Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No profession is underpaid. All professions operate under supply and demand.

You individually might feel like you are underpaid. If you are switch careers to a job that is in higher demand with a higher salary.

I don’t know if it’s as simple as this. There is no completely “free-market” supply and demand when there are so many interferences and artifices that affect the environment.

Teacher salaries are affected by teachers’ unions and bloated self-serving administrations among other things.
This means that the more difficult to fill positions cannot increase the salary in order to attract more applicants, so the worse schools have higher turnover, which in turn negatively affects those schools.

Personally I believe we need many more male teachers at all levels, but Union rules would not allow higher pay for that. And better quality teachers across the board. Now that women have many more options, smart women are not concentrated in teaching anymore. We’ll see how it pans out with AI, DOGE et al, and the loss of “laptop jobs”. We may find more willing high quality candidates for teaching.

I'm sorry but most men can't handle teaching. Or nursing. There's very few men in teaching due to two reasons: it's dang hard and in most of the country doesn't pay enough compared to the work involved.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A teacher around here can expect to make $90k a few years in for essentially 9 months of work (given the endless summers plus all the other holidays). That means average salaries are really more like $120k on an annualized basis. Plus the value of the pension that will easily bump it to a $130-140k equivalent. Plus generous benefits of all sorts. Pretty good for a union job with 100% job security and where you get to go home at 3pm!

Where is “around here”? How many years are “a few years in”?

This ranks right there with the “retire after 20 years, free healthcare, union negotiated” posts.

Oh give it up, that trope about the underpaid teacher is getting seriously old.

https://www.aei.org/articles/the-truth-about-teacher-pay/

"It is clear that the widely cited 21% teacher salary gap is a meaningless statistic. Furthermore, predictions generated by the underpaid-teacher hypothesis fail to be borne out by the data: Teachers rarely quit their jobs and, when they do, rarely cite low pay as the reason; only a tiny percentage of teachers’ salaries come from second jobs, and that percentage has been falling over time; there is no generalized teacher shortage; most teachers live comfortable middle-class lives; and teaching is not more stressful or time-consuming than the average job. Over and over again, we fail to find evidence that teachers as a group are underpaid.

"It is more likely that workers in public education are on average overpaid, in the sense that they could not earn as much in the private sector. Studies of teachers who switch jobs and comparisons of teaching to other occupations with the same BLS skill requirements suggest that the teacher wage penalty is close to zero. If that is true, then incorporating fringe benefits as measured in the NIPA would boost total teacher compensation about 18% above private-sector levels. This premium comes before adding the value of job security and the predictability of regular raises, which economic theory predicts would be offset by lower wages."

"If that is true, then incorporating fringe benefits as measured in the NIPA would boost total teacher compensation about 18% above private-sector levels. This premium comes before adding the value of job security and the predictability of regular raises, which economic theory predicts would be offset by lower wages."

Just because they're fairly compensated doesn't mean the whining will stop anytime soon. Always some other gripe

Again… please point to the whining?
As teachers, we know what whining sounds like. I haven’t read any on this thread. There is a difference between “whining” and “explaining.”

Then please actually "explain" it instead of just complaining. So far I've only seen a lot of griping how you think you deserve more money. Meanwhile the study cited above shows that teachers are actually compensated quite well relative to other comparable professions.

Actually, if you review this thread, you’ll realize that pay is NOT the major concern of teachers posting here. It’s workload. If you reread, you’ll find teachers explaining they work 3-4 extra hours a night, or all day on Saturdays, etc. They explain that they have half an hour a day allotted for all of the “extras” of teaching: planning, grading, attending meetings, attending trainings, responding to emails, updating data, etc. In fact, you will find at least two different teachers saying that they would prefer a more balanced workload than more pay. I do see posts in which teachers say they would appreciate compensation for the 20 or so extra hours a week, perhaps in the form of overtime. I also see teachers say they think they are fairly compensated for what people THINK the job is, but not necessarily for what it REALLY is.

