- Pregnancy
- Baby & Toddler
- Parents
- Getting Pregnant
- Baby Names
- Product Reviews
-
Registry
- Community
-
More
Want a personalized experience?
Download the free app
Cincinnati Babies
NBR: Senate Bill 5
This discussion has been closed.
Re: NBR: Senate Bill 5
I am obviously majorly against it because it will probably hit me in my wallet, but that's not the only reason. Actually, this subject sort of makes my blood pressure skyrocket, so I apologize in advance. But I will say that the arguments I have heard about why teachers' compensation is so out of whack don't hold water, in my opinion. I think there is a lot of ignorance about what teachers do and how hard they work. I come from a family of teachers and not one of them ever got the summer off. At most, they had a month off, which is the same as the 4 weeks vacation time I got as a middle manager in the private sector. They also never worked 6.5-hour days. My sister is a teacher now and is very rarely home before 6 p.m. Not to mention, teachers and other public employees do not take Social Security, they pay into their own retirement systems, so I don't think most people understand what we're talking about when we discuss pensions.
Beyond teachers, though, SB 5 will take hurt police officers and firefighters. Again, trying to compare a police department to a private business is comparing apples to oranges. In my husband's city, for example, there has been a lot of discussion about keeping things fair across the board for all city employees. OK, well then when parks and rec and city admin employees have to work Christmas, work 11 p.m. to 7:30 a.m. and miss holidays and birthdays and time with their families, then we'll discuss fair. Not to mention the whole risk-of-getting-killed-at-work thing. We already make a lot of sacrifices, so the comment that "we all need to sacrifice to balance budgets" just really p!sses me off. Plus, most unions have already made concessions. When my husband started work as a police officer, we paid nothing for health care, as did most area departments. It was considered a benefit of putting your life on the line every day. Now, we pay for health care monthly, also pay into an HSA, and have a several-thousand-dollar deductible. Health care through my private employer was better than this. Trust me, there have been concessions.
As for merit-based pay, again, it's apples and oranges. In the private sector, I got promoted because I performed. Yes, some of it's political, but most of the way you're evaluated as a private employee is performance-based. In a city, you have to trust the city or state to be able to accurately evaluate performance across the board without involving politics. I, personally, do not. I also do not like the idea of lay-offs being "performance-based." In the private sector, we've all seen the highest-paid employee laid off first. Do we really want the guy who's spent 17 years devoting his life to keeping us safe to be the first to be laid off because he makes the most? I think that's what it will come down to.
Personally, I think the whole thing is politically motivated. I do not think it makes sense in terms of balancing the budget, but is an attempt by Republicans to squash unions, which historically are big supporters of Democrats. I think there have to be better ways of balancing the budget than on the backs of the people who do some of the most important and thankless jobs in our country.
And while we're on the topic, I already posted this on FB, but I love it. And it points out the politics and hypocrisy involved in this issue.
https://www.mediaite.com/tv/jon-stewart-exposes-the-lavish-lifestyle-of-the-american-public-school-teacher/
Photo by Melissa Nicole Photography
maybe so, but they also work nights and weekends during the school year. It's not a 40 hour a week job.
My views on this are complex. I will try to simplify. I am, in general, opposed to unions. I think they served a very good purpose in our history at the turn of the century. And yes, I have read Upton Sinclair's The Jungle. But I believe current labor laws address most of the basic issues unions originally fought for.
Second, I think unions undermine and sell short their own workers. My uncle was a sheet metal worker from the age of 22 until the day he retired. At 22 he was a fired-up union loyalist. At 60 he hated his union because he was never able to grow as a professional and was still doing the same dangerous, physically-demanding work at 60 that he was doing as a young man. Now that's really his fault but the point being that unions can make it difficult for a worker to move upwards.
Additionally, in his 40s his wife reentered the workforce in middle management in an industry with union workers. He started to see the other side of union work. Watching his wife try to do her work while having to deal with union leaders was eye-opening for him.
Third, I believe unions drive up the cost of US manufacturing thus pricing us out of global competition and killing the US manufacturing sector.
Fourth, I have worked in public schools and have benefitted from the collective bargaining agreement even though I was not a union member. I really appreciate the benefits and pension set up they had in place for me. But ultimately it was unsustainable for the State of Nevada and it had to be changed despite the union's opposition. Unions make things too freaking expensive. From wages to benefits to pensions.
