Steve Jobs Blames Education Problems on Teacher Unions

Parents Forum
301

<p>Facilities - Magnets and charters may keep the dollars in the 'system' but it doesn't solve the problem of the less used facilities you mention since people are still flocking from one to another. It's a fact that as magnets/charters pop up students and teachers will be displaced from one facility to another. In the case of vouchers it simply opens up other facilities to students (and teachers). The movement will happen regardless unless the kids are forced to stay at their one facility (and even then it'll change somewhat).</p>

<p>Money in the 'system' - Most voucher proposals I've seen only propose making a portion of actual dollars spent, for example 50%, available in vouchers. This means that if people use their vouchers to go out of the 'system', the system would have even 'more' money per pupil than it presently has. </p>

<p>Private schools - There seems to be an assumption that with a voucher system all kids would immediately bail from the publics and go into privates. Not only couldn't this happen immediately since there aren't presently nearly enough privates to server the demand, but I think that some would choose the public if it was convenient, had the programs they desire, and deemed by them to be acceptable. I believe that some of the publics might even improve and become more attractive to those wielding vouchers.</p>

<p>Church/State - I don't see this as an issue at all although I think it's being wielded by the anti-voucher contingent. The state has established guidelines for educational requirements and I think the church-sponsored schools would need to meet those and that's what the voucher is paying for. If that school chooses to also teach an hour of religion, that can be outside of that state-mandated educational portion. </p>

<p>Voting - Yes I vote but frankly the school boards seem to also be status quo - I don't see them making any major changes. They're also empowered to do only so much. For example, they can do nothing regarding the voucher question. If they were to try to make major changes, they'd have the unions to contend with.</p>

302

<p>"Voting - Yes I vote but frankly the school boards seem to also be status quo - I don't see them making any major changes. They're also empowered to do only so much. For example, they can do nothing regarding the voucher question. If they were to try to make major changes, they'd have the unions to contend with. "</p>

<p>Then they should have a convincing arguement. They haven't so far and some things you want will fail. Not to worry some of the things I want fail too. ;) I have yet to get my ice cream for everyone passed yet. I vow to keep trying though. We aren't licked yet.</p>

303

<p>
[quote]
You still have not provided any evidence that totally private schools are required to accept special needs students under a voucher system.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Nice try, wharfrat! You and I know that private schools are not required to accept ANYONE. That is why they are private. It is the second part of your statement that was misleading as it was pretending that ALL public schools have to accept SPED students. </p>

<p>FWIW, do you know the value per capita of the vouchers used in Milwaukee (or in Florida before they were taken away) and how much of a percentage of the expenditure per capita of the local public schools they represented?</p>

<p>Also, do you know in which income brackets the users of vouchers are in the pilot programs? Do you know what happened to the public schools in Florida that were "victimized" by the departure of voucher students? Didn't they fare ... better? Did the voucher "creamed" away the best of the best? </p>

<p>The answers might surprise you.</p>

304

<p>
[quote]
I used to think a bit like you, till I got out there and found milton's theories while talked about..aren't what goes on.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The United States will need to keep looking for a better mousetrap. One problem is that we are not very open to make changes unless we see an immediate result. In almost every sector of our economy, we pride ourselves for our uncanny ability to invent, reinvent ourselves and profess our profound love for open and fair ... competition. Yet, when it comes to education, we seem quite happy to follow a path of least resistance. </p>

<p>Should we not look at systems that obtain better results and achieve those by spending a lot less than we do all the while ... dedicating close to 80% of the budgets to the teachers. In such systems, there are no difference between private and public schools: they all compete. You do not need to take my word for it ... just watch a rerun of John Stossel's Stupid in America. </p>

<p>While we cannot merely import the entire system, there might be some merit to analyze how it works.</p>

305

<p>I've started to jump in to this conversation several times over the last few days but resisted out of a desire not to appear overly defensive. And anyway, Opie's pretty much covered my own teacher perspective.........and I just haven't had the energy to get into it after the long hard days I've had in this very typical week.</p>