I don’t see complaining or “griping.” I see people trying to explain to non-educators what the job is like and why people are quitting in droves.

As for the study, that’s once voice. I read the whole thing. It’s remarkably opinionated, and thanks to Covid, woefully out of date. All references to a perceived teacher shortage are no longer relevant because of the tremendous hit Covid had on this profession.

Teaching is no longer a profession that is attractive for the reasons that it once was, which is why there is a shortage. There is no way to pinpoint any one reason and I am sure that the reasons change according to the region. However, there is a shortage and no one can deny that, but how they chose to address it and whether those solutions are successful remains to be seen. The only way that I see to change the tide is to limit the job choices of women so they are again forced to choose from only a couple of careers because let's face it - that's the reason that the profession is dominated by women and also suffers lower than average pay when considering the education required.

The solution is to lesson the workload. That’s the *only* solution. Teachers should get at least half their work day to do the behind-the-scenes work required of the job. Planning, grading, report writing, trainings, correspondence, meetings… right now teachers are supposed to do all of this on their off-hours. It’s unacceptable. Reports from people fleeing the profession rarely mention pay as the reason for leaving. They mention workload and disrespect (from students, parents, and admin). Fix those.

We have plenty of people qualified and able to teach in this country. They just aren’t teaching because they made the easy decision to quit. Get them back by offering better conditions.

I think that each class should have 2 FT teachers that only teach core courses with specials and recess being first 1.5 hrs and last 1.5 hrs. So for example my kids ES starts at 830-240. One teacher would be responsible for 7-130. She has 1.5 hours to do grading, prep, IEPs, transitions to AM announcements and has the kids special first period plus 1st recess. The other core teacher comes in at 930-4. They do core work and lunches between 930-100. 1-230 is recess, special, and dismissal. Crossing guards should be a full-time position associated with the school and they perform recess oversight. The latter shift teacher has 1hr plus a bit to do grading, IEP, meetings, etc. This would also solve daycare and transportation dilemma for a lot of younger teachers.
I also think teachers should be allowed to obtain exemptions for their kids to attend their employer county schools, if desired. I know some districts allow this already but teachers arent just unmarried single women anymore and sometimes that isnt apparent from the expectations placed on teachers.

Teaching when I lived in Long Island it seem to get hired nearly all new hires grew up in school district. Long Island is a high cost area. Single teachers whose parents live in town live at home. They are highly paid considering they made a great salary, had zero housing expense. Back in the day, the ones I knew got houses in Hamptons, for summer, did bartending or stuff for extra cash. Some even lifeguarded at beach as a NYS employee it adds to pension. then they get married at 30 with a boatload of cash and many just bought a house in the school district. parents nearby, built in baby sitting and kids go same schools they teach at.

today that model is broken. Teachers need more pay for todays model. Or we go back to old model.

I see nothing wrong with that old model; indeed I see it still happening where I live in Fairfax County with many of our beloved teachers.
I don’t think my kids will be teachers but it would not be awful if they got jobs around here after college and moved home to save lots of money and then buy a house. The tide is turning and it’s no longer shameful to live with your parents in young adulthood.

Right but there is some benefit to kids who have teachers who have been in the profession for a long time. Just like any position there is institutional knowledge and most people get better with time in their position. Young unmarried women and men do well in the position because they dont have outside obligations outside of their own hobbies and desires. You cant have employment be untenable for 25-50 and only be great for those >25 without kids or >50 empty nesters.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A teacher around here can expect to make $90k a few years in for essentially 9 months of work (given the endless summers plus all the other holidays). That means average salaries are really more like $120k on an annualized basis. Plus the value of the pension that will easily bump it to a $130-140k equivalent. Plus generous benefits of all sorts. Pretty good for a union job with 100% job security and where you get to go home at 3pm!

Where is “around here”? How many years are “a few years in”?

This ranks right there with the “retire after 20 years, free healthcare, union negotiated” posts.