HOWEVER, merit pay in public education is not possible and it's a disservice to teachers. Public schools are not businesses. Stop trying to run them as such.
Fifth, I am a capitalist. And I don't think that's a dirty word. I think it's okay that businesses make money. Now I don't think it's okay to employ an 8-year-old Cambodian in a factory but I am not opposed to businesses making money and being profitable. The vast majority of my retirement is in the stock market. I am happy when businesses do well. They create jobs.
Sixth, I believe in personal freedom. I think people make their own deals and I think workers should vote with their feet and energy. Go to the companies that pay better, the ones that offer better benefits, the ones that provide a better working condition. I think it's a shame a union worker has to accept strike pay and is forced to strike even if s/he wants to work that day. I hate that they can't complete a project from start to finish because their union has so restricted their job description to include only one small piece of labor. I hate that the union comes before the company, the quality of work, or the personal ambitions of the worker.
I expect to be vilified and flamed. But that's okay. We all get our say in the voting booth.
Mine was. And that is ultimately what became too expensive for the State of Nevada to continue. I paid ZERO into my pension. The taxpayer paid all of it. And I will receive 75% of my highest pay at the age of 62 for the rest of my life on the back of the Nevada taxpayer.
But new public employees starting in 2007 (I think it was. Maybe 2008) will not have that same benefit because it was just too much for the state to maintain.
Is it wrong that I want to kiss you on the face, right now?
This was us exactly, minus that me being in my 40s thing. I was a middle manager dealing with an unhappy union, and I did not like it. And I thought that union was outdated and their demands absurd. Meanwhile, my husband is in a union. I do not always agree with his union, and he and I have had civil discussions about it. But I think there is also a difference between the issues I faced with a private-sector union vs. a public union. The issues they fight about are different, because the role of their "companies" in society are different. I just don't understand the comparisons.
Photo by Melissa Nicole Photography
Most of my statements, again, were based on the info I had from Wisconsin.
I think that this is a really complex argument, but in generally I don't agree with unions the way the run today. I don't really see why teachers need a union. Can't each teacher negotiate their salary and benefits? I agree with the poster who basically said unions sell short their members.
I think policemen, firemen, teachers, etc. would all do better for themselves than any union could because your number one advocate in working is you.
Yes! My feelings regarding unions are largely directed towards unions in the private sector which, if you hadn't guessed, I am vehemently opposed to. In the public sector I am a little more wishy-washy. But still what the educators union in Nevada was doing was detrimental to the state. I can't back that. And co-workers who moved from other states (Illinois in particular) where required to belong to their teacher's union. I am categorically opposed to mandatory union membership.
Several of your points are well-made, but fall under the happenings of private sector unions more than public. Is your concern that the public unions will eventually make the same mistakes?
P.S. I completely disagree that unions driving up costs are what's preventing us from competing in the global market. We can blame that on pure, American greed. We took ourselves out of manufacturing the minute we realized it's a whole lot cheaper (with or without unions) to do it outside of this country. Why is it so much cheaper? Because those countries don't have labor laws or unions to speak up for their employees.
Why would you be vilified and flamed for holding an [educated] opinion? IMO, the only people who deserve to be flamed are the ones who believe everything they hear on the [Fox
] news, then yell [mis]information from the mountaintops, without ever having researched issues for themselves.
Not really. For example, most pay and benefits for police/fire departments are spelled out in city code. It's not like you can say, OK, well, I'll take that salary if you'll give me an extra week's vacation, like you can when negotiating in the private sector. Vacation time, comp time, sick time is all spelled out in city ordinances and not up to supervisors' discretion.
And the union has more power because it has numbers. It's a lot more effective to negotiate as a whole rather than one-on-one.
Photo by Melissa Nicole Photography
No, it's not that simple.
I think your opinion is colored by what you know. I can't fault you for that, but it's not the same when it comes to the public sector. Apples and oranges.
Precisely related to my point above. Labor laws = a good thing. Won't ever argue that. But unions make things expensive for businesses and that cost is passed onto the consumer by raising the costs of goods. Ergo, unions make products more expensive which then result in calls for increases in minimum wage and proportional increases in union wages and all other wages which then leads to inflation. Businesses either have to pay higher wages or go places with lower wages.