<p>Today, one of the 120 students I teach in one of five different classes in two different content areas with students in grades 9-12 and ability levels varying from THIRD GRADE reading level to off-the-charts gifted asked if I had finished grading the essays he and the 41 other students enrolled in that particular course had turned in yesterday, and he seemed a bit perturbed when I replied that I had not. Since we had just finished study of the early labor movement in the US, I thought I might as well make a connection between classroom learning and real life in my response to his little pout: "You know, we learned last week about the real sacrifices early union activists made to secure decent working conditions and an 8-hour day. They put their lives and livlihoods on the line, and it's occured to me that I'm disrespecting their efforts every time I stay up late grading papers." I went on to explain that thanks to the contract the teachers' association negotiated, I do at least have 70 minutes of my work day during which I am not in direct student contact. That hour and ten minutes is the official time in which I am paid to prepare five different lessons, plan meaningful assessment of student learning, evaluate their work, report grades on a weekly basis, make parent contacts, attend IEP and committee meetings, and complete other duties as assigned. Of course, it's not enough time. I do work overtime, but I've decided to concentrate on the top priority, which is providing consistently high quality instruction, and get the rest done when it gets done (and if need be, I'll expect union backing if anyone is dissatisfied with the best I have to offer). I do my job well, and I'm not a rare exception among my colleagues. And the fact is, my students are statistically much less at risk than those in many schools across the nation--all of them have homes and at least one employed parent, and most of them speak English fluently. My job is not easy, but many teachers have it a lot harder than I do.</p>

<p>But the truth is, I'm getting tired. I'm tired of seeing administrators drive away at 3:30 every day and not bothering to follow through on my very occasional discipline referrals because they don't have time. I'm tired of hearing administrators pretending like they have any knowledge about the quality of instruction I offer based on a grand total of 4 1/2 MINUTES in my classroom so far this year (it's February!!!!!). I'm tired of hearing about teachers' mythical easy schedule and three months off when we start no later than the middle of August and the school year ends on June 21. I'm tired of students whining because I assign at least an hour of reading a night for an AP class, and I'm tired of parents complaining to the school board when the only students who earn A grades are the few who actually do that reading and make the effort to come to my voluntary after-school study sessions (particularly ironic this year when I have also put in 20 unpaid hours to meet the requirements of the College Board's audit, which is intended to ensure consistent rigor in courses bearing the AP trademark). And I'm especially tired of the assumption that an average of my students' scores on a 110-minute subtest given on one morning in March has any correlation whatsoever to the quality of instruction I provide on a daily basis all year long. </p>

<p>And I'm sad. Even ten years ago, when a bright student told me he or she was planning on a career in education, I rejoiced. Now, my honest response is, "You're too smart for that," because I know they can do so much better in so many other employment sectors. I still love what I do, but I just can't see much hope for a better future in public education. If I really believed the teachers' union held responsibility for even a measurable portion of the shortcomings of public schools, I would withdraw my membership in a heartbeat. It's just not that simple.</p>

306

<p>"In almost every sector of our economy, we pride ourselves for our uncanny ability to invent, reinvent ourselves and profess our profound love for open and fair ... competition."</p>

<p>:) This is what I mean about youth and ideals ... one word Mircosoft. </p>

<p>I probably did sound like you at that age. Work experience and class experiences tended not to jive. Rarely, did I see anything close to what your saying here. Sure alot of people talk those words, but when it comes down to it, at the end of the day it's not increase stockerholder wealth, it's increase management wealth. We don't like competition in anything from sports to business to dating. We talk about one thing, but do another and as long as we aren't caught, don't care. </p>

<p>There's a reason I keep saying the day we can garantee fair and honest treatment from others will be the last day unions exist is because it's true. I don't know if your working yet or what your career plans are. If you're lucky you won't see Milton's theories blow up in your face. Your opinons may change down the road, it just depends on what happens.</p>

307

<p>Renee,</p>

<p>You sound like so many educators who have been part of my kids experiences. Thank you. That sounds like a typical day for alot of the teachers up here too. The vast majority work like you do. Yes, we've had one or two lesser educators during their k-12 experiences, but 2 out of around 70 educators doesn't make the system corrupted. It means 68 work pretty hard. </p>

<p>Thank you.</p>

308

<p>"but 2 out of "</p>

<p>for those of you who are going to that old "but that's two too many" or "shouldn't the other 68 want those 2 gone?" </p>

<p>The other 68 realize more often than not...it's somebody's opinion if your a good teacher or not, not fact. Most teachers realize they're one helicopter parent away from hell. They are one school board member's kid, cut from the team they coach, from being a bad english teacher. </p>

