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.
[quote=Fastrudy;12973703]I can name 3 kindergarten teachers in one school in GC making $110K
When you add in the vacation time, pension benefits, and all the other union "perks" (like guaranteed return on teachers savings that is backstopped by the taxpayer, my friend a NYC teacher says his wife is guaranteed annual 8% returns by taxpayers), 110K for a kindergarden teacher is really too high, even in the best of districts. High school teachers in difficult subjects (I'm not talking about the gym teacher here, like physics, law, math etc..) are probably worth their weigh in gold, but kindergarden....this kind of thinking leads to only one place. California & NJ are there, and NY is not too far behind them.
Around 75k-85k. Remember also this is for 180 days of work, so the yearly salary is actually over 100k. But I do think teachers are important so that salary is fine. But, please get rid of the other taxpayers' burdens: pensions, healthcare, tenures, yearly raises, and early retirement. They should work until 65 like everyone else, contribute to 403b, and pay for healthcare like the private sectors. Their raises will depend on the economy and their performance... enough of these yearly raises without regard to their performance and economic conditions. Plain and simple, they cannot be getting raises while everyone else is getting laid off/paycuts/pay freezes. And, get rid of tenure.
On another note, I've worked with people who belong to unions and firing them is close to impossible. And, I've worked with those who are not part of unions and their work is evaluated. Let me tell you the quality of work between those union workers versus non-union workers are night and day. When people get complacent and comfortable and know they have such a security, they get LAZY.
Quote:
Originally Posted by snad5393
With all of the talk that teachers make too much, I wonder what people think IS fair compensation. Let's take the following assumptions so we are all talking about the same thing:
1. Teacher has a Bachelors Degree and an MA with 30 additional credits.
2. Teacher has 10 years of experience
3. Regardless of politics, we think education is important and valuable
4. We think teachers should be paid fairly so that they are able to maintain a decent standard of living.
Based on these assumptions, give me a number. Before posting, think honestly if you would want this salary for the level of education/experience and if you would be able to pay your bills on it.
Looking forward to the replies!
02-21-2010, 11:26 AM
grant516
n/a posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasminescent
Around 75k-85k. Remember also this is for 180 days of work, so the yearly salary is actually over 100k. But I do think teachers are important so that salary is fine. But, please get rid of the other taxpayers' burdens: pensions, healthcare, tenures, yearly raises, and early retirement. They should work until 65 like everyone else, contribute to 403b, and pay for healthcare like the private sectors. Their raises will depend on the economy and their performance... enough of these yearly raises without regard to their performance and economic conditions. Plain and simple, they cannot be getting raises while everyone else is getting laid off/paycuts/pay freezes. And, get rid of tenure.
More teachers & administrators than you think pay 10-30% of thier healthcare costs. I'd say only 30% of the districts still cover full employee health benefits.
The early retirement bonuses are encouraging to keep costs down by getting out higher paid veteran teacher staff. Shouldn't the goal be to push that and keep lesser-cost teachers who now as tier 5 employees have to contribute to retirement for life?
More teachers & administrators than you think pay 10-30% of thier healthcare costs. I'd say only 30% of the districts still cover full employee health benefits.
The early retirement bonuses are encouraging to keep costs down by getting out higher paid veteran teacher staff. Shouldn't the goal be to push that and keep lesser-cost teachers who now as tier 5 employees have to contribute to retirement for life?
Many in the private sector pay MORE than that.
I vote for work until 65 if it is going to continue to be pensions, not 403(b)s. It's cheaper to pay one salary than to pay the salary for the new teacher who replaces them PLUS the pension. Also, in order to get Medicare one must be 65. Letting them retire at 55 only encourages the continued providing of health insurance benefits past retirement that they currently have.
Around 75k-85k. Remember also this is for 180 days of work, so the yearly salary is actually over 100k. But I do think teachers are important so that salary is fine. But, please get rid of the other taxpayers' burdens: pensions, healthcare, tenures, yearly raises, and early retirement. They should work until 65 like everyone else, contribute to 403b, and pay for healthcare like the private sectors. Their raises will depend on the economy and their performance... enough of these yearly raises without regard to their performance and economic conditions. Plain and simple, they cannot be getting raises while everyone else is getting laid off/paycuts/pay freezes. And, get rid of tenure.
