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.
If my property taxes were $5,000 a year and it could fund 125K teacher salaries and their lavish benefits, I would be fine. But my taxes are $14,000 a year for a nice but nothing great house. And most of my taxes fund the school district. And most of the school district expenses are teacher salaries.
So I am not alright with it. Teachers should contribute more for their pension and health care, and higher paid teachers should take a 3-year wage freeze. And school districts should cut the fat.
If my property taxes were $5,000 a year and it could fund 125K teacher salaries and their lavish benefits, I would be fine. But my taxes are $14,000 a year for a nice but nothing great house. And most of my taxes fund the school district. And most of the school district expenses are teacher salaries.
So I am not alright with it. Teachers should contribute more for their pension and health care, and higher paid teachers should take a 3-year wage freeze. And school districts should cut the fat.
Love teachers, but this cannot go on.
I agree... I went to the Board of educatin meeting last night in my district. Basically it boiled down to, they need almost 7% just to maintain and do nothing extra.. putting off buying textbooks, new buses, computers etc.... Their alternative budget, which was 2% included a large number of cuts to programs, as well as some layoffs of teachers, aids etc.. whoever is lowest on the totem pole.
They need to make up some 5.x Million.. Someone asked the question.. If the Teachers took a salary freeze, how much would we save.... 3.5M... To me thats a good start... It was also asked about taking salary cuts...
The point they make is that the retirement fund and health insurance are the huge increases..... But you tell me that you save 3.5 from salary freezes.. thats a pretty big savings...
How can I pay 7%?? They said we ask that everyone helps out and the taxpayer pay a little more... that comment is inflammatory....
As salaries go up.. I am assuming that the retirement/pension burden goes up correct?
I agree... I went to the Board of educatin meeting last night in my district. Basically it boiled down to, they need almost 7% just to maintain and do nothing extra.. putting off buying textbooks, new buses, computers etc.... Their alternative budget, which was 2% included a large number of cuts to programs, as well as some layoffs of teachers, aids etc.. whoever is lowest on the totem pole.
They need to make up some 5.x Million.. Someone asked the question.. If the Teachers took a salary freeze, how much would we save.... 3.5M... To me thats a good start... It was also asked about taking salary cuts...
The point they make is that the retirement fund and health insurance are the huge increases..... But you tell me that you save 3.5 from salary freezes.. thats a pretty big savings...
How can I pay 7%?? They said we ask that everyone helps out and the taxpayer pay a little more... that comment is inflammatory....
As salaries go up.. I am assuming that the retirement/pension burden goes up correct?
All I can say is wow. And I can only respect their honesty. Who is going to prop up our retirements when the time comes?
I agree... I went to the Board of educatin meeting last night in my district. Basically it boiled down to, they need almost 7% just to maintain and do nothing extra.. putting off buying textbooks, new buses, computers etc.... Their alternative budget, which was 2% included a large number of cuts to programs, as well as some layoffs of teachers, aids etc.. whoever is lowest on the totem pole.
They need to make up some 5.x Million.. Someone asked the question.. If the Teachers took a salary freeze, how much would we save.... 3.5M... To me thats a good start... It was also asked about taking salary cuts...
The point they make is that the retirement fund and health insurance are the huge increases..... But you tell me that you save 3.5 from salary freezes.. thats a pretty big savings...
How can I pay 7%?? They said we ask that everyone helps out and the taxpayer pay a little more... that comment is inflammatory....
As salaries go up.. I am assuming that the retirement/pension burden goes up correct?
7% is pretty close to the salary increases for teachers including the annual increases and step increases. I understant that the pension fund for teachers is separate from other civil service but they use the same projection of 8% annnual increase, short falls in the pension need to be covered by the district. The pension system is underfunded because of the market down turns th e last few years and taxpayers will need to cover the shortfall.
7% is pretty close to the salary increases for teachers including the annual increases and step increases. I understant that the pension fund for teachers is separate from other civil service but they use the same projection of 8% annnual increase, short falls in the pension need to be covered by the district. The pension system is underfunded because of the market down turns th e last few years and taxpayers will need to cover the shortfall.
The system is broken - between step increases and annual salary increases, the teachers have been receiving a 3 for 1 special for much too long.