<p>Think I'm kidding? </p>

<p>As far as those 2, some other parents thought they were the bee's knees. Go figure. Whose right?</p>

309

<p>I'll now leave this thread with the same expression as before:</p>

<p>/s i g h</p>

310

<p>A quick side step away from vouchers... (since i don't have the answer to that issue). :-)</p>

<p>I feel the inclination to include (into this discussion of education) one of "our" reasons (why we chose a private high school for our son). </p>

<p>As preface, I think we would all agree that too many schools are suffering from too many students receiving less than the education that they deserve. Would you agree? </p>

<p>We have too many students who can not do basic math problems. Too many students who can not read/comprehend at the 12th grade level (and in many cases at the 8th or 5th grade level). Too many students who can not spell at the 12th grade level (and unfortunately in many cases, at the 8th or 5th grade level). Too many students who do not know how to write a term paper, or a business letter. And, as time goes by, the numbers seem to be getting worse, right? Most of you probably agree on these facts.</p>

<p>So, what do the public schools do? They come up with every imagineable area to study - apart from reading, writing, and math. </p>

<p>My short take is this: School systems, when you have the basics covered (reading, writing, and math), then and only then, we will let you start teaching other subjects. The aforementioned skills will help all students lead more successful lives. </p>

<p>Once you have the basic skill covered, then go for it. Bring on the Sciences. Bring on the History. Bring on the technical skills. </p>

<p>Once you have those basics covered, then, and only then do you the right to to have discussions, and assemblies, and outside speakers, on every controversial subject including: global warming, war in Iraq, floating chads, old growth redwoods, immigration, gay marriages, contraception, religious freedom, homeless, internal combustion vehicles, etc.</p>

<p>I truly do support every group in America who has ever gone through hard times. Be it due to gender discrimination, age discrimination, marital status, sexual preference, ethic, racial and/or religious background, political orientation, etc. etc. If we go back far enough in time, darn near every group has endured hardships. True, some have endured far more harships than others. For years, women were barred from voting, and other privledges. For years, Chinese were held as slaves. For even longer, Blacks were held as slaves. Dare I bring up religious discrimination, and religous wars over the past centuries. I am sure that i left out more groups that i just included. But dang it, we do not have the time (in our schools) to study EVERY group that has ever endured a hardship, when our children are failing at reading, writing, and math. We do not have enough weeks in the school year with which to designate a week to every group (in order to accomodate an assembly, special studies, outside speakers, rallies, marches, etc. )</p>

<p>Therefore, we (my family) chose a private high school for our son. The primary focus in his school was reading, writing, and math. And the school took those basic subjects up through college level subject matter. He is now attending a "very selective" college, and is holding his own. </p>

<p>We have neighbors whose kids went to the public high school. We would hear, in discussions, of the initiation of this week, or that week being dedicated to this group or that group, to this cause or to that cause. This included school assemblies, and mandatory "time" spent covering the subject matter. (I don't want to take this into a purely political discussion, but there was even a school sponsored rally against the Gulf War, and against the Iraq War, including time out for a march down the city streets.). </p>

<p>Meanwhile, the test scores declined. Meanwhile, fewer juniors and seniors even bothered to take the SAT. The drop-out rate increased. (As i mentioned earlier, it was after seeing these statistics, year after year, that we made the decision, to send our son to a school that focused on academics).</p>

<p>Conclusion: IF, and ONLY IF, the schools can teach the basics, such that the students consistently pass skill tests related to the basics, then they can start to focus on additional subject matter. If ALL students graduated from high school with competence in reading, writing, and math - then those students would start their adult lives with the basic skills needed to be moderately successful.</p>

<p>To those who think the "other" areas are as important (or more so) than reading, writing, and math, don't you think that the students will be better prepared to champion those areas of concern if they have a solid academic background? They will write better letters to the editor (and better books) in support of those causes, if they have the fundamental writing skills under the belts. They will be better public speakers (in support of those areas of concern), if they have learned learn the skills of persuasive speaking. They will be better prepated to go to college; and became lawyers (arguing cases in support of those areas of concern); to become college professors (teaching classes on those areas of concern); to become leaders (in all walks of life) who will be in positions capable of making change happen. You do them a huge disservice, to ruin their education by focusing on too many other areas, when they do not yet have competence in the important basic skills.</p>