I will say this regardless of opinion - I applaud the senate for showing up and doing their job unlike WI.
All of these representatives were hired via voting by the public and they are there to vote based on what their constituancy wants... even if they don't agree with the bill, fine- show up and vote against it.
If the public isn't happy then in a few years, vote em out. That's how democracy runs. It runs that way when you like the people in office, or you don't like them.
And lets face it folks, no one likes any of them now a days.
BTW After this baby I would love to grab a case of beer and learn how Ohio's education system works. I really am baffled.
I agree with E's points, here.
Thanks for posting this. It's really interesting to read the different opinions. Let me first say that I'm against the bill for many reasons, most of which have been stated here.
I'm finding the merit pay very interesting. Having only worked in the private sector, where merit pay is a way of life, I guess I don't understand the argument that merit pay doesn't work in the public sector. If you take my job for example. I'm in sales. Every year the heads guys at corporate, who don't know me, my clients or my geography that well, come up with whatever compensation plan they want depending on the goals of the company this year. Last year it was growth, this year it's margin etc. We as reps have no say in what our plans look like. If we don't like them, the choice is simple. Sign the plan or leave. So we have a very objective plan, set forth for the whole, who don't have a say and we are all judged and ranked against one another. Those that perform well, make more money.
How would it be that different in the public sector? Guidelines would be set at a higher level than the employee (maybe the state legislature etc.) w/o consideration for the employee, but rather what's good for the state as a whole. Employees wouldn't have a say, but would be expected to perform to those standards. Those that do well, would be compensated accordingly.
I plead my ignorance, as I've never worked in the public sector, but from an outsiders perspective when people complain that merit based pay I can't relate. Why do those in the public sector feel this is impossible?
Well, except for that Republican on the committee who was against the bill, and so was yanked off the committee by his party and replaced by a senator who was for it.
Photo by Melissa Nicole Photography
So, perhaps I'm confused. Help me to understand what this, specifically, has to do with kicking my husband (and others in the middle class) in the balls.
How would you evaluate this for a police officer? How many tickets they write? Which gets into the whole debate about what kind of policing is best. Do you want cops who are afraid if they don't write enough tickets they'll be evaluated poorly? How many calls they respond to? How's that work for people who work overnight vs. in the evenings? How well they represent their department in their city? How do you measure that?
What about teachers? Are we judging based on how well students score on a test? That's a big old can of worms that there's no way to objectively evaluate.
Photo by Melissa Nicole Photography
C beat me to the punch.
Your response seems a non sequitur to me. Now I am confused. Warrior's point was that US manufacturing died because US companies found overseas labor cheaper than American labor. I contend that overseas labor is cheaper than US labor because unions drive up the cost of goods. So Warrior and I disagree on this point.
Seems unrelated to your concern about your husband's balls as he's not in a manufacturing position.
I suppose you right. In my senario it's based on dollars and cents and how much you sell. But there are many other roles in corporate America that arent' a cut and dry. For example, how is an admin judged on performance? How many files that are filed? Probably not. It's probably more objective things like how many days do they miss work, are their tasks like paperwork etc. done in a timely manner. How many special projects does the person volunteer for? Do they go above and beyond to help the company (city/station/school) in this case. I don't think it has to be as granular as number of tickets and/or test scores, because the private sector doesn't have these things alot of times either. But more general terms on what makes a good employee in the eyes of the employer. Again, not being argumentative, I just find the concept interesting.
Lame attempt to bring it back to MY concerns related to SB5.
Exactly this. There is no objective way to evaluate many people in their jobs to determine how much they should make. Student testing is skewed, student evals are a joke (coming from someone who gets them 4+ times a year), and bosses are not sitting in classes and also subjective, and you can't go by pass/fail rates. Teachers work insane hours and that whole "summer off" thing is a joke. Prep time happens on those vacations for the coming year and any time off maybe only partially makes up for the nights/weekends spent doing work.