Oh give it up, that trope about the underpaid teacher is getting seriously old.

https://www.aei.org/articles/the-truth-about-teacher-pay/

"It is clear that the widely cited 21% teacher salary gap is a meaningless statistic. Furthermore, predictions generated by the underpaid-teacher hypothesis fail to be borne out by the data: Teachers rarely quit their jobs and, when they do, rarely cite low pay as the reason; only a tiny percentage of teachers’ salaries come from second jobs, and that percentage has been falling over time; there is no generalized teacher shortage; most teachers live comfortable middle-class lives; and teaching is not more stressful or time-consuming than the average job. Over and over again, we fail to find evidence that teachers as a group are underpaid.

"It is more likely that workers in public education are on average overpaid, in the sense that they could not earn as much in the private sector. Studies of teachers who switch jobs and comparisons of teaching to other occupations with the same BLS skill requirements suggest that the teacher wage penalty is close to zero. If that is true, then incorporating fringe benefits as measured in the NIPA would boost total teacher compensation about 18% above private-sector levels. This premium comes before adding the value of job security and the predictability of regular raises, which economic theory predicts would be offset by lower wages."

"If that is true, then incorporating fringe benefits as measured in the NIPA would boost total teacher compensation about 18% above private-sector levels. This premium comes before adding the value of job security and the predictability of regular raises, which economic theory predicts would be offset by lower wages."

Just because they're fairly compensated doesn't mean the whining will stop anytime soon. Always some other gripe

Again… please point to the whining?
As teachers, we know what whining sounds like. I haven’t read any on this thread. There is a difference between “whining” and “explaining.”

Then please actually "explain" it instead of just complaining. So far I've only seen a lot of griping how you think you deserve more money. Meanwhile the study cited above shows that teachers are actually compensated quite well relative to other comparable professions.

Actually, if you review this thread, you’ll realize that pay is NOT the major concern of teachers posting here. It’s workload. If you reread, you’ll find teachers explaining they work 3-4 extra hours a night, or all day on Saturdays, etc. They explain that they have half an hour a day allotted for all of the “extras” of teaching: planning, grading, attending meetings, attending trainings, responding to emails, updating data, etc. In fact, you will find at least two different teachers saying that they would prefer a more balanced workload than more pay. I do see posts in which teachers say they would appreciate compensation for the 20 or so extra hours a week, perhaps in the form of overtime. I also see teachers say they think they are fairly compensated for what people THINK the job is, but not necessarily for what it REALLY is.

I don’t see complaining or “griping.” I see people trying to explain to non-educators what the job is like and why people are quitting in droves.

As for the study, that’s once voice. I read the whole thing. It’s remarkably opinionated, and thanks to Covid, woefully out of date. All references to a perceived teacher shortage are no longer relevant because of the tremendous hit Covid had on this profession.

Teaching is no longer a profession that is attractive for the reasons that it once was, which is why there is a shortage. There is no way to pinpoint any one reason and I am sure that the reasons change according to the region. However, there is a shortage and no one can deny that, but how they chose to address it and whether those solutions are successful remains to be seen. The only way that I see to change the tide is to limit the job choices of women so they are again forced to choose from only a couple of careers because let's face it - that's the reason that the profession is dominated by women and also suffers lower than average pay when considering the education required.

The solution is to lesson the workload. That’s the *only* solution. Teachers should get at least half their work day to do the behind-the-scenes work required of the job. Planning, grading, report writing, trainings, correspondence, meetings… right now teachers are supposed to do all of this on their off-hours. It’s unacceptable. Reports from people fleeing the profession rarely mention pay as the reason for leaving. They mention workload and disrespect (from students, parents, and admin). Fix those.

We have plenty of people qualified and able to teach in this country. They just aren’t teaching because they made the easy decision to quit. Get them back by offering better conditions.