<p>I realize that my post is somewhat foolish for a variety of reasons: It is too simplistic. There are a multitude of problems within the education system, and my area of complaint is probably near the bottom in terms of significnace. But wouldn't it be refreshing, to have ALL students graduate from high school with competence in reading, writing, and math.?</p>

311

<p>School board, elected officals make the rules.</p>

<p>school board has one employee- the superintendent
They can't hire, fire anyone else
Thats it.
they are pretty much lame ducks
so who else would be the elected official that makes the rules?</p>

<p>Charter schools have been on the ballot three times I think
<a href="http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/196974_charter27.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/196974_charter27.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

312

<p>"School board, elected officals make the rules."
"so who else would be the elected official that makes the rules"</p>

<p>ehmm, How bout south of both of us and then waay east? Would those not be elected officals that create educational policy? ;) </p>

<p>Didn't Gw and our legislature create the policy you're worried about? And in the same token, did either fully fund their "ideas"?</p>

313

<p>Teacher union activists are very good at swinging the vote in school board elections. School board candidates don't campaign, usually, on a platform of "I'll cave in to all of the union's demands," but the union knows which candidates will most nearly approach that position in practice. </p>

<p>"In the first place God made idiots. This was for practice. Then He made School Boards." -- Mark Twain, Following the Equator (1903) 2:295</p>

314

<p>Posts 305 and 310 illustrate some of the ways in which both teachers and students are victimized in multiple ways by a system out of control, not just in its governance, management, but in its various (too many) priorities.</p>

<p>The vastly better and more uniform level of functional literacy in my own childhood education allowed the assemblies, field trips, and what have you, to be true enrichment, supplementation: an expansion of the education. The shift from a mostly English-First-Language school population in many States, as well as migration patterns & school policies encouraging hetreogeneity at all costs in the classroom have radically altered the appropriateness of the former model. </p>

<p>How we got to where we are is the result of two things: the politicization of K-12 curriculum (the various political & social agendas creating the kinds of mandatory "participation" described by the above poster) and the influx of ill-conceived nonpolitical agendas stressing the personal development of the individual student OVER his or her content-rich academic competence. I would even describe that movement as anti-intellectual, ironically.</p>

<p>While the above paragraph has compromised to some degree the public education of all students (in my State), it has particularly compromised the advancement of already academically at-risk students. How very ironic again, the radical shift by minority communities (via charters) away from the hetreogeneous model to a homogeneous and rigorous one: standardization of the curriculum among a subset of students on the same level; long, no-frills school days, tutoring in-school & on-site, etc., until those basic skills are mastered.</p>

<p>The further irony of this picture is that most often responsible for the spinning out of control of competing school agendas is neither the teachers nor the parents, who are the parties most intimately involved with the education of any particular student. And that's why the (previous) teacher-bashing has limited use. It may work in more efficient educational models to focus "merely" on teacher performance, but not so in classrooms & systems highly heterogeneous on many levels -- ability, race, language, culture, economic background (which directly affects educational advantage) -- and affected by competing administrative & legislative agendas. All of these variables render more impotent the direct role of the teacher in classroom outcomes. </p>

<p>The unions, yes, are somewhat to blame in the employment department, when they seem willing to support a body of teachers without regard to levels of proven competence. But let's be clear that they, too, are not the single factor responsible for this mess. Who is telling, ordering the teachers to teach particular curricula? Or to prefer nonacademic priorities over academic? Ain't the unions. Where I fault them is their complicity in supporting the structure, rather than examining it radically, fostering meaningful, structural change. (Again, leadership.) But the legislatures lead & direct where they have no business leading, & districts, boards and the like make no vigorous effort to exercise their own leadership when they have the opportunity. It is a self-perpetuating, interconnected (albeit inefficiently connected) <em>system</em>. </p>

<p>If you live in a State with fewer variables in the student population than in mine, and/or with far less legislative influence, consider yourself quite lucky, & in a better position to have your voice heard & effective changes made. In my region, the schools are a political football, with the teachers, parents, & students mostly being used by others.</p>

