Being a teacher in this economy - worth it?

<p>The contract in our district is for 180 days- which is why I use 180 days.
Yes I agree some teachers work much more than that- others- such as the ones that were blocking my way at the Garden show last week are very firm on not working more than their contract calls for & they will expound on why if you give them the slightest encouragement.</p>

<p>My H, who makes about what a teacher with 20 years experience makes in their contract- works full time, plus three weekends every month- mandatory. ( he has been working in his job for 25 yrs- not counting the work in a related field for 10 yrs)
He could get vacation-but he saves it for when something on our house or one of our cars breaks, because we can’t afford to hire someone to fix it.
He also will not recieve half the pension that public school teachers receive- & he will not be able to retire & go back to work.
[Local</a> News | State’s retire-rehire rules being stretched | Seattle Times Newspaper](<a href=“Page not found | The Seattle Times”>State's retire-rehire rules being stretched | The Seattle Times)</p>

<p>I can’t see going year-round. Our school district already cut evening and Saturday programs and charges for summer school. They’re NOT going to be willing to aircondition and staff the schools for the summer months (not to mention, I don’t think there would be wide support). </p>

<p>Fwiw, I am a midcareer professional in a field unrelated to education. After 5 or 10 years, employees where I work get 5 weeks vacation plus sick days/ holidays and personal days. They work 35 hours a week, often as 7 10-hour days every two weeks. Additional hours are paid in overtime or comptime. Some people take the comptime and use it for additional vacation.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>If you agree that teachers do not work enough hours for the pay that they are getting, there are two basic ways to make this fair:</p>

<ol>
<li> Reduce the amount of pay.</li>
<li> Increase the number of hours of work.</li>
</ol>

<p>What is interesting is that in at least my state, and so far from what I’m hearing in other areas of the country, only solution (1) is being proposed by Republican dominated legislatures and Republican governors. If true, it suggests that increasing the hours of work is not the ‘easy solution’.</p>

<p>What it does suggest is that the attack on teacher pay by state legislatures and governors is simply not a desire to make things fair on their part, or even of getting higher quality education, but simply part of an agenda of union busting and reducing government services.</p>

<p>Well, personally, I have no interest at all in “union busting” per se, but I have a lot of interest in teachers unions going away because they make education less effective in this country and because they protect very bad teachers at the expense of students. That’s probably the real issue here. You have many who would happily pay a great deal of money (and do) to have great teachers, who STILL want the teachers union gone, having NOTHING whatsoever to do with pay or benefits but with the fact that the union is counterproductive for the kids. So, it’s more than one group who would like to see them gone. Keep in mind that “Waiting for Superman” is a documentary produced by the same liberal who produced many well-recieved liberal documentaries.</p>

<p>It’s a matter of educating the kids. For too long it has been a matter of protecting grown adults.</p>

<p>^^ agree it is difficult. </p>

<p>The best teachers I know, who would have been successful and probably very wealthy if they had pursued the careers advised by most friends and family, went into a field where they knew there would be financial sacrifices but at least thought they would have decent benefits. They counted on those benefits when making the decision to become teachers. </p>

<p>But busting what unions are left in this country? No No No No NO</p>

<p>Who’s read Michael Moore’s essay “America is not Broke”?</p>

<p>I am not seeing unions as the problem.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>That is not what people say nor legislators do. </p>

<p>For starters, you do not see students and families organizing strikes to complain about the teachers being paid too much. They do not organize protests to complain about the teachers working 9 months, or having superior benefits. In fact, the overwhelming majority of families and taxpayers have either accepted this situation, or resigned themselves that is just the way it is. So, who is complaining? </p>

<p>On the other hand, for the past 60 years, teachers have allowed or supported a leadership that engages in a constant and relentless attack on the public coffers and taxpayers. To put it simply, if there was a time when teachers DID need the protection and deserved better conditions, that time has passed. There was a time when lower pay was compensated by great benefits. As we know, this made the profession the ideal work for a second-wage earner (especially mothers) who could combine a familiy and a job. The extended vacation and reduced work days allowed them to work without the need for babysitters or additional help. Again, the pay was not great, but when factoring the better retirement benefits and health coverage, it all worked out. However, over the years, the gaps in pay have been eliminated, and in many cases went the “other way.” Currently, most public jobs are the better paid jobs, without even factoring the better benefits. </p>

