Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
the average education level in public sector is more advanced than the average education level in private sector. so every time someone points out that the average pay and benefits for public sector employees is more than double the average private sector, they conveniently leave out the fact that the 1.3 million people who work at wal--mart, mostly with no high school education and making $9/hr, are private sector employees counted in the "average pay and benefits".
factually misleading argument.
when you offer such generous pay and benefits, you have lots of competition for the positions and can demand more education. that doesnt mean that its needed to do the job right. even still, id be happy to see the comparison done with equivalent levels of education/experience. pay will probably be more comparable but benefits will still probably be far superior in the public sector.
i'd argue most people in the private sector wouldn't last a day in teaching either. i sure as hell won't ever do it.
i hire people of varying levels of education and pay rates so i have an idea of what i can get someone to do their job for. of course, its always nice to be able to offer more pay and benefits and get higher educated/experienced people but in a for profit company you need to find the lowest paid person that can do the job right.
i dont really like to get into the whole notion of how hard the job is or how hard it is to work with kids. the reality of it is that its a job and what people care about is what they get paid.
when you offer such generous pay and benefits, you have lots of competition for the positions and can demand more education. that doesnt mean that its needed to do the job right. even still, id be happy to see the comparison done with equivalent levels of education/experience. pay will probably be more comparable but benefits will still probably be far superior in the public sector.
this i believe has been done and your guess i am pretty sure is correct. pay is actually less in public than private though from all the things i've read when dealing with comparable education levels, as they often claim, but benefits are definitely better in public which i don't think anyone denies. so in the end, the argument is kinda pointless.
i hire people of varying levels of education and pay rates so i have an idea of what i can get someone to do their job for. of course, its always nice to be able to offer more pay and benefits and get higher educated/experienced people but in a for profit company you need to find the lowest paid person that can do the job right.
i dont really like to get into the whole notion of how hard the job is or how hard it is to work with kids. the reality of it is that its a job and what people care about is what they get paid.
depends on the type of company. the lowest paid person that can do the job right isn't always the most desirable. you may want to give a person a bit more to create loyalty, if there is a benefit to your company. if it's largely a disposable job (say, a waiter, a cashier, etc) where there are tons more ready to fill in, yeah. but in a lot of the successful private companies you'll see it time and time again, they give their employees benefits and perks and salaries to create loyalty and a positive environment. look at the top companies in the fortune 500 for examples. SAS, Google, etc.
depends on the type of company. the lowest paid person that can do the job right isn't always the most desirable. you may want to give a person a bit more to create loyalty, if there is a benefit to your company. if it's largely a disposable job (say, a waiter, a cashier, etc) where there are tons more ready to fill in, yeah. but in a lot of the successful private companies you'll see it time and time again, they give their employees benefits and perks and salaries to create loyalty and a positive environment. look at the top companies in the fortune 500 for examples. SAS, Google, etc.
anyways, enough for a saturday. back to painting.
i agree, you have a lot of factors involved in deciding on appropriate compensation. i think for profits would do a lot better job. the government should contract out the teacher positions to the lowest bidder.
painting the babies room? let me tell you brady, your life is going to suck for a few months after that baby is born. (im half kidding on that) my life was still pretty great but it was rougher.
If you do a search for an article called "The Teacher Pay Myth" this is all explained.
Basically, if you compare total compensation per day worked (that's important!) including benefits, teachers do not make less than private sector employees, in fact they often make more. Also taking into account years experience and quality of credentials.
And of course, tenure must be worth something too, something private sector employees don't have.
i'd argue most people in the private sector wouldn't last a day in teaching either. i sure as hell won't ever do it.
Eh. I guess you have to like working with kids, but to be honest, I haven't met many in the field that really like kids all that much.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