And FTR I am non-union faculty (non-BUFM), made crap pay my first year ($34k with a Master's at the COLLEGE level non-negotiable), and have no protection (never get tenure). I can say thanks to collective bargaining, the administrators extended BUFM benefits to non-BUFM so I benefit from the union indirectly. I also never get raises outside of keeping up with inflation, and only have 1 more level of promotion to go through, my last chance at any raise EVER in my career). BUT, unions are much needed for the protection of people in these positions where there is no objective way to evaluate performance and protect them.
The difference is, you at least work for a company run by individuals who are capable of determining what your goals should be. Schools have to put up with input from the state & local governments, tax payers and board members just to name a few. All we're told is to "educate young minds," but no one wants to pinpoint a specific goal.
Is it to meet specific scores on standardized tests? Is it to help contribute productive individuals to society? When you ask someone the point of public education you're going to get a wide variety of responses. There's just too many variables to make it 100% merit based when no one can define specific goals in regards to education.
I like this debate...
Tomorrow can we do circumcision?
I'm not sure this is much different than a large corporation. For example, my company is publicly traded. Therefore we are responsible to our board of directors, our stock holders etc. All of whom have a say in the direction of the company. This is similiar to what you're talking about with the various levels of government. At the end of the day the president of our board doesn't really know what it will mean to me and my family if he decides that margins are the most important thing to the company this year. But based on his direction, the shareholders imput etc., our compensation plans and goals are made in a vacuum. The impact to the individual is not weighed when making decisions for the whole.
Even our cheapest non-union labor couldn't compete with overseas labor. American's feel that those jobs are beneath them now. Supply and demand are the primary factors involved in driving up the cost of goods. I'd imagine the unions effect on these variables is pennies to the dollar.
And to add coming from a non-union teacher, I always feel like I can't say no because I have no protection from a union and my position IS very subjective in evaluation. I do my job, but my boss has been pressuring me to teach more and more since I am now the only one left in my department who can teach this subject matter. I constantly feel like even though I am working hard and doing what my contract dictate and even then some (uncompensated I might add), that if I say no then it would put my job in jeopardy.
Also, the non-BUFM also get dumped on when there is needed teaching b/c they cannot force the BUFM faculty to teach beyond their "contracted" amount. Not union-bashing at all here, just trying to show that unions can protect their members from being pushed to do more than they are specifically paid to do and provide protection for their members.
I just think you want the rest of us thinking about your H's balls. Or balls in general. Now I have visions of scrotum dancing in my head.
Let me try to explain it this way:
Present company excluded, of course, most people would do darn near ANYTHING to ensure their merit increase/bonus. Lie, cheat, fudge numbers - scruples tend to fly out the window. Working in the private sector (now), I live it. I see it, every.single.day. Do we really want to force our teachers (and other public employees) into that "game"? At what cost? Who will really benefit? Who might lose?
I am a teacher in Cincinnati Public Schools. One does not have to attend the neighborhood school. There are magnet school options to which one can apply. My son attends a public Montessori school that is fantastic (of which there are six Montessori schools). There is the School of Creative and Performing Arts, and Fairview-German Bilingual just to name a few that are awesome. If you live in CPS, you apply to get into those schools. Or you can go to your neighborhood school, which some are also very good. Overall, almost every building is rebuilt or renovated currently. Also, for secondary (high school) a student can choose any high school (except Walnut Hills- you have to test in...it is top ranked nationally) and the district buses them across the city to the high school. It is called "schools of choice." Anyway, I hope this helps. Louisville's system sounds interesting, too.
Yes, it is my understanding that teachers must get their masters. I have mine.
But the goals of all of those groups are the same: for your company to make money. Your company is a success if it's making money, period. What warrior is saying is that there's no similar goal for public employees. So what measuring stick is the state going to use that's going to work in every school district in Ohio? And of course, this all assumes that the state's goal is to actually employ the best teachers. Which I'm not sure it is, because cutting salaries and benefits isn't the typical model companies use to attract the best candidates.
Photo by Melissa Nicole Photography
I completely agree.
Alright.... I have skimmed the various responses. Most of you know that I am a teacher and have been teaching for over 10 years. I am late jumping on here because I got home from school at 7:10 tonight. I worked over 12 hours today.
Some facts:
1. Over 1/3 of my paycheck is gone due to deductions. Most of them are required deductions. 10% of my paycheck goes straight to STRS. I do not pay into Social Security... but I am not eligible to receive it either. I currently pay 12% of my health insurance premium, and it will be increasing to 15% within the next few years.