<p>Now, as the century turned, with an economy that started to deteriorate in almost every facet, came the inevitable conclusion that we collectively spend more than we make, and that we simply pay for our excesses with borrowed money. In so many words, the situation has become untenable as we run out of Peters to pay the Pauls.</p>

<p>At the end of the day, all of the discussions converge into a simplistic message. It is simply about the survival of unions as political mercenaries. The term 'union busting" might be appropriate, but it does not make it an unappealing message to people who are interested in stopping the bleeding before it is too late. It is easy to notice that, if in the1970s, 1 out of 3 or 4 in BOTH the private sector and the public sector were unionized, the numbers have changed dramatically. Today, only 1 out 12 private sector worker is a member of a union. In the public sector? ONE of of THREE. </p>

<p>Current discussions about collective bargaining is not about pay. It is not about offering “protection” to teachers. It is all about the right of the union to IMPOSE on everyone its “right” to collect the funds necessary to participate in the political arena and be a formidable manipulative agent. </p>

<p>Teachers’ unions deserve the right to exist. But as a union that stands for what it is. It should be a voluntary organization that deals strictly with the work conditions of their members. They should not have a voice in curriculum design, in finances, and especially not in setting the scope and length of instruction. It should also be an organization barred from political spending. </p>

<p>Something that has not been lost in Wisconsin, Idaho, Ohio, and Tennessee. And things DID change in Wisconsin yesterday, as the games played by politicians ended.</p>

<p>I’m not even going to read how OP’s question turned into the last few posts. I don’t know much about the state’s unions mentioned, but my H is a teacher in a non-union state. The audacious statement that teacher’s work too little for what they’re paid is ludicrous!!! </p>

<p>My H is a teacher and we qualify for reduced price lunch!!! Not only that, we spend a sizeable amount of money on his kids both to supplement what their families will not or cannot, and to motivate them to perform, because their families will not or cannot. Why do we do this? Because good teachers, and most are, care about their kids and care about continuing in a profession that often experiences the brunt of society’s angst and ills.</p>

<p>Just last night there was a sensationalist story on the local 6 o’clock news about a teacher stapling a note to a student’s shirt. Crime, crime - fire, fire!!! No one asks WHY the teacher did this. No one asks what kind of workplace and societal conditions would compel a teacher to NEED to do this. Teachers are responsible for everything from potty training to getting kids into college, often on their own dime because diapers and letter of recommendation paper is not provided. </p>

<p>Oh, and during those wonderful summer breaks, teachers are either working jobs to supplement their outrageous incomes or parlaying their meager hard-earned money on continued education in hopes of making that next degree income tier. Party, party, R&R, for sure.</p>

<p>Ask all your Teach for America idealist friends who make it only a few months in the classroom how cushy and lucrative the profession has become. Let them tell their tales and then decide.</p>

<p>I don’t think teachers work too little for their pay, and I also don’t have an issue with summers off either. I live in NJ where there is a pretty heated clash between teacher’s union and Governor Christie ( he is likened to Hitler by local teachers ) Even though our high school has the highest paid teachers in the state , I know several of them who either work in the summer or own summer businesses…and most teachers here also purchase supplies for the classroom .
What I take issue with is how the teachers IN MY STATE were unwilling to concede to the minor adjustments asked of them in tough economic times , in our dangerously cash strapped state…doesn’t mean I disrespect the profession or the jobs they do to educate our children.</p>

<p>Anyone who feels unappreciated or underpaid as a teacher should feel free, like anyone in any other profession who feels unappreciated or underpaid, to get a different job. Really, they should absolutely feel completely free to pursue another line of work. Nobody’s “making” them do the job. There is no teacher shortage in the US, except in areas where there has always been and will always be a teacher shortage, the places where nobody wants to teach, anyway.</p>

<p>poetgrl you’ve hit one nail on the head - those places where no one wants to teach have needy kids who are part of YOUR society whether you see them or not. They must be educated for you to thrive. Can you begin to understand that? </p>

<p>Thankfully for the greater society, there are some who put aside the distractions of an esteem-diminished profession to serve those kids. “Unappreciated” and “underpaid” don’t factor into their decisions. We sold successful businesses for my H to become an elementary school teacher. We did so knowing the financial situation we were entering, but not fully understanding the uninformed and disrespectful attitudes of too many.</p>