I think that each class should have 2 FT teachers that only teach core courses with specials and recess being first 1.5 hrs and last 1.5 hrs. So for example my kids ES starts at 830-240. One teacher would be responsible for 7-130. She has 1.5 hours to do grading, prep, IEPs, transitions to AM announcements and has the kids special first period plus 1st recess. The other core teacher comes in at 930-4. They do core work and lunches between 930-100. 1-230 is recess, special, and dismissal. Crossing guards should be a full-time position associated with the school and they perform recess oversight. The latter shift teacher has 1hr plus a bit to do grading, IEP, meetings, etc. This would also solve daycare and transportation dilemma for a lot of younger teachers.
I also think teachers should be allowed to obtain exemptions for their kids to attend their employer county schools, if desired. I know some districts allow this already but teachers arent just unmarried single women anymore and sometimes that isnt apparent from the expectations placed on teachers.

Teaching when I lived in Long Island it seem to get hired nearly all new hires grew up in school district. Long Island is a high cost area. Single teachers whose parents live in town live at home. They are highly paid considering they made a great salary, had zero housing expense. Back in the day, the ones I knew got houses in Hamptons, for summer, did bartending or stuff for extra cash. Some even lifeguarded at beach as a NYS employee it adds to pension. then they get married at 30 with a boatload of cash and many just bought a house in the school district. parents nearby, built in baby sitting and kids go same schools they teach at.

today that model is broken. Teachers need more pay for todays model. Or we go back to old model.

I see nothing wrong with that old model; indeed I see it still happening where I live in Fairfax County with many of our beloved teachers.
I don’t think my kids will be teachers but it would not be awful if they got jobs around here after college and moved home to save lots of money and then buy a house. The tide is turning and it’s no longer shameful to live with your parents in young adulthood.

Anonymous wrote:No profession is underpaid. All professions operate under supply and demand.

You individually might feel like you are underpaid. If you are switch careers to a job that is in higher demand with a higher salary.

I don’t know if it’s as simple as this. There is no completely “free-market” supply and demand when there are so many interferences and artifices that affect the environment.

Teacher salaries are affected by teachers’ unions and bloated self-serving administrations among other things.
This means that the more difficult to fill positions cannot increase the salary in order to attract more applicants, so the worse schools have higher turnover, which in turn negatively affects those schools.

Personally I believe we need many more male teachers at all levels, but Union rules would not allow higher pay for that. And better quality teachers across the board. Now that women have many more options, smart women are not concentrated in teaching anymore. We’ll see how it pans out with AI, DOGE et al, and the loss of “laptop jobs”. We may find more willing high quality candidates for teaching.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A teacher around here can expect to make $90k a few years in for essentially 9 months of work (given the endless summers plus all the other holidays). That means average salaries are really more like $120k on an annualized basis. Plus the value of the pension that will easily bump it to a $130-140k equivalent. Plus generous benefits of all sorts. Pretty good for a union job with 100% job security and where you get to go home at 3pm!

Where is “around here”? How many years are “a few years in”?

This ranks right there with the “retire after 20 years, free healthcare, union negotiated” posts.

Oh give it up, that trope about the underpaid teacher is getting seriously old.

https://www.aei.org/articles/the-truth-about-teacher-pay/

"It is clear that the widely cited 21% teacher salary gap is a meaningless statistic. Furthermore, predictions generated by the underpaid-teacher hypothesis fail to be borne out by the data: Teachers rarely quit their jobs and, when they do, rarely cite low pay as the reason; only a tiny percentage of teachers’ salaries come from second jobs, and that percentage has been falling over time; there is no generalized teacher shortage; most teachers live comfortable middle-class lives; and teaching is not more stressful or time-consuming than the average job. Over and over again, we fail to find evidence that teachers as a group are underpaid.

"It is more likely that workers in public education are on average overpaid, in the sense that they could not earn as much in the private sector. Studies of teachers who switch jobs and comparisons of teaching to other occupations with the same BLS skill requirements suggest that the teacher wage penalty is close to zero. If that is true, then incorporating fringe benefits as measured in the NIPA would boost total teacher compensation about 18% above private-sector levels. This premium comes before adding the value of job security and the predictability of regular raises, which economic theory predicts would be offset by lower wages."