315

<p>epiphany,</p>

<p>I agree with much of what you say, but there are a couple of points I question. One is whether there ever was such a thing as the good old days in public education. When I compare my own high school experience to that of my daughter, a senior in a school of about the same size, there really is no comparison. My daughter has taken AP French, physics, English, and US history, scoring well on all of the exams, and she is in AP Calculus, English Lit, and German this year. I took earth science and biology; drama and speech counted as two of my four English requirements, and I took one year of algebra. I still remember sitting in my "guidance" counselor's office at the end of my first year of high school and telling him that I really liked math. His enthusiastic response was that I should enroll in bookkeeping, typing, and office machines classes because there was a new bank coming into town and, especially with my ability to speak Spanish, I would be set for a secure future as a bank teller. I didn't know any better, and it apparently never occurred to him that a college prep curriculum might be appropriate for a Mexican kid in a little farm town in eastern Washington. I actually did get a job at the bank and didn't think to pursue further education until a number of years later.</p>

<p>I'm just one example, but I bet I'm representative of many minority students who, although not victims of outright discrimination, were simply overlooked by well-meaning individuals who never thought beyond their own preconceptions. When I look at the school in that same little town thirty years later, I am truly gratified by what I see. Multiculturalism is not a token observance on a special day of the month; it is a palpable, living, energizing reality in the entire school--students, faculty, and administration. Overall, graduation rates and the percent of students going on to higher education are somewhat higher than during my youth, but it's not just the white kids any more. From first grade on, we always had a core group of migrant kids who would be with us in the fall and spring as their parents followed the agricultural employment circuit. They were fewer in number by late junior high, and I don't remember a single one after the ninth grade. There are still migrant kids, but now most of them stay in school and graduate. I actually had the chance to work in the district for a couple of years in the 90s and wrote a grant for a literacy project in which we taught school-age kids in the migrant program to conduct literacy activities at home with their younger siblings, and the outpouring of interest on the part of the families was amazing. Wow, I guess I'm realizing I still have my own biases there--why should I consider it amazing that these families wanted to do all they could to educate their children? I hope I'm making my point, but I'm not sure. We can look at standardized test scores and see a decline, or we can look at a vastly different student population than we had a generation ago, recognize that we are serving a far greater proportion of them than in the past, and be encouraged at the progress we (and they) are making. </p>

<p>In reference to the comment on teachers' unions:--"they seem willing to support a body of teachers without regard to levels of proven competence"--I think I'm pretty competent, but how on earth would I or anyone else prove it? With the average scores on a slightly less than two-hour test taken by students who have absolutely no personal stake in the outcome, just because they have been in my class for an hour a day for seven months out of the last 14-17 years ? And if it's a good day and Smart Suzie does especially well and Goof-off Gertie is absent on test day, do I deserve merit pay?</p>

<p>I really don't mean to sound caustic or flippant. And I'm truly not a trouble-maker type of person. Still, I have had a couple of experiences with being targeted by parents who were disgruntled over issues that had nothing at all to do with my competence and a lot to do with their children's failure to meet reasonable expectations that they all knew well in advance, and they just plain tried to get me. I will never work without the protection of a union.</p>

316

<p>Renee (pretty name),
I do think experiences vary as to how good the old days were. My point was that many of the communities that had more predictable & more uniform populations, with fewer of the variants of today you describe & I also experience in the classroom, were by that fact more conducive to a uniform strategy & a predictable outcome. (Thus also more teacher-accountable.) The absenteeism you also encounter (such as on test day, etc.) was also not tolerated in my Salad Days. Many schools believe they need such "warm seats" as provided by Goof-off Gertie for financial reasons -- a "necessity" which is one of the many failures of a system, a system which has also caved in to supporting social (family & community) needs. (Schools as the surrogate parent, the surrorgate social agency, the surrogate drug enforcement or drug intervention agency, surrogate law enforcement authority, etc. These are not minor factors in my region: they dominate many of our urban public schools, if not by percentages, by mere presence. When one-fifth to one-fourth of the class, including first-graders, present as patients rather than students, and the teacher is told it's her "job" to address those needs before the academic needs, what are you, the public, holding the teacher accountable for? Her teaching, or her illegally practiced psychiatric skills, which people other than parents, are holding her accountable for? And that one-fourth to one-fifth of every classroom is so afflicted with a variety of ills & lack of preparation & lack of self-control that they sabotage the remaining segment. The system in my area, & the predominant political winds in community & in State d.o.e., does NOT support suspension, expulsion, or often even temporarily removal from the classroom.) I'm totally supportive of your points as credibly backed up by your current teaching experience & reinforced by the reality of others' similar experiences.</p>