<p>Teachers do feel free to move on, and many do, usually the best and brightest. I hope that your encouragement doesn’t leave your child or a child for whom you care dependant on a less than qualified teacher who happens to be able to ignore the immense and often unnecessary pressure and distractions of the profession.</p>

<p>Teachers here continue to do more with less. Administrative tasks are added daily. I volunteer in H’s classroom regularly so that his kids aren’t impacted. I help other frazzled teachers, too. Their pay HAS been cut. How many bachelor and master degree educated professionals do you know who can’t go to the bathroom when they need? H had to refuse medication recommended by his doctor because of this. I have been grabbed from hallways into classrooms by teachers desperate for a bathroom break. I’m not sure what teacher unions have helped with in some states, but it may be worthwhile to look outside the bubbles in which some of you must exist.</p>

<p>I’m not a union expert, but I offer the idea that in the day when teachers were respected and deferred to as authority figures rather than whipping posts, maybe teacher unions that did exist weren’t as powerful.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>This is from my earlier post.</p>

<p>I have a tremendous respect for great teachers.</p>

<p>My ONLY problem with unions is the seniority issue.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Yes, it pays to look outside the bubbles in which we must exist. That is why we read the stories of teachers who can’t go to the bathroom, or need to buy their own supplies. All pretty unacceptable, if you ask me. Then, I wonder why such issues remain unaddressed by the union reps at the schools where such disgrace happens. Of course, we know how budgets are seemingly so tight that extraordinary --or even ordinary-- expenses are almost impossible to cover. </p>

<p>But then, when we find the energy to step outside our bubbles, we find small anecdotes of how our education dollars are spent. To this uninformed person, it seems that plenty of pencils and crayolas could be purchased with money spent on chemical peels and legal aid. But yeah, that’s just me! </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Agreed and apologize for the bubble comment. I’m as guilty as the next person of forgetting that everywhere doesn’t look like my own backyard. Your examples are equally unacceptable. They make our BOE extravagances pale in comparison. The common thread, if there is one, seems to be administrative decisions at school board and governmental levels.</p>

<p>

Maybe, Xiggi, they are in schools in states that HAVE NO UNIONS! (Texas, “right to work” state, anyone?)
Really, guys, the United States of America is a big place, and there is a HUGE difference in the working conditions, wages, pensions and perks of teachers. Some are paid as little as $23,000; some as much as $118,000. That makes it difficult for us to discuss such highly-charged issues! My school district is somewhere in the middle; my salary (with a master’s degree, after 18 years of experience) is less than $50,000. I work long hours with students who are very needy (98% free lunch) and have all sorts of issues. I am expected to attend summer workshops and I go back full-time on my own two weeks before school starts to get set up for the year. If I average out my out-of-class time and summer workshops - I work a year-round full-time’s job hours, compressed into a 9 1/2 month official schedule.</p>

<p>Maybe, Xiggi, they are in schools in states that HAVE NO UNIONS! (Texas, “right to work” state, anyone?</p>

<p>Washington is a right to work state as well.</p>

<p>Following salaries is confusing between districts- experience & education.

</p>

<p>and more detail.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Teachers in Seattle have very small raises as new teachers- but each year they stay, they get bigger and bigger.
Pensions are also a % of highest yearly salary as opposed to simply a flat fee for years working.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>It’s pretty interesting- but it makes it really hard to help teachers out the door who are burned out.</p>

<p>All this ^^^ is from
[National</a> Council on Teacher Quality (NCTQ) Homepage](<a href=“http://www.nctq.org/p/]National”>http://www.nctq.org/p/)</p>

<p>Yes, non-union state. H’s colleague mentioned that the four lowest performing states are non-union states. Not sure if this is true, but worth considering.</p>

<p>Not to keep rehashing the summer and school breaks point, but H has missed many of our kids activities and honors because he gets 3 personal days a year. (He’s involved in a ministry that takes two of them.) Beyond that, no time off when needed unless sick, which is somewhat reasonable because of the breaks - nice but inflexible. H has only taken 2 sick days in 12 years, and for the first time, was “sick” when D needed both parents at a scholarship interview weekend out-of-town that encompassed a Friday. It was very hard for him to do ethically and he almost backed out several times.</p>

