U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-01-2016, 07:34 PM
 
Location: Hampstead NC
5,483 posts, read 5,002,896 times
Reputation: 13858

Advertisements

LOL< i'm sure they're confident this isn't going to be a problem because no teacher will want to teach in NC for the 5 years it takes to get vested in the retirement program. They'll all just move away long before they can retire.

I do wonder, however, if these people would be eligible for policies via the healthcare market place? (Assuming the program lasts that long)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-01-2016, 07:34 PM
 
1,335 posts, read 731,864 times
Reputation: 877
Quote:
Originally Posted by OrganicSmallHome View Post
$54,000 is peanuts. Bringing the salary to the top level of teachers in the Southeast is nothing to be proud of. Teachers with extensive training and experience should be making at least $75,000/year. We're talking here about the education of the state's children. I'll never understand why Americans have so little respect for the education and work of teachers. Parents and society in general today put enormous burdens on teachers; they expect miracles, but don't want to pay for it. If you want to see American children continue to fall behind their counterparts in Europe--where teachers are respected and well paid--then fine, continue to belittle teachers and deprive them of a professional salary and benefits. But remember that it's the children who suffer, as well as our nation.
Why not start at $100,000 and work up from there?

That's the problem with government jobs. True value has to be guessed at and pay scales are set arbitrarily. I would put teachers somewhere below police officers, but above social workers.

Also, if we're talking about yearly salary, wouldn't $54,000 for 9 months of work equate to $67,500 for the 12 months most other government employees are working? I'd imagine teachers could find additional work those 3 months and bump their income up substantially if they were so inclined. Most every other yearly salary figure we have to compare against would not be careers with that option.

Last edited by vulfpeck; 06-01-2016 at 08:39 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-01-2016, 07:37 PM
 
1,335 posts, read 731,864 times
Reputation: 877
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stagemomma View Post
LOL< i'm sure they're confident this isn't going to be a problem because no teacher will want to teach in NC for the 5 years it takes to get vested in the retirement program. They'll all just move away long before they can retire.
Teacher turnover in North Carolina is actually lower than the national average. Only about 1% moved or left the profession due to dissatisfaction last year. The majority of attrition is due to retirement, taking other teaching jobs within the state, or a spouse relocating for work.

The increased pay scale in the current budget will only improve the outlook.

Last edited by vulfpeck; 06-01-2016 at 08:47 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-01-2016, 09:11 PM
 
Location: Raleigh NC
8,935 posts, read 6,988,540 times
Reputation: 7935
I'm concerned whether some folks in this thread understand that the benefit in question is RETIREMENT health care. It really sounds like some believe that current teachers or state employees that are already employees would lose those benefits. Or, heaven forbid, that we would quit altogether providing benefits to CURRENT employees.

Isn't it ALL state employees, and not just teachers?

It is quite simply telling NEW employees that they will no longer have guaranteed benefits upon retirement. They can get Obamacare or whatever private industry remaining can obtain.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-01-2016, 09:16 PM
 
2,361 posts, read 2,633,125 times
Reputation: 2289
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoBromhal View Post
I'm concerned whether some folks in this thread understand that the benefit in question is RETIREMENT health care. It really sounds like some believe that current teachers or state employees that are already employees would lose those benefits. Or, heaven forbid, that we would quit altogether providing benefits to CURRENT employees.

Isn't it ALL state employees, and not just teachers?

It is quite simply telling NEW employees that they will no longer have guaranteed benefits upon retirement. They can get Obamacare or whatever private industry remaining can obtain.
That is correct, and if passed, the current legislature will be overturned as well as the governor who signs it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-01-2016, 09:25 PM
 
1,335 posts, read 731,864 times
Reputation: 877
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoBromhal View Post
I'm concerned whether some folks in this thread understand that the benefit in question is RETIREMENT health care.
We were paying for healthcare of people that we no longer employed? What the what? That's some primo cush benefits. I wish my job offered that. I guess tax money goes a lot farther than honest revenue.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-01-2016, 09:35 PM
 
Location: Raleigh NC
8,935 posts, read 6,988,540 times
Reputation: 7935
promising long-term benefits to folks who are otherwise underpaid to the private market is not that cushy. don't overlook that. Truly, government employment has pretty much always been for those who valued stability and benefits over pay.

But I'm not sure what mlhm5 is even trying to say in his last post. It's as if he/she acknowledges that it's absolutely correct that this ONLY affects FUTURE NEW employees, but that it will be proclaimed as something worse.

It's pretty much like screeching at 70 year olds that the Congress will starve them and cut their SS benefits when any proposal to curtail benefits only concerns those for whom such benefits are decades away.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-02-2016, 08:07 AM
 
901 posts, read 837,854 times
Reputation: 878
Quote:
Originally Posted by vulfpeck View Post
Why not start at $100,000 and work up from there?

That's the problem with government jobs. True value has to be guessed at and pay scales are set arbitrarily. I would put teachers somewhere below police officers, but above social workers.

Also, if we're talking about yearly salary, wouldn't $54,000 for 9 months of work equate to $67,500 for the 12 months most other government employees are working? I'd imagine teachers could find additional work those 3 months and bump their income up substantially if they were so inclined. Most every other yearly salary figure we have to compare against would not be careers with that option.
Interesting, why would you rank police officer pay over teacher pay? Seems like the same sort of logic that favors increasing prison population over education and healthcare. The only economic justification I can think of is one is a male dominated profession and the other female dominated. If we had to choose, would we want our best teachers to quit teaching and become cops or would we want our best cops to become teachers.

Salaries aren't arbitrary because of guessing, the issue is we have unlimited demand for most government services. At some point, we can only pay what we can afford and can only hire the talent that exists. It's really a matter of deciding how much capital, both money and human, we want to allocate to public vs. private purposes. It's one of the great debates.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-02-2016, 09:53 AM
 
1,335 posts, read 731,864 times
Reputation: 877
Quote:
Originally Posted by BullCity75 View Post
Interesting, why would you rank police officer pay over teacher pay? Seems like the same sort of logic that favors increasing prison population over education and healthcare. The only economic justification I can think of is one is a male dominated profession and the other female dominated.
If you think teachers deserve higher average pay than police officers, I suggest you ride along with one. It can even be a female officer since you want to make it about gender.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-02-2016, 12:00 PM
 
3,444 posts, read 3,121,851 times
Reputation: 3372
Quote:
Originally Posted by vulfpeck View Post
If you think teachers deserve higher average pay than police officers, I suggest you ride along with one. It can even be a female officer since you want to make it about gender.
Do lesson planning (for 3-4 classes a day), managing a classroom full of K-12s (60-90 minutes), a bulk of administrative tasks, parent/teacher contacts and conferences, grading papers, hallway monitoring, external activities, meetings, trainings/professional development, staying after school for tardies/absences/tutoring makeup times, and being a nurturer to boot when mommy/daddy about to divorce, etc. One year was enough for me, corporate America is a breeze compared to that 18 hour day and many weekends.


And then by God, squeeze instructional time in there somewhere coupled with an 2nd job to pay bills. It's not a glamor profession but like a cop, a passion to do it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top