On another note, I've worked with people who belong to unions and firing them is close to impossible. And, I've worked with those who are not part of unions and their work is evaluated. Let me tell you the quality of work between those union workers versus non-union workers are night and day. When people get complacent and comfortable and know they have such a security, they get LAZY.
You're preaching to the choir here!
If Paterson is smart he will make the reform of the NYS public employee sector a part of his platform. If he fixed things like bolded above, a lot of people who are sick and tired of ever-increasing taxes to fund these outdated and unnecessary perks for NYS public employees would vote for him, including me. I notice he has ticked off the police unions by not caving into demands. We will see.
OK- I hate to be the bearer of bad news for a lot of people on here, but most of you actually granted long island teachers a RAISE!!!!!!! The average Suffolk teacher salary is $66,078. The Nassau number is at about 75K!!! A chunk of this difference stems from Nassau teacher having an avg of more years on the job. Some long term veterans make the often touted 6-figure mark, but many make less.
It is easy to point out the highest earners and shape one's argument completely around that, but the facts don't bear it out. It is kind of like looking at CEO salaries and saying that everyone who works in manufacturing is overpaid. There are legitimate arguments about how benefits should be structured and who should pay the cost and how much, but in the end teachers are valuable and need to be compensated reasonably. It seems that most here agree with that, and the view of what is fair seems to be MORE than the average wage today. I find this so ironic and interesting.
If Paterson is smart <======Now there's a whopper of a conditional statement!!
When I taught, all faculty paid 50% of their health care insurance. One of the reasons I accepted my district's early retirement incentive is that they were to pay 100% of health insurance for my spouse and I until we each attain 65 years of age.
Before you flame me:
1) This was not a union-induced early retirement incentive, it was solely an offer by the school district for all teachers (not just me) that were 55 that year. I never asked why.
2) If you were offered the same deal, I doubt that any of you would NOT take it. So I took it.
If Paterson is smart <======Now there's a whopper of a conditional statement!!
When I taught, all faculty paid 50% of their health care insurance. One of the reasons I accepted my district's early retirement incentive is that they were to pay 100% of health insurance for my spouse and I until we each attain 65 years of age.
Before you flame me:
1) This was not a union-induced early retirement incentive, it was solely an offer by the school district for all teachers (not just me) that were 55 that year. I never asked why.
2) If you were offered the same deal, I doubt that any of you would NOT take it. So I took it.
If I recall correctly, you were NOT teaching on LI, but somewhere else in the state. Therefore your deal has nothing to do with LI's high property taxes and cannot be "held up as an example" of anything that goes on in a LI school district, so what does it have to do with what we are talking about?
Was your spouse also a teacher? If not, think about this. Probably NOWHERE in the private sector do companies pay 100% for dependant health insurance. DEFINITELY nowhere in the private sector do companies pay anything for health insurance after retirement.
What happened after you both attain(ed) 65 years of age? Is your former school district going to cut you loose to Medicare or are they just going to stop paying 100% of your health insurance and make you contribute something?
If I recall correctly, you were NOT teaching on LI, but somewhere else in the state. Therefore your deal has nothing to do with LI's high property taxes and cannot be "held up as an example" of anything that goes on in a LI school district, so what does it have to do with what we are talking about?
Was your spouse also a teacher? If not, think about this. Probably NOWHERE in the private sector do companies pay 100% for dependant health insurance. DEFINITELY nowhere in the private sector do companies pay anything for health insurance after retirement.
What happened after you both attain(ed) 65 years of age? Is your former school district going to cut you loose to Medicare or are they just going to stop paying 100% of your health insurance and make you contribute something?
Well, this time you are correct. Taught upstate NY because LI was not competitive with regard to teacher salaries, so I had to take an apartment upstate. The salary minus apartment expense still beat any LI salaries that I was offered. As to whether or not it impacts LI districts, the upstate districts draw talented, experienced teachers away from Long Island. I know at this point you are probably thinking, "Good Riddance". However you must admit that Long Island is losing teachers to upstate because of their competitive salaries. LI teachers see the better salaries every week in the NY Times, and a certain number apply seeking to better themselves. Your comparison to the private sector is also of no interest to Long Island teachers salaries. I think you are just jealous.
We have not yet attained 65 years of age, but when we do, Medicare takes over. After contributing to it my entire life, I feel as if I am entitled to it. Silly me.
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.
LI teachers see the better salaries every week in the NY Times, and a certain number apply seeking to better themselves. Your comparison to the private sector is also of no interest to Long Island teachers salaries. I think you are just jealous.