1 - Step increase
2 - Salary increase
3 - Pension benefits increase disproportionately due to the compounded effects of both Step and Salary increases
You can blame market movements until your blue in the face - the fact is the local school boards are in cahoots with the teachers - rubberstamping these increases without asking the proper questions, then putting up the proposed contract out for a vote and saying that if you vote no it will impact the kids.
Give me a break - the purpose of a school board is to look out for its constiuents - that means the taxpayer and the kids. Have you ever inquired what the financial backgrounds of the board members were? Why is it that they need to use outside advisors? You vote for dumb, you deserve what you get.
I am still waiting for the first superintenedent to cut his/her salary to $179,000.00 to match that of the governor? The shared sacrifice will make the increasing of class sizes and slashing of teacher positions a bit easier to swallow and establish a bit of credibility with the public. But still....nothing...maybe they are just greedy amateurs after all.
I am still waiting for the first superintenedent to cut his/her salary to $179,000.00 to match that of the governor? The shared sacrifice will make the increasing of class sizes and slashing of teacher positions a bit easier to swallow and establish a bit of credibility with the public. But still....nothing...maybe they are just greedy amateurs after all.
You and me both.
They won't though. Don't you know that there are only a TINY FEW people qualified to be school superintendants and these people are the equivalent of a Derek Jeter or A-Rod? EVERYONE wants them, so we must pay a fortune for their services. They are very scarce! That's why one can retire and collect his mid six figure pension and at the same time take another school super job and collect a mid six figure salary! This is what they want us to believe ... that precious few can be a school super on LI. I say bull, we can find plenty of qualified people, but they want to keep it "all in the family" for their little cliques. To the detriment of the taxpayers, they have been doing quite well up to now with that.
The system is broken - between step increases and annual salary increases, the teachers have been receiving a 3 for 1 special for much too long.
1 - Step increase
2 - Salary increase
3 - Pension benefits increase disproportionately due to the compounded effects of both Step and Salary increases
You can blame market movements until your blue in the face - the fact is the local school boards are in cahoots with the teachers - rubberstamping these increases without asking the proper questions, then putting up the proposed contract out for a vote and saying that if you vote no it will impact the kids.
Give me a break - the purpose of a school board is to look out for its constiuents - that means the taxpayer and the kids. Have you ever inquired what the financial backgrounds of the board members were? Why is it that they need to use outside advisors? You vote for dumb, you deserve what you get.
Somebody better tell that to the typical Long Island school board.
Because, if we judge by their actions, what they believe is that their purpose is to make sure the teachers' union is happy and the superintendants and administrators are happy. Teaching kids? Just a byproduct of their super-enabled workplaces.
The typical school board is a bunch of hacks who currently are/or have been in the education business. Teachers can be on school boards (just not the one where they work). So they get on the school boards of their friends' schools and scratch each other's backs. School boards have been hiding for way too long behind County Executives and letting CEs take the blame for high property taxes, when it is really the fault of the local school boards. They have thrived for too long flying under the radar. Many of them run year after year, completely unopposed. THAT is how clueless the average taxpayer is on LI. Little by little, we are changing that.
They won't though. Don't you know that there are only a TINY FEW people qualified to be school superintendants and these people are the equivalent of a Derek Jeter or A-Rod? EVERYONE wants them, so we must pay a fortune for their services. They are very scarce! That's why one can retire and collect his mid six figure pension and at the same time take another school super job and collect a mid six figure salary! This is what they want us to believe ... that precious few can be a school super on LI. I say bull, we can find plenty of qualified people, but they want to keep it "all in the family" for their little cliques. To the detriment of the taxpayers, they have been doing quite well up to now with that.
You got it. There are plenty of applicants for every position and the job is not that tough. Considering the low quality of superintendents, the staggering number of duplicative assistant/associate/deputy superintendents, and the doddering school boards that employ them I am not surprised we are in the financial mess we are in. My favorites are the ones with the discredited EdD's that insist upon being called "Doctor". Might as well call me the king of England! Still no superintendent takers to cut their salary to that of the governor ($179,000.00)?
Wait. WHAT?! Teachers salaries haven't kept up with inflation?
Please explain why the AVERAGE teacher is costing the taxpayer the average household income of areas? Why do teachers get 2-3 raises every year? What other profession has had that?
This should be good.
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.
