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.
In many part of North Carolina, it wouldn't be hard to imagine that the caliber of students is abysmal. Teachers have to face a disruptive, apathetic, even violent student body on a daily basis.
100% correct. And when you try to talk to the parents (usually parent) you immediately see where the problem comes from. Yep another problem created, in large part, by the enablers in government.
I'm sick to death of people thinking the only options are "New York" or "North Carolina" in the default public salaries vs COL.
Get over yourselves Ex New Yorkers....yeah that state has high taxes and higher teacher pay...among the highest... that doesn't mean that NC teachers aren't under paid....you are talking about the two extremes as if they are the only two options.
It's not either "we keep the sub-par pay and working conditions for teachers the same" OR "face the wrath of evil teachers and civil servants with huge paychecks and become a high-tax hellhole"....THAT mindset is propaganda.
That is not the way it works. There is PLENTY of room for improvement on public education in NC on many fronts without becoming a public-sector heavy workforce with a high COL.
The difference between NY taxes and NC is that middle incomes do better and can get a lower tax rate because of a progressive tax system.
Our Tax system in NC has the conservative flat tax. The top earners made out while 99% are paying more. When you fall for that one page or a post card nonsense you are giving away a lot of earning power.
Since I have moved here, I now pay a higher state income tax, higher sales taxes, higher property tax, higher real estate tax, Higher fees to use govt services which used to be covered under the old tax system.
What have my grand kids gotten, lower rated schools, employees (Teachers) who leave because their is a political system in place which only makes their jobs harder.
If you come you will need to support your kids as well as public school teachers.
All state jobs with the exception of politically connected ones have low wages and lousy benefits.
This is a right to work for less state.
I agree with the low wages part, but many if not most (not counting teachers) state jobs have pretty darn excellent benefits when compared with the private sector. It doesn't quite make the lower pay worth it, but it helps.
In many part of North Carolina, it wouldn't be hard to imagine that the caliber of students is abysmal. Teachers have to face a disruptive, apathetic, even violent student body on a daily basis.
I agree with the low wages part, but many if not most (not counting teachers) state jobs have pretty darn excellent benefits when compared with the private sector. It doesn't quite make the lower pay worth it, but it helps.
Do you actually work for the state? Because this myth that state employees get "excellent benefits" is indeed a myth. I started with the state in 1999 and by the time I left in 2013, I'd seen our benefits get shaved from every front. Raises are abysmal, often nonexistent for several years running. Health benefits are (were) pretty good for a single person but family/spouse coverage gets more and more expensive every year. No dental or vision unless you pay extra. Now, they've even started making a huge number of new state jobs "EPA", meaning "Exempt from the Personnel Act", which basically means you aren't subject to the usual employee-protection laws about comp time, grievances, etc. It used to be that only high-level appointee-type positions were EPA; now many of the "rank-and-file" have that insult in addition to their low salaries, disrespect from the Governor and Legislature, and more bureaucracy than you can fathom if you're in private industry.
They do get a pension after a vesting period, but that is paid for BY THE EMPLOYEES--6% comes off the top of every paycheck, low as they already are. After 10 years, you get a yearly longevity bonus of a whopping 1%. They are subject to mond-bogglingly bureaucratic performance reviews but no financial incentive is built in--a "needs improvement" employee gets the same raise (set by the Legislature, rarely more than 2%) as the best employee in the building.
I would say that pretty good sick time and vacation time are the only real "benefits" for govt employees, but they've cut staffing so much, a lot of folks aren't able to take vacations (like anywhere else). I'm wondering what "excellent benefits" you think state employees/teachers are getting?
More propaganda by the N&O. Monks earn more? Really. Two teachers can't buy a house? My eldest just did with much less $ than two teachers make.
Many people are completely ignorant on this topic. A combined income of $80,000 to $100,000 is certainly enough to buy a house and far more than most people make. I'm a teacher and I've owned a house for several years.
I believe a handful of teachers may have left the state for higher salaries...probably newer teachers that weren't tied to the area. But most teachers have lives/families/friends/other ties to their community and will not just pick up and leave for $2K/year. It's just false and is being used by the Democrats (I'm a Democrat but don't fall in line here) to criticize the Republican legislature. I'm hopeful that we will gain more seats in the coming elections so people can shut up about the exodus of teachers from NC. It's just not true.
I agree with the low wages part, but many if not most (not counting teachers) state jobs have pretty darn excellent benefits when compared with the private sector. It doesn't quite make the lower pay worth it, but it helps.
Actually teacher salaries are not horrendously low. In urban/suburban NC school systems, first-year teachers make around $40K. It's not poverty level unless you're trying to support a family...one person can live comfortably on that salary and with a combined salary two people or a family can live very comfortably. It's honestly more than most people make and averages out to about $25 to $30 (or more) per hour. Not bad for a starting salary. Teachers can make up to $75K or more with experience and/or an advanced degree.
Does the salary match the responsibilities/demands of the job? Probably not, but we don't really want people teaching for financial reasons...teachers need to be in the profession for the love of teaching. I wouldn't want my children being taught by anyone in it for the money.
