U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Education > Teaching
 [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 05-06-2009, 10:35 PM
 
Location: Conejo Valley, CA
12,476 posts, read 16,890,967 times
Reputation: 4304

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by antredd View Post
School district's pay out COLAs to their retirees---not CALSTRS.
No, they do not. Retirees receive payments from Calstrs. The school distinct only makes contributions for employees currently on payroll (8.25% of payroll).

Quote:
Originally Posted by antredd View Post
I don't get you on furlough. A furlough for teachers is UNPAID DAYS that result in a DEDUCTION IN SALARY--POINT BLANK.
Its a reduction in salary, but again not my point. If there is deflation cola's should be negative. Otherwise they are not really "cost of living adjustments".

Quote:
Originally Posted by antredd View Post
You can't wait for CA to eventually cause you to pay HIGHER INCOME TAXES, as a result of the defeat of props 1A-1C?
Props IA-IC will raise income taxes, not lower it. These props don't create magic money. Regardless, California can raise its income tax to 100% for all I care. I can easily leave the state, all the businesses will fellow me too.

Raising income taxes in California is unlikely to increase tax revenue. The taxes are already so high, that increasing it will just push business under ground or they will leave the state.

Quote:
Originally Posted by antredd View Post
WOW I agree with you in that if the state has no money, then teachers and any state worker should not demand or get a COLA. So, in a sense, we better be fortunate to have a job and our salaries intact.
Sure. But, my primary point is regarding how the COLA are calculated. Look if you have deflation/disinflation, i.e., prices are going down or aren't increasing, then teachers should not be getting COLA's regardless of the state budget.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-06-2009, 10:39 PM
 
Location: Conejo Valley, CA
12,476 posts, read 16,890,967 times
Reputation: 4304
Quote:
Originally Posted by TuborgP View Post
.... Teacher COLA are usually negotiated and thus not formula based. It is a way of enhancing teacher salaries and is sometimes above or below any measurable cost of living for the area.
Yeah so as I said its a "Lets see how much more blood we can suck out of the tax payers this year" adjustment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2009, 10:42 PM
 
29,360 posts, read 33,441,785 times
Reputation: 10983
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
Yeah so as I said its a "Lets see how much more blood we can suck out of the tax payers this year" adjustment.
That is literally the process and it differs from state to state and district to district depending on funding sources for salaries and union status.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2009, 10:42 PM
 
3,259 posts, read 5,064,590 times
Reputation: 1470
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
No, they do not. Retirees receive payments from Calstrs. The school distinct only makes contributions for employees currently on payroll (8.25% of payroll).


Its a reduction in salary, but again not my point. If there is deflation cola's should be negative. Otherwise they are not really "cost of living adjustments".


Props IA-IC will raise income taxes, not lower it. These props don't create magic money. Regardless, California can raise its income tax to 100% for all I care. I can easily leave the state, all the businesses will fellow me too.

Raising income taxes in California is unlikely to increase tax revenue. The taxes are already so high, that increasing it will just push business under ground or they will leave the state.


Sure. But, my primary point is regarding how the COLA are calculated. Look if you have deflation/disinflation, i.e., prices are going down or aren't increasing, then teachers should not be getting COLA's regardless of the state budget.
I get your point, and I guess your point is that our government shouldn't be educating our children at tax payer's expense. If so, how are we going to pay for it, since we dont have nearly enough private schools to take on that load, and how are we going to measure each private school's success, since they technically have autonomy on what they teach, how they teach it, especially christian private schools.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2009, 10:50 PM
 
Location: Conejo Valley, CA
12,476 posts, read 16,890,967 times
Reputation: 4304
Quote:
Originally Posted by TuborgP View Post
That is literally the process and it differs from state to state and district to district depending on funding sources for salaries and union status.
Yeah I figured....but part of me hoped it was actually tied to you know...actual cost of living.