2. Teachers in Ohio were required to get their Master's degree within the first 12 years of teaching. This rule I believe (but I may be wrong) is disappearing because while it is good in theory that teachers become more educated, lawmakers figured out that school districts couldn't afford to pay each teacher for a Master's degree.
3. @KittahMama- school funding in Ohio has been declared unconstitutional MULTIPLE times since 1989. It is a mess, and we do not have county schools like KY. Most communities have their own school district.
4. I am not required to be a member of my teacher's union. However, it does provide me insurance in case of a lawsuit (and believe me, in this current era, the coverage is necessary). Some unions do have a fair share fee, which means every teacher pays their "fair share."
.....
Now for some of my own thoughts...
Kasich and company began writing this bill without actually talking to members of teachers, police, fire, etc... unions. He didn't find out what we're about... I have a problem with that. If you're going to completely change the "structure" of how public employees are compensated, etc... at least talk to "us" first.
This bill was generated in a few weeks time. I don't care what the bill is.... at least take the time to think it through.
Kicking Seitz off the committee at the 11th hr so that the bill could go through committee to the floor for a vote makes me sick to my stomach. Seitz's biggest point was that this bill should be more thought out first.
Teachers are in the business of servicing KIDS. It's not the same as dealing with adults. It's been proven that teenagers don't necessarily gain the "common sense" trait until later in high school if not early adulthood. My job is to teach teenagers. I have a hard time basing my salary on how teenagers perform or feel about their teachers. In my 10+ years teaching, I've had good years and bad. More good than bad or I probably would've found a new career. Determine my pay based on test scores? OK... what if I have only the "honors" kids that almost always do well on tests? Fantastic. What if I have a large group of special needs kids because I'm "good" at helping them make progress? But you might not judge their growth on test scores well.... What if I have a group of very needy kids who have next to no parental support or are homeless... or go home to parents who think it's ok to smoke dope and shoot up....or other absolutely crazy scenarios that you couldn't even imagine? My product is one that is not easily judged.
The pay ranges for teachers that I've seen are 30K-80K. Nothing substantial, but if you make a career out of being a teacher, you can make a reasonable wage. I just want to be paid for my master's degree and experience. While there are a lot of really good young teachers, experience does make a difference and I do believe more experienced teachers deserve more pay. Oh, and after about 12 years, there are a lot of plateaus in pay raises. There's not a ton of room for increase after that level unless you increase your education (but you can't be maxed out that way either).
Some school districts lost their excellent rating because they didn't make enough gains in test scores last year. But the reason for this is because their test scores were ALREADY really HIGH... making enough "gains" is nearly impossible because they're too close to the top. Here's an article with a similar scenario about a teacher: https://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/07/education/07winerip.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1 It somewhat explains why merit pay scares me.
OK... so maybe you base it on other things... but teaching is VERY subjective. What one principal likes another doesn't... I've been evaluted by 4 different principals and all like different things. Usually merit pay is judged on the product. Our product is kids, and while yes they can't be predictable, I really don't want to place my paycheck on the mind of a child. And if you didn't see the Enquirer on Sunday, testing is already a little corrupt... imagine what would happen if it determined teacher's pay?
I am constantly working. Yes, I'm required to work 7.5 hours each day. Most days are at least a 9 hour day, if not more. I spend a few hours each weekend keeping up with email and grading papers. I get 15, maybe 20, minutes for lunch on a daily basis. I usually have to force myself to go to the bathroom. I have an amazing amount of paperwork to complete. The other thing is as a teacher when I say that I work that long each day... I work. As soon as I walk in the door, I am "on." What do I mean by that? I constantly have someone asking me a question or needing something. As for summers off? Yeah... ok... 3 summers I spent all summer in classes all day working on my Master's degree that I was required to earn. One summer I taught summer school. Last summer I spent several weeks taking continuing ed hours. Copswife estimate of approximately one month off was about right...