"If that is true, then incorporating fringe benefits as measured in the NIPA would boost total teacher compensation about 18% above private-sector levels. This premium comes before adding the value of job security and the predictability of regular raises, which economic theory predicts would be offset by lower wages."

Just because they're fairly compensated doesn't mean the whining will stop anytime soon. Always some other gripe

Again… please point to the whining?
As teachers, we know what whining sounds like. I haven’t read any on this thread. There is a difference between “whining” and “explaining.”

Then please actually "explain" it instead of just complaining. So far I've only seen a lot of griping how you think you deserve more money. Meanwhile the study cited above shows that teachers are actually compensated quite well relative to other comparable professions.

Actually, if you review this thread, you’ll realize that pay is NOT the major concern of teachers posting here. It’s workload. If you reread, you’ll find teachers explaining they work 3-4 extra hours a night, or all day on Saturdays, etc. They explain that they have half an hour a day allotted for all of the “extras” of teaching: planning, grading, attending meetings, attending trainings, responding to emails, updating data, etc. In fact, you will find at least two different teachers saying that they would prefer a more balanced workload than more pay. I do see posts in which teachers say they would appreciate compensation for the 20 or so extra hours a week, perhaps in the form of overtime. I also see teachers say they think they are fairly compensated for what people THINK the job is, but not necessarily for what it REALLY is.

I don’t see complaining or “griping.” I see people trying to explain to non-educators what the job is like and why people are quitting in droves.

As for the study, that’s once voice. I read the whole thing. It’s remarkably opinionated, and thanks to Covid, woefully out of date. All references to a perceived teacher shortage are no longer relevant because of the tremendous hit Covid had on this profession.

Teaching is no longer a profession that is attractive for the reasons that it once was, which is why there is a shortage. There is no way to pinpoint any one reason and I am sure that the reasons change according to the region. However, there is a shortage and no one can deny that, but how they chose to address it and whether those solutions are successful remains to be seen. The only way that I see to change the tide is to limit the job choices of women so they are again forced to choose from only a couple of careers because let's face it - that's the reason that the profession is dominated by women and also suffers lower than average pay when considering the education required.

The solution is to lesson the workload. That’s the *only* solution. Teachers should get at least half their work day to do the behind-the-scenes work required of the job. Planning, grading, report writing, trainings, correspondence, meetings… right now teachers are supposed to do all of this on their off-hours. It’s unacceptable. Reports from people fleeing the profession rarely mention pay as the reason for leaving. They mention workload and disrespect (from students, parents, and admin). Fix those.

We have plenty of people qualified and able to teach in this country. They just aren’t teaching because they made the easy decision to quit. Get them back by offering better conditions.

I think that each class should have 2 FT teachers that only teach core courses with specials and recess being first 1.5 hrs and last 1.5 hrs. So for example my kids ES starts at 830-240. One teacher would be responsible for 7-130. She has 1.5 hours to do grading, prep, IEPs, transitions to AM announcements and has the kids special first period plus 1st recess. The other core teacher comes in at 930-4. They do core work and lunches between 930-100. 1-230 is recess, special, and dismissal. Crossing guards should be a full-time position associated with the school and they perform recess oversight. The latter shift teacher has 1hr plus a bit to do grading, IEP, meetings, etc. This would also solve daycare and transportation dilemma for a lot of younger teachers.
I also think teachers should be allowed to obtain exemptions for their kids to attend their employer county schools, if desired. I know some districts allow this already but teachers arent just unmarried single women anymore and sometimes that isnt apparent from the expectations placed on teachers.