Quote:
Originally Posted by antredd View Post
I get your point, and I guess your point is that our government shouldn't be educating our children at tax payer's expense.
That was not my point. I made two points, one about state finance that is pretty irrelevant and the other about the so called "COLA" and the way it should work.

I don't mind tax payer funded education, just not in the way it is currently done. I'm pretty fond of moving towards a voucher system while allowing the schools to have a large amount of latitude.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2009, 11:56 PM
 
3,259 posts, read 5,064,590 times
Reputation: 1470
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
Yeah I figured....but part of me hoped it was actually tied to you know...actual cost of living.



That was not my point. I made two points, one about state finance that is pretty irrelevant and the other about the so called "COLA" and the way it should work.

I don't mind tax payer funded education, just not in the way it is currently done. I'm pretty fond of moving towards a voucher system while allowing the schools to have a large amount of latitude.
Ok, well thanks for correcting me on your points that I perceived wrong. In my local city, we taxed ourselves again so that our schools that, at one time, was growing so fast, that the school district coulldn't keep up, to help fund the building of new elementary and middle schools. Mind you we are paying for specical bonds already for a high school that was built ten years ago, and that's not part of our school district as of yet.

But now my youngest son because of the change in boundaries has to go to another brand new high school when he enters the 9th grade, that is also not part of our school district. My city's school district has not unified yet with both high schools, because of the cost of transferring control over of each high school from its district to ours.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-07-2009, 12:38 AM
 
Location: Conejo Valley, CA
12,476 posts, read 16,890,967 times
Reputation: 4304
And just imagine if you could send him to any school in the area with a state supplied voucher!

The way they handle districting etc in this country seems to exist for no longer reason than to keep poor and/or minority kids out of the (usually white) suburban school systems. Its surprising it still exists...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-07-2009, 06:39 AM
 
9,807 posts, read 12,797,201 times
Reputation: 8127
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
And just imagine if you could send him to any school in the area with a state supplied voucher!

The way they handle districting etc in this country seems to exist for no longer reason than to keep poor and/or minority kids out of the (usually white) suburban school systems. Its surprising it still exists...
Thankfully, in Minnesota, we have open emrollment.
That means a student can attend any public school they want to and the state funding per pupil follows the student to their school.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-07-2009, 09:29 AM
 
29,360 posts, read 33,441,785 times
Reputation: 10983
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
Yeah I figured....but part of me hoped it was actually tied to you know...actual cost of living.



That was not my point. I made two points, one about state finance that is pretty irrelevant and the other about the so called "COLA" and the way it should work.

I don't mind tax payer funded education, just not in the way it is currently done. I'm pretty fond of moving towards a voucher system while allowing the schools to have a large amount of latitude.
Teacher salary determination is a group process and not individual based. It is usually not based on collective performance however their are some isolated efforts to do so. The COLA term as applied is less one of cost of living measurement and more one of district/state economic prosperity. When the economy is thriving and tax revenues increasing then the COLA reflects upwardly the increased tax revenues flowing in. However now as we see dramatic declines in tax revenue ought we see declines in teacher salaries? As housing which is primary source of local revenue declines in value ought not the salaries funded by the previous bubble also be in need of realigning? California and some other states have significant revenue/spending issues and any economic recovery will not change that picture. It will slow it down perhaps but a day of reckoning is coming and teachers need to be prepared for a different landscape. One that us old folks remember. Just like the new housing reality there will follow that a new compensation reality for public employees.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-07-2009, 09:31 AM
 
Location: Conejo Valley, CA
12,476 posts, read 16,890,967 times
Reputation: 4304
Quote:
Originally Posted by marmac View Post
Thankfully, in Minnesota, we have open emrollment.
That means a student can attend any public school they want to and the state funding per pupil follows the student to their school.
Is this true for all grade levels? From what I can tell Minnesota ranks consistently in the top 10 for states, where as California is consistently in the bottom 10.

Now if it was not so cold.
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 > General Forums > Education > Teaching
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:45 PM.

2005-2017, Advameg, Inc.

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