary since 2008 because of the recession....if they kept their jobs at all.

Did you see the part where I said that I got my MA and took 60 additional credits as well? I didn't just get a 40% increase, I worked hard for it because I realized it was the only way to make a decent living and actually have ANY type of increase. Not to mention, of course, that all of the professional development has helped me to become an even better teacher.

It looks like I'll be making about $4K less next year if the council approves the current budget - great.

[Anonymous]

You had me up to the point that you indicated that you could not afford to live in the county. My guess is that you can afford to live in the county but choose not to because you can afford a nicer house, better school and better living somewhere else. It is the same trade-off that we all make, live in an apt., condo, small home or move away and buy something bigger. I here people complain about not being able to live in certain counties all of the time but in general they are unwilling to live in the neighborhood or house that is in their price range in their desired county. Obviously there are families living there, choosing to live there.

Are you absolutely kidding?? Yes, a family of 5 needs to live in a 1-bedroom condo for 300K to stay in Montgomery County? Sometimes I really wonder about the people on this forum.

[Anonymous]

According to NPR/WAMU this morning, MCPS budget cuts are going to be directed at teachers' benefit packages (probably healthcare). According to the report, Valerie Ervin said that taxpayers have been "taxed to the hilt" and that they don't have any other choice.

I'm pretty sure that no one will object to teachers' healthcare costs going up, even after their pension contributions have gone up as well, and Valerie Ervin & Co. know that. For my DH (an MCPS teacher), the pension piece already amounts to a $1700 pay cut for next year. The healthcare piece will likely be another several thousand dollars in paycuts.

I suppose that if class sizes don’t go up but teachers' insurance premiums do, people will be indifferent because that won’t effect them directly. Teachers are (as this thread suggests) viewed as a bunch of greedy whiners.

The true cost of this will take years and years for people to see – how lousy the schools become – and by then, it will be too late to do anything.

On a related note, I would happily pay more taxes if the County would e.g. not fund the Fillmore, or Costco in Wheaton. I'm stunned that the citizens of MoCo are not outraged by this sort of use of county money. Are people really so numb to how their tax dollars are being used?

[Anonymous]

"*to so ignorantly state that teachers are "lucky to have summers off" when MOST are working second jobs "


Evidence?

[Anonymous]

Only teachers would consider having to pay more for their health care a "paycut." Again, nothing that isn't happening to other employees also.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/HealthCare/healthcare-cost-burden-shifting-employers-employees/story?id=11555746

And in case you didn't notice employers (like mine) cut company matches for 401k contributions, which still haven't returned. That is my own self-funded "pension" with no taxpayer contribution and for years now no company contribution.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123803147918143721.html

I don't think teachers are greedy. I just think they like to complain.

[Anonymous]

"I don't think teachers are greedy. I just think they like to complain. "

Teachers are among those with the lowest SAT scores.

[Anonymous]

I'm pretty sure that no one will object to teachers' healthcare costs going up, even after their pension contributions have gone up as well, and Valerie Ervin & Co. know that. For my DH (an MCPS teacher), the pension piece already amounts to a $1700 pay cut for next year. The healthcare piece will likely be another several thousand dollars in paycuts.

As I understand it, this is and will be the case with other employees - cops, firemen, etc. Do you have any reasons teachers should be treated differently than those other employees?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Only teachers would consider having to pay more for their health care a "paycut." Again, nothing that isn't happening to other employees also.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/HealthCare/healthcare-cost-burden-shifting-employers-employees/story?id=11555746

And in case you didn't notice employers (like mine) cut company matches for 401k contributions, which still haven't returned. That is my own self-funded "pension" with no taxpayer contribution and for years now no company contribution.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123803147918143721.html

I don't think teachers are greedy. I just think they like to complain.

Correct, except that teachers earn less (far less) than those in the private sector.