Teaching when I lived in Long Island it seem to get hired nearly all new hires grew up in school district. Long Island is a high cost area. Single teachers whose parents live in town live at home. They are highly paid considering they made a great salary, had zero housing expense. Back in the day, the ones I knew got houses in Hamptons, for summer, did bartending or stuff for extra cash. Some even lifeguarded at beach as a NYS employee it adds to pension. then they get married at 30 with a boatload of cash and many just bought a house in the school district. parents nearby, built in baby sitting and kids go same schools they teach at.

today that model is broken. Teachers need more pay for todays model. Or we go back to old model.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A teacher around here can expect to make $90k a few years in for essentially 9 months of work (given the endless summers plus all the other holidays). That means average salaries are really more like $120k on an annualized basis. Plus the value of the pension that will easily bump it to a $130-140k equivalent. Plus generous benefits of all sorts. Pretty good for a union job with 100% job security and where you get to go home at 3pm!

Where is “around here”? How many years are “a few years in”?

This ranks right there with the “retire after 20 years, free healthcare, union negotiated” posts.

Oh give it up, that trope about the underpaid teacher is getting seriously old.

https://www.aei.org/articles/the-truth-about-teacher-pay/

"It is clear that the widely cited 21% teacher salary gap is a meaningless statistic. Furthermore, predictions generated by the underpaid-teacher hypothesis fail to be borne out by the data: Teachers rarely quit their jobs and, when they do, rarely cite low pay as the reason; only a tiny percentage of teachers’ salaries come from second jobs, and that percentage has been falling over time; there is no generalized teacher shortage; most teachers live comfortable middle-class lives; and teaching is not more stressful or time-consuming than the average job. Over and over again, we fail to find evidence that teachers as a group are underpaid.

"It is more likely that workers in public education are on average overpaid, in the sense that they could not earn as much in the private sector. Studies of teachers who switch jobs and comparisons of teaching to other occupations with the same BLS skill requirements suggest that the teacher wage penalty is close to zero. If that is true, then incorporating fringe benefits as measured in the NIPA would boost total teacher compensation about 18% above private-sector levels. This premium comes before adding the value of job security and the predictability of regular raises, which economic theory predicts would be offset by lower wages."

"If that is true, then incorporating fringe benefits as measured in the NIPA would boost total teacher compensation about 18% above private-sector levels. This premium comes before adding the value of job security and the predictability of regular raises, which economic theory predicts would be offset by lower wages."

Just because they're fairly compensated doesn't mean the whining will stop anytime soon. Always some other gripe

Again… please point to the whining?
As teachers, we know what whining sounds like. I haven’t read any on this thread. There is a difference between “whining” and “explaining.”

Then please actually "explain" it instead of just complaining. So far I've only seen a lot of griping how you think you deserve more money. Meanwhile the study cited above shows that teachers are actually compensated quite well relative to other comparable professions.

Actually, if you review this thread, you’ll realize that pay is NOT the major concern of teachers posting here. It’s workload. If you reread, you’ll find teachers explaining they work 3-4 extra hours a night, or all day on Saturdays, etc. They explain that they have half an hour a day allotted for all of the “extras” of teaching: planning, grading, attending meetings, attending trainings, responding to emails, updating data, etc. In fact, you will find at least two different teachers saying that they would prefer a more balanced workload than more pay. I do see posts in which teachers say they would appreciate compensation for the 20 or so extra hours a week, perhaps in the form of overtime. I also see teachers say they think they are fairly compensated for what people THINK the job is, but not necessarily for what it REALLY is.

I don’t see complaining or “griping.” I see people trying to explain to non-educators what the job is like and why people are quitting in droves.

As for the study, that’s once voice. I read the whole thing. It’s remarkably opinionated, and thanks to Covid, woefully out of date. All references to a perceived teacher shortage are no longer relevant because of the tremendous hit Covid had on this profession.

Teaching is no longer a profession that is attractive for the reasons that it once was, which is why there is a shortage. There is no way to pinpoint any one reason and I am sure that the reasons change according to the region. However, there is a shortage and no one can deny that, but how they chose to address it and whether those solutions are successful remains to be seen. The only way that I see to change the tide is to limit the job choices of women so they are again forced to choose from only a couple of careers because let's face it - that's the reason that the profession is dominated by women and also suffers lower than average pay when considering the education required.

