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.
That's mighty transparent of you. Say what you really mean.
It's also against the law to discriminate against people over age 40 when it comes to employment and would cost more in lost lawsuits than it would save.
How come there are millions of people out there in the private sector that are OVER AGE 40 and still have jobs without having tenure?
It is illegal to fire anyone for their age when they are over 40. However, it is perfectly legal to fire them for a high salary if you are looking to replace them with someone who makes less money. So, if teachers didn't have tenure then they would inevitably be fired because they could be replaced with someone who makes 1/2 what they do and has similar, or better, results.
Here is a chart from NY State that shows all the tax obligations. It gives a pretty good breakdown of the tax oblgation by town, village, school district etc.. I have the 2010 table but I have to convert it first.
It is illegal to fire anyone for their age when they are over 40. However, it is perfectly legal to fire them for a high salary if you are looking to replace them with someone who makes less money. So, if teachers didn't have tenure then they would inevitably be fired because they could be replaced with someone who makes 1/2 what they do and has similar, or better, results.
My understanding is that not all teachers receive a step increase each year and that the steps increases themselves vary. For some teachers, the actual raise received equalled the cost of living and for others was 4% more. As I understand it most teachers are married and pay 20% of the district's group rate for family insurance.
Since older teachers generally earn more pay and thus receive larger raises AND they doubtlessly rack up more in medical bills this is further reason we should do away with tenure and just fire these more expensive folks once they hit age 45 or so. It is a win-win for the taxpayer.
The big difference between that district and Syosset's is the unbelieveable compensation package of the Syosset Superintendent (she is by far the highest paid in the state) and Syosset's primary Assistant Superintendent (he earns well over $300,000.00).
Yes not all teachers receive step increases but with 16 to 20 steps in a column based on education experience would reach the cap if they never too another credit, take more credits and move to the next column.
Go look at your school district salaries and compare 2009 to 2010, not getting a step increase does happen but is pretty rare.
It is illegal to fire anyone for their age when they are over 40. However, it is perfectly legal to fire them for a high salary if you are looking to replace them with someone who makes less money. So, if teachers didn't have tenure then they would inevitably be fired because they could be replaced with someone who makes 1/2 what they do and has similar, or better, results.
You cannot fire because of age in private industry and most certainly cannot do it within civil service, with or without tenure. That would be very bad for business to fire an experienced teacher with 20+ years of experience
You cannot fire because of age in private industry and most certainly cannot do it within civil service, with or without tenure. That would be very bad for business to fire an experienced teacher with 20+ years of experience
Whereas I disagree with the TUs inequitable distribution of wealth amongst its own, in the interests of protecting seniority at the expense of the kids, I whole heartedly support their right to organize.Like I said earlier this is the tail end of a 30 year Union busting tirade thats started with Bonzo and ends here.
It is illegal to fire anyone for their age when they are over 40. However, it is perfectly legal to fire them for a high salary if you are looking to replace them with someone who makes less money. So, if teachers didn't have tenure then they would inevitably be fired because they could be replaced with someone who makes 1/2 what they do and has similar, or better, results.
Then how come there are MILLIONS of people in the workforce over age 40, making large salaries? People in the dog eat dog private sector where there is no such thing as tenure.
Why haven't they all been replaced for someone who makes 1/2 what they do?
I don't think all teachers over 40 would be "inevitably" fired without tenure.
Whereas I disagree with the TUs inequitable distribution of wealth amongst its own, in the interests of protecting seniority at the expense of the kids, I whole heartedly support their right to organize.Like I said earlier this is the tail end of a 30 year Union busting tirade thats started with Bonzo and ends here.
And their teeth are tearing apart the rest of the middle class.
Or, wait ... is the private sector middle class all gone now because most of them were not in a union?
Youre a smart Chickee
Let it marinate and get back to us.
Unions arent the problem, theyre just no longer the solution.
Crooks
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.