Good school districts offer competitive pay and competitive benefits packages. This is a statistical fact. Cutting benefits packages will translate to an inability to attract talent, which will eventually have a negative impact in the classroom - and on our kids' educational experiences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Only teachers would consider having to pay more for their health care a "paycut." Again, nothing that isn't happening to other employees also.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/HealthCare/healthcare-cost-burden-shifting-employers-employees/story?id=11555746

And in case you didn't notice employers (like mine) cut company matches for 401k contributions, which still haven't returned. That is my own self-funded "pension" with no taxpayer contribution and for years now no company contribution.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123803147918143721.html

I don't think teachers are greedy. I just think they like to complain.

Correct, except that teachers earn less (far less) than those in the private sector.

Good school districts offer competitive pay and competitive benefits packages. This is a statistical fact. Cutting benefits packages will translate to an inability to attract talent, which will eventually have a negative impact in the classroom - and on our kids' educational experiences.

Well yes because they work 180-190 days a year compared to 300+ for the private sector. I would be willing to take a massive pay cut (from my $50k/year job with my masters degree) to have summers off but then I would just get fired.

[Anonymous]

"Well yes because they work 180-190 days a year compared to 300+ for the private sector. I would be willing to take a massive pay cut (from my $50k/year job with my masters degree) to have summers off but then I would just get fired. "

Ditto. Plus Winter and Spring Breaks!!!! Awesome.

[Anonymous]

"Good school districts offer competitive pay and competitive benefits packages. This is a statistical fact. Cutting benefits packages will translate to an inability to attract talent, which will eventually have a negative impact in the classroom - and on our kids' educational experiences."

I don't care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Only teachers would consider having to pay more for their health care a "paycut." Again, nothing that isn't happening to other employees also.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/HealthCare/healthcare-cost-burden-shifting-employers-employees/story?id=11555746

And in case you didn't notice employers (like mine) cut company matches for 401k contributions, which still haven't returned. That is my own self-funded "pension" with no taxpayer contribution and for years now no company contribution.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123803147918143721.html

I don't think teachers are greedy. I just think they like to complain.

Correct, except that teachers earn less (far less) than those in the private sector.

Good school districts offer competitive pay and competitive benefits packages. This is a statistical fact. Cutting benefits packages will translate to an inability to attract talent, which will eventually have a negative impact in the classroom - and on our kids' educational experiences.

Well yes because they work 180-190 days a year compared to 300+ for the private sector. I would be willing to take a massive pay cut (from my $50k/year job with my masters degree) to have summers off but then I would just get fired.

I'm not sure of the exact numbers, but most public school teachers in our area work closer to 200 days a year. They get 9 weeks off in the summer as well as spring and winter breaks. It seems a bit far-fetched to say the average private sector job is 300+ days a year. Most jobs get at least two weeks of vacation. So, if you work 5 days a week for 50 weeks a year, that equals 250 work days. (and most of us get much more vacation time than 2 weeks! I know that I get closer to 30 days of vacation and personal leave a year...so I'm only working 20 days a year more than teachers but I get paid a whole lot more.)

I don't know why there is all this negativity and disrespect towards teachers. Is it jealousy that they get the summers off?

[Anonymous]

We are losing some of the most promising young people to early burn out.

I haven't seen much data to support this statement in terms of people leaving teaching to do a different job. All the teachers I know that quit left to be SAHMs and most plan to go back once their kids are in school. Most teachers are women and start young - I think that it's normal to expect that a sizable % of them will leave to stay w/ their kids for a few years.

To the compensation point - teachers focus mostly on what they are paid and very little on the value of their benefits. Benefits aren't free and it's a fact that school/public sector benefits are much more generous than the current private sector benefits in most industries. If teachers wanted to swap some benefits for income, I doubt many would object - say moving from a pension to a fix contribution 401K system. But you can't just keep saying we need more money for higher salaries while the benefits in particular are at unsustainably high levels for the county and state. The math just doesn't work and MD is already a very high-tax place. The answer is not simply to keep ratcheting up taxes to fund ever higher benefit packages.

[Anonymous]

"I don't know why there is all this negativity and disrespect towards teachers. Is it jealousy that they get the summers off? "

Consumer responses.