The solution is to lesson the workload. That’s the *only* solution. Teachers should get at least half their work day to do the behind-the-scenes work required of the job. Planning, grading, report writing, trainings, correspondence, meetings… right now teachers are supposed to do all of this on their off-hours. It’s unacceptable. Reports from people fleeing the profession rarely mention pay as the reason for leaving. They mention workload and disrespect (from students, parents, and admin). Fix those.

We have plenty of people qualified and able to teach in this country. They just aren’t teaching because they made the easy decision to quit. Get them back by offering better conditions.

I think that each class should have 2 FT teachers that only teach core courses with specials and recess being first 1.5 hrs and last 1.5 hrs. So for example my kids ES starts at 830-240. One teacher would be responsible for 7-130. She has 1.5 hours to do grading, prep, IEPs, transitions to AM announcements and has the kids special first period plus 1st recess. The other core teacher comes in at 930-4. They do core work and lunches between 930-100. 1-230 is recess, special, and dismissal. Crossing guards should be a full-time position associated with the school and they perform recess oversight. The latter shift teacher has 1hr plus a bit to do grading, IEP, meetings, etc. This would also solve daycare and transportation dilemma for a lot of younger teachers.
I also think teachers should be allowed to obtain exemptions for their kids to attend their employer county schools, if desired. I know some districts allow this already but teachers arent just unmarried single women anymore and sometimes that isnt apparent from the expectations placed on teachers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s all supply vs demand.

Are teachers in Mississippi underpaid at like 30k a year? Absolutely.

Is an individual teacher making 30k in Mississippi underpaid? Maybe not. If we tripled the pay to 90k it’s more likely that the 30k teacher should be out of a job as the talent pool would increase and we would hire better teachers.

So even a teacher in Virginia making 100k who “thinks” they should make 200k May not be able to keep their job if we were fair about keeping it meritocratic. Even if they keep their jobs it would likely result in the majority of their coworkers losing their jobs if we are being fair.

True, but the unions would prevent the firing of bad teachers. Which is also why good teachers can't be paid more.

+1

Considering how hard it is to fire teachers, the automatic raises, pension and benefits, many teachers are compensated quite well. In MCPS, 85% of teachers have been there for 5 or more years and half have been there for at least 15 years. If the pay was so bad they would not be able to retain teachers this well.

I'm a teacher and I agree with you. The pay isn't the problem; the working conditions are.

Teachers feel trapped. Many of us would love to do something else, but the pension makes it hard to leave. So teachers start to cut corners in an effort to survive another 5, 10, or 20 years. That's why you see so many posts about "bad" teachers. They aren't necessarily bad teachers, but they are teachers who stop working tons of outside hours, so grades don't get done and emails don't get responses. It's merely survival. Ending work at 4pm instead of 8pm means you can last longer in a demanding profession.

If I had to choose between a 20% increase or a 20% reduction in job requirements, I'd take the reduction in workload. Without hesitation.

I would absolutely love for the union to focus on improving working conditions. The problem is that compensation costs are increasing faster than county revenues, and so there is less and less money every year for everything other than existing staffs' salaries.

Teachers are not underpaid. Match the income to the average educational attainment and I think it’s commensurate. The high achieving students most often have wealthy and involved parents so a good school is inframarginal to their achievements.

Anonymous wrote:Nurses are not underpaid.

one kid is a nurse, other marketig. The marketing major gets paid 30K more a year and goes to fancy conferences, and works from home two days a week in a 9-5 office job with free coffee and breakfast.

Day consists of of this, arrive 30-45 minutes early to have time to park in overflow lot (you pay to park in) take shuttle buss to main building, then clock in and do shift turn over. They work 12 hours, if busy 13-15 when add in charting, then 15-30 minutes back to car depending if you just miss shuttle buss.

Now nurses are paid low so some have 45 minute to one hour coummutes so cant afford to live in DC. So when my kid lived at home she live for work at 630 am for work do 8-8 shift with charting or issues could be 8-10pm then get home by 11 pm. And when she flipped day to nights she had to leave for work at 630am next day for day shift, meaning she had to get up around 545am at latest to get ready for work So she literally only had 5-7 hours between shifts.

