Pensions or Teachers? (for sale, unemployment rate, public school)

[Brenda-by-the-sea]

Originally Posted by randian

Highnlite's claim that teachers are employed at will is laughable on its face. I can point to dozens of news articles detailing how difficult it is to fire a teacher for good cause. No cause? Not happening.

Hardly. Teaching is one of the few jobs where the prelude to a pink slip can be a heartfelt speech telling you what a great job you've been doing and how sorry the district is that it doesn't have the money to keep you...and good luck in your future career, whatever that may turn out to be. Thousands of talented hard-working teachers are losing their jobs right now simply because government revenue streams are running dry. You call that job security?

[mysticaltyger]

Originally Posted by .highnlite

This idea that school districts don't fire teachers is baloney. The rightwing whackos will say it doesn't happen because teachers have tenure... I know that the whackos are not too bright, if they were, they would know that all tenure does is assure the teacher of a hearing before they lose their job.

More outright lies from highnlite.

Just watch Waiting for Superman. It was done by a left of center type. He concluded overwhelmingly that it is much easier to disbar a lawyer or doctor than it was to fire a teacher in the vast majority of states:

Amazon.com: Waiting for "Superman" [Blu-ray]: Geoffrey Canada, Michelle Rhee, Davis Guggenheim: Movies & TV


Without actually saying it outright, he pretty much concludes that a lot of what conservatives say about the problems with the education system are correct. I'm not talking the "bring prayer to public schools and teach creationism crowd". I'm talking the majority of mainstream conservatives, of which the "teach creationism" crowd is not.

[mysticaltyger]

Originally Posted by Brenda-by-the-sea

Hardly. Teaching is one of the few jobs where the prelude to a pink slip can be a heartfelt speech telling you what a great job you've been doing and how sorry the district is that it doesn't have the money to keep you...and good luck in your future career, whatever that may turn out to be. Thousands of talented hard-working teachers are losing their jobs right now simply because government revenue streams are running dry. You call that job security?

That's a very recent development. People in the public sector have also had 2 years' lead time to prepare for the possibility. By contrast, most of the private sector layoffs happened quickly and suddenly 2 years ago.

[randian]

Originally Posted by Brenda-by-the-sea

Teaching is one of the few jobs where the prelude to a pink slip can be a heartfelt speech telling you what a great job you've been doing

That happens all the time in the private sector. It is in no way unusual or noteworthy for grand speeches to be a prelude to layoffs. I honestly don't know what universe you inhabit that leads you to believe teaching is one of the few places where it happens.

Originally Posted by Brenda-by-the-sea

Thousands of talented hard-working teachers are losing their jobs right now simply because government revenue streams are running dry. You call that job security?

No rational analysis of employment patterns would conclude that teachers don't have far, far more job security than most anybody in the private sector. Unemployment among teachers is far less than the general population. So yes, I'd say teachers in general have great job security.

For those that are being laid off, there's no money to pay them. Talent or work ethic is irrelevant. They have to go. Welcome to the world the rest of us inhabit.

[randian]

Originally Posted by .highnlite

A decent salary for a professional would allow them to buy a house and a new car, with some left over for a vacation.

What, exactly, entitles you to a salary at that level? Answer: nothing. Not your BA, not your MA, not your teaching certificate, and certainly not your self-proclaimed status as a "professional".

[.highnlite]

Originally Posted by randian

What, exactly, entitles you to a salary at that level? Answer: nothing. Not your BA, not your MA, not your teaching certificate, and certainly not your self-proclaimed status as a "professional".

This is an odd post, did any one use the word "entitle"?

Here is the definition of the word professional, I could be wrong, but I don't think one needs to "self proclaim". It appears from the definition that the word explains itself.

pro·fes·sion·al   
[pruh-fesh-uh-nl] Show IPA
–adjective
1.
following an occupation as a means of livelihood or for gain: a professional builder.
2.
of, pertaining to, or connected with a profession: professional studies.
3.
appropriate to a profession: professional objectivity.

Generally payscales in most any field are determined by things such as: your BA, your MA, your teaching (or other) certificate

Now, I could be wrong, but it would appear from the note of anger in your post that you do not have any of the above, however, that is fixable, there are plenty of teachers in public school, trade schools, community colleges, and universities that are happy to help you, because, after all, they are professionals.

[randian]

Originally Posted by .highnlite

This is an odd post, did any one use the word "entitle"?

Think attitude, highnlite. Attitude.

Originally Posted by .highnlite

Generally payscales in most any field are determined by things such as: your BA, your MA, your teaching (or other) certificate.

While credentials are not valueless, you grossly overemphasize their importance. I understand why you would do that, credentialism is SOP in the public sector, doubly so in teaching.

[.highnlite]

I do? Where when and how? Why would I care about credentialism in the public sector as opposed to the private sector, and why would I give a flying hoot about teaching?

Again, you seem a little angry.. What kind of career choice did you make?, no credential, no license, no BA, No MA, no money?

[CA4Now]

"Unquestionably, state and local political leaders have been profligate with pensions, awarding workers improved benefits and post-employment health coverage — the value of the latter being perhaps the largest single difference between California retirement plans and those of federal and private workers. Some enhancements were awarded retroactively, which is an absolute sin in the pension biz.

Typically they were extracted by public-employee unions from Democratic administrations alegislatures, especially when the dot-com boom made the state budget look flush and the enhancements look free. Everyone pretended that the boom would last forever, including, shockingly, CalPERS actuaries — public bodies even were permitted to forgo contributions to the system during the fat years, which only made things worse when the market crashed. The pols perceived that public employees were a potent voting bloc, but of course one thing that makes them so is that so many other Californians sit on their duffs on election day. If you're one of the nonvoting masses, you're to blame for the pension fiasco, too."
Michael Hiltzik, pensions: Public pension reform, not public-worker bashing - latimes.com

[steel7]

Brown just gave the greedy & very selfish teachers 3 billion dollars. Hes sooo owned by the public unions it isnt funny. They are his master. He will do ANYTHING to give them what they want & he has. The prison guards union are browns daddy. The local assemblyman here in yucaipa paul cook is a dirtball & bent over for the unions just like brown, the puke demoratics & 1 more punk republican.