SB5 may have been changed to let us negotiate on salary, but not much else. When our union went to the board to negotiate, there is a natural give and take... meaning we don't get what we ask for. It's a negotiation. We make concessions just like the Board makes concessions. Here's another good perspective: https://cincinnati.com/blogs/considerthisclermont/2011/02/22/a-little-collective-bargaining-is-needed/ My union has taken no raise in some of our negotiation years... but in return we got our maternity leave upped to 8 weeks regardless of delivery method and 3 unrestricted personal days (instead of having to 'justify' why- one teacher was asking for wedding programs and funeral notices)
I will preface this by saying that I do have a continuing contract (aka tenure). However, I worked my tail off to earn it... it took me 7 years. And yes, you can be fired. Do something illegal? fired. Break Board Policy? Yes, you can be fired. So... if a school district wanted to press the issue, they could fire you.
Our contract includes class size limitations, payment for additional duties (most coaches I know make about $1/hour when it comes down to it... so don't tell me that they should do it for "free"), and other working condition issues like how we're evaluated and how complaints are handled. These are things that will be gone with SB 5.
.... More to come later...
Schools cannot be run like businesses... this was taken from a friend's FB page:
"If I ran my business the way you people operate your schools, I wouldn't be in business very long!" I stood before an auditorium filled with outraged teachers who were becoming angrier by the minute. My speech had entirely consumed their precious 90 minutes of in-service. Their initial icy glares had turned to restless agitation. You could cut the hostility with a knife.
I represented a group of business people dedicated to improving public schools. I was an executive at an ice cream company that became famous in the middle 1980s when People Magazine chose our blueberry as the "Best Ice Cream in America." I was convinced of two things. First, public schools needed to change; they were archaic selecting and sorting mechanisms designed for the industrial age and out of step with the needs of our emerging "knowledge society." Second, educators were a major part of the problem: they resisted change, hunkered down in their feathered nests, protected by tenure and shielded by a bureaucratic monopoly. They needed to look to business.
We knew how to produce quality. Zero defects! TQM! Continuous improvement! In retrospect, the speech was perfectly balanced equal parts ignorance and arrogance. As soon as I finished, a woman's hand shot up. She appeared polite, pleasant - she was, in fact, a razor-edged, veteran, high school English teacher who had been waiting to unload..
She began quietly, "We are told, sir, that you manage a company that makes good ice cream."
I smugly replied, "Best ice cream in America, Ma'am."
"How nice," she said. "Is it rich and smooth?"
"Sixteen percent butterfat," I crowed. "Premium ingredients?" she inquired. "Super-premium! Nothing but triple A." I was on a roll. I never saw the next line coming. "
Mr. Vollmer," she said, leaning forward with a wicked eyebrow raised to the sky, "when you are standing on your receiving dock and you see an inferior shipment of blueberries arrive, what do you do?" In the silence of that room, I could hear the trap snap. I was dead meat, but I wasn't going to lie.
"I send them back."
"That's right!" she barked, "and we can never send back our blueberries. We take them big, small, rich, poor, gifted, exceptional, abused, frightened, confident, homeless, rude, and brilliant. We take them all: GT, ADHD, ADD, SLD, EI, MMR, OHI, TBI, DD, Autistic, junior rheumatoid Arthritis, English as their second language, etc. We take them all! Everyone! And that, Mr. Vollmer, is why it's not a business. It's school!"
And so began my long transformation. Since then, I have visited hundreds of schools. I have learned that a school is not a business. Schools are unable to control the quality of their raw material, they are dependent upon the vagaries of politics for a reliable revenue stream, and they are constantly mauled by a howling horde of disparate, competing customer groups that would send the best CEO screaming into the night.
None of this negates the need for change. We must change what, when and how we teach to give all children maximum opportunity to thrive in a postindustrial society. But educators cannot do this alone; these changes can occur only with the understanding, trust, permission and active support of the surrounding community.
For the most important thing I have learned is that schools reflect the attitudes, beliefs and health of the communities they serve, and therefore, to improve public education means more than changing our schools, it means changing America.
In other words... you can't compare things in the private sector to things in the public sector. Public schools are not a business. They open their doors to all types, and we have to service all types. I know of kids who have threatened to bring dangerous weapons to school. They might be "expelled." Did you know there is a limit of 120 days of expulsion in the state of Ohio? In other words, after 120 days, the student has to come back to the same school he or she threatened. Don't agree with that? When America was founded, one of our ideals was Education for ALL. Not just your top notch