<p>You (it sounds like) and hopefully I (I believe) can work virtual miracles with students from any background when the environment or the student's personal condition is not thoroughly sabotaging our efforts. If the parent is not literate, but is cooperative & providing an essentially healthy home for even a very impoverished student, you and I can help that student if the student is also eager. But if a student returns to an illiterate & dysfunctional home where drugs are being freely used in front of him, and where the parents are too impaired themselves to provide direction, or if a student is not being treated psychiatrically for a psychiatric condition (because the parents cannot afford health insurance), then it is not the teacher who is incompetent.</p>

<p>In a differently evaluated system such as I described earlier, you indeed would be BETTER off in your evaluations than you are now, not worse so. It's absurd the numerically <em>generalized</em> way in which you and other teachers are judged. In the cases you and I describe, it is the parents who should be negatively accountable, not the teachers.</p>

317

<p>
[quote]
And if it's a good day and Smart Suzie does especially well and Goof-off Gertie is absent on test day, do I deserve merit pay?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Another factor to consider is that on our state assessment last year I had approximately 85% of my students pass. (It is at least for now a requirement for graduation) One of my department members had a pass rate of just under 70% for her students. We each had a relatively equal number of students. Here's the thing. I had four sections of Honors students where the pass rate was over 90%. My colleague had 3 sections of inclusion students where all but a small handful had IEP's. </p>

<p>On what criteria do we base merit pay with regard to test scores? Just looking at raw numbers one might conclude that I am a better teacher than her. If you look deeper at the make up of our classes what she accomplished with her students was nothing short of miraculous while my students performed the way they should have. If either of us would have been deserving of merit it would be her. I should have been fired if my students didn't perform the way they did.</p>

318

<p>If merit pay is based on test scores it would clearly have to take into account student ability, ESL questions and improvement from the year before. (A fifth grade teacher who gets a kid who can barely read to read on a third grade level clearly has accomplished something.) I don't think merit pay of some sort is impossible, but clearly there are a lot of complicating issues. We've seen similar things happen with school report cards. Our middle school failed one year because one too few ESL students failed to show up for the exam. The ridiculous thing was, if the absent kid had come and failed the school would have been fine.</p>

319

<p>mathmom, what is "clear" to you, and probably to most people with common sense, is not clear to a district, a school, State mandates necessarily. The perfect example (since you mentioned "improvement") are the unique requirements of charter non-site schools, for example. We take students who have been 4 years below grade level in site schools; often within 6 months they have made dramatic improvement with us (also a free school), due to one-on-one attention, removal of distractions, professional follow-up & intervention. At the end of the academic year they can even have progressed 2 academic years in the core subjecs. Yet they may have entered our program at an unlucky time for them and for us, if that entrance coincides with renewal of our charter (typically a 3-yr time frame). Added to whatever pool of other recent entrants we have, their State test results in late spring may show them 2 yrs. below grade level (vs. 4), resulting in a denial of our charter's renewal. This is a frequent occurrence, & frequent cause of the closing of charters -- more so than any failure of the teachers, students, parents. In fact, the teachers in such schools are often among the best, as they are in it truly for the professional pleasure & better working environment, NOT for pay, which is laughably low versus that of traditional site-school teachers in the very same public school district, very same State.</p>

320

<p>"truly for the professional pleasure & better working environment, NOT for pay,"</p>

<p>E,</p>

<p>Maybe that's true of your situation, but not everywhere. The bigger issues of the strike we went through were over a better working environment. Working conditions are what tipped the hand. I think the wage issue was nominal, not great guns to strike for. But issues about class size, planning, inservice days and generally civility (professional) issues were all straightened out. There was such anmosity from the top downward, that for alot of educators that was the issue. </p>

<p>As I said the new super is a national finalist for what was resolved here and where it's gone from a few years ago. The most significant aspect is a professional respect between admin and educators that is improving things. </p>

<p>Pay is always nice, we all enjoy pay if we're honest. However, respect for what you do matters too... Move up here, you might like it.</p>