She often during a 37 hour period between a shif change work 30 hours. Yes 30 hours out of 37 hours. Amd some of nurses since salary is onlyl 80-90k do a per diem shift in another hospital. So that makes is a 50-60 hour work week all on your feet. Just to make what a junior marketing person at Fannie Mae who is 34 year old makes

I make 120k teaching year round in a HCOL area (no summers off). I feel adequately paid. But I also get beat up, spit on, scratched, etc daily. I’d be happy if I had more support with behavior management.

Loudoun County teachers have it great. 7ish hours a day, tons and tons of holidays, if they cover a class during their daily “resource” time they get paid time and a half. It’s a really good gig. Prorated and they’re probably making more than the majority of county residents.

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think either is underpaid. It depends on where you live. Teachers are well paid in some areas, and so are nurses. Underpaid seems to be the exception, not the rule.

I disagree. Virtually all of the south, and most of the rest of the country underpays it's teachers. Parts of IL, parts of CA, parts of NY, parts of NJ and a few other places pay decently. I'm in IL, there are a few suburbs that pay well. The city pays well. But nearly all of the south suburbs of Chicago pay crap. Nearly all of IL outside of an hour from the city pays ok or terrible. And if you change districts or move across the country you get 2-5 years credit in the new district. My spouse is in one of the top four paying districts in our state and he can never leave until he retires. We looked at moving to Madison, WI and he would take more than a 50% pay cut. Madison might have a slightly lower COL but not 50% lower.

I know teachers in AZ and NOLA. They both work second jobs just to survive. I'm talking people in their 50s who are frugal.

That said, if you can get a job in a place where COL isn't crazy and pay is highish and the pension is strong, AND you can survive the system 30-35 years, the pension can be very, very good. My spouse will teach at his school til he hits 34 years to get the max pension. I left my public school that paid decently, not amazing, 18 years in cause I couldn't take the behavior any more. My pension will be much, much smaller than his. That's ok. We are on track to be well positioned for retirement as we've always saved heavily on top of contributing to the pensions.

And nurses, I personally believe no nurse should make less than 100k as a starting salary. Those people are my heroes.

Because historically it was women's work.

I don’t think either is underpaid. It depends on where you live. Teachers are well paid in some areas, and so are nurses. Underpaid seems to be the exception, not the rule.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s all supply vs demand.

Are teachers in Mississippi underpaid at like 30k a year? Absolutely.

Is an individual teacher making 30k in Mississippi underpaid? Maybe not. If we tripled the pay to 90k it’s more likely that the 30k teacher should be out of a job as the talent pool would increase and we would hire better teachers.

So even a teacher in Virginia making 100k who “thinks” they should make 200k May not be able to keep their job if we were fair about keeping it meritocratic. Even if they keep their jobs it would likely result in the majority of their coworkers losing their jobs if we are being fair.

True, but the unions would prevent the firing of bad teachers. Which is also why good teachers can't be paid more.

+1

Considering how hard it is to fire teachers, the automatic raises, pension and benefits, many teachers are compensated quite well. In MCPS, 85% of teachers have been there for 5 or more years and half have been there for at least 15 years. If the pay was so bad they would not be able to retain teachers this well.

I'm a teacher and I agree with you. The pay isn't the problem; the working conditions are.

Teachers feel trapped. Many of us would love to do something else, but the pension makes it hard to leave. So teachers start to cut corners in an effort to survive another 5, 10, or 20 years. That's why you see so many posts about "bad" teachers. They aren't necessarily bad teachers, but they are teachers who stop working tons of outside hours, so grades don't get done and emails don't get responses. It's merely survival. Ending work at 4pm instead of 8pm means you can last longer in a demanding profession.

If I had to choose between a 20% increase or a 20% reduction in job requirements, I'd take the reduction in workload. Without hesitation.