<p>Agree with previous poster. If you added H’s extra time tutoring after school, prep time, my volunteer time, and required workshops at his expense, he works a full year. Once we were going to figure out his true pay/hour, but decided it wouldn’t be good for morale - Master’s degree and under 50K/year.</p>

<p>Now another question worth considering is, “Why are so many teachers burned out and less effective later in their careers?” I know on this forum I’m probably preaching to the choir, but please take televisions, computers, and other attention span reducing electronics OUT of your kids’ bedrooms, at the very least. Try teaching a kid who requires constant light flashing, action and dramatic audio stimulation, oh, and who has never sat quietly and read a book on their own.</p>

<p>I’m not a fan of teacher’s unions. In general, I think union’s have served their purpose, and are no longer as necessary. But I am concerned with all the recent rhetoric aimed at teachers. I’m a big believer in the free market. I’m also a big believer that the education of our children is a primary driver for our long-term economic health. 40+ years ago, many of the best/brightest women went into teaching (one of the few socially/culturally acceptable careers for educated women). Today, they go to business school, law school, med school, etc. Why? Because they can make more money in those careers! </p>

<p>No one, and I mean no one, gets wealthy by going into teaching. If we go on the cheap, and start reducing compensation (salary and benefits) because we are in “tough” economic times, we will get what we pay for. Fewer and fewer of the best/brightest will go into teaching. Economic cycles come and go. IMO, we are being very short-sighted with our calls for reduced teacher compensation.</p>

<p>Look, we need a paradigm shift in our education system. The “system” is too strong and is not working. The ‘system’ is broken and the biggest roadblock to changing the ‘system’ is the teacher’s union. I think the teachers, themselves, for the most part, are burned out because of working in a system that doesn’t work. </p>

<p>I’m not going to blame the kids. The kids want to learn. I’m not going to blame the parents. The parents want good schools and want their kids to learn. I’m NOT blaming teachers. I “blame” the current system.</p>

<p>We know what works, now. We have seen through the successful charter schools in this country that longer school days and working through the summer is the most effective way to change our system and make our kids competitive in the international world. The biggest obstacle to these changes taking place is the teachers union. From my perspective, THAT is why the unions need to go. Not because of the benefits or pay…I’d gladly pay more, frankly, for more effective education. But since the 70’s we have doubled our financial spending per student in this country (adjusted for inflation doubled our spending), and we have made NO gains.</p>

<p>If you want an interesting perspective watch “Waiting for Superman.” </p>

<p>The world will ALWAYS need great teachers, the time has come for those great teachers to be rewarded for their work and not asked to be put on a conveyor belt with the “jailers” who are just “doing their time”-- as if they are one and the same kind of educator. They aren’t.</p>

<p>@ getalife, many of the conditions your husband seems to struggle with as far as his job are concerned also apply to my husband , though we are small business owners.
He works 7 days a week all year long ( though he did just go see his parents for 10 days ) Often times , he works well over 100 hrs a week. Oh , and also goes without a paycheck for extended periods aside…in the months that I work full time, I also work 7 days a week , long hours .
I am not asking anyone for sympathy because we do what we do to keep the business afloat and sacrifice a lot to support our family…times are tough economically and sometimes we would love to sell the business and cash out, but that isn’t very feasible in the current economic climate
And again, no one is forcing us to do this, we chose this occupation and do the best we can.</p>

<p>I diagree poetgrl that the unions are the main obstacle to change. I truly believe that the main obstacle is rooted in money. I hate to mention it again, but most teachers are paid for the number of days they work and to lengthen the school year would be an expensive (too expensive for many communities) undertaking. I would not mind if my school year would be lengthened, but I do want fair compensation. Also, many of the buildings lack air conditioning (at least in my part of the country), so the buildings need to be updated for year round use. That is another expense (although that is a one time one). What about the cottage industries that have cropped up as a result of the current school year (camps and the like)? I can’t help but think those people would be opposed to a longer school year. Too be perfectly honest, I would love it if I did not feel like I was on a roller coaster each day; if I could take my curriculum and really spend the quality time with it, the time a lengthened school year could provide. I just don’t think it is going to happen anytime soon, but I agree with you that the system is breaking down and we need to make some changes.</p>