Do you actually work for the state? Because this myth that state employees get "excellent benefits" is indeed a myth. I started with the state in 1999 and by the time I left in 2013, I'd seen our benefits get shaved from every front. Raises are abysmal, often nonexistent for several years running. Health benefits are (were) pretty good for a single person but family/spouse coverage gets more and more expensive every year. No dental or vision unless you pay extra. Now, they've even started making a huge number of new state jobs "EPA", meaning "Exempt from the Personnel Act", which basically means you aren't subject to the usual employee-protection laws about comp time, grievances, etc. It used to be that only high-level appointee-type positions were EPA; now many of the "rank-and-file" have that insult in addition to their low salaries, disrespect from the Governor and Legislature, and more bureaucracy than you can fathom if you're in private industry.
They do get a pension after a vesting period, but that is paid for BY THE EMPLOYEES--6% comes off the top of every paycheck, low as they already are. After 10 years, you get a yearly longevity bonus of a whopping 1%. They are subject to mond-bogglingly bureaucratic performance reviews but no financial incentive is built in--a "needs improvement" employee gets the same raise (set by the Legislature, rarely more than 2%) as the best employee in the building.
I would say that pretty good sick time and vacation time are the only real "benefits" for govt employees, but they've cut staffing so much, a lot of folks aren't able to take vacations (like anywhere else). I'm wondering what "excellent benefits" you think state employees/teachers are getting?
As I said in my previous post, I wasn't counting teachers in that statement. They still make way too little and have too few benefits for the work load and the importance of their jobs. I was speaking about other state employees, which I stated in that post.
However, if you really want to know, my experience is as follows:
I worked for the state from the beginning of 2008 to the middle of 2011. After that and currently I work in government jobs but not for the state.
Regarding raises/pay: During that time I only had 1 very small raise after working 6 months because that's when "annual" evaluations were done and though I hadn't been there a year yet, I would be eligible for the raise if I got evaluated and was deemed worthy but again, it wasn't much and the only one I ever got. Yes, my salary was (and continues to be) MUCH, MUCH lower than my private sector counter parts. But I knew that going into the job/my career field and weighed the options.
Regarding health insurance: At the time I worked for the state was a "single" person on my health insurance plan (my former spouse had his own through his company) so you're right, the health insurance was great since I paid nothing out of my paychecks. In my book, paying nothing out of ones paycheck does = a great benefit, especially considering that single people in private sector jobs almost never have this kind of benefit and you'd be laughed at if you asked. I know it's not the same for families/couples on the same plans and yes, I'm aware that those costs have been increasing. I knew (and still know) lots of people who were married where both spouses worked, but only the state employee would be on the State plan (making their insurance 'free') and the rest of the family would be on the spouses plan which often has the effect of making the spouses plan cheaper due to less insured parties on it, but I know that doesn't always work out and isn't always the case. However, from what I understand, the family plans for state employees are still less than what employees at private sector jobs pay for families in most scenarios. Nontheless though, if you're single (or your spouse/partner has a separate plan) it certainly qualifies as great benefit and paying less for a family plan than you would in the private sector at least qualifies as "good" these days even if it's not *as good* as it was before.
Regarding EPA: I was also an EPA employee at the time and actually preferred it that way - there's a lot of 'red tape' on the employee side of things when you're non-EPA that I was glad I didn't have to deal with. However, you're right that I wasn't afforded the additional protections non-EPAs had which sometimes wasn't the best. However, it never (thankfully) became an issue for me.
Regarding sick/vacation time: Yep, this is the kicker. The oodles of sick and vacation time were absolutely stunning and something I fully enjoyed while working for the state. I don't know what you're talking about with folks "not being able to take vacation" because if they have it, my understanding is they have the right to take it unless their supervisor can show extenuating circumstances for denying the time. Heck, I had so much vacation time it was almost felt like it was impossible for me to take it all, but I did my best. Would it have been nice to have been paid a bit more in place? Sure! But again, I weighed all this when I took the dang job. When I changed jobs I had to get used to the lesser amount of vacation I'm allowed in my non-state government jobs but my friends in the private sector still look at me like I'm crazy for complaining because it's still far more than any of them receive.
So, in conclusion while I'm not currently a state employee, I was previously and would consider returning if a job presented itself. I do currently work in government and I continue to make LESS THAN HALF what my counterparts in the private sector do with the same educational background and work experience. Yes, this sucks and I wouldn't turn down a raise (lol, like that'll ever even be an issue) but it's part of the deal. I like working in my field in the public sector. I like being a public servant. I like the atmosphere and dedication of my colleagues. I like that I like to get up in the morning and know I get to go to a job I like. I also know that with a private sector job I'd loose a lot of what I love about my job - there'd be the expectation of vast amounts of over time that would kill my work/life balance. I may not have such understanding, welcoming and wonderful coworkers which would drive me batty. It's just not worth the money. I'm happy with what I do and get by as well as I can on the money I make which aint always easy but I know I'm happier than I would be running around like crazy in a corporate environment.
I know this isn't the same for every state or government employee, but this is my experience and how I feel about the trade offs. No, I wasn't around 10+ years ago when benefits were even better and can't speak to all the changes but there you go, my $.02.
Why anyone would incur debt to become a teacher in NC is beyond explanation. Starting salary is $30K and the average debt is $28K. The math just does not work out.
$4K in federal taxes and $3600 in loan repayment plus state excise and payroll taxes probably qualifies for SNAP.
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.
Many people are completely ignorant on this topic. A combined income of $80,000 to $100,000 is certainly enough to buy a house and far more than most people make. I'm a teacher and I've owned a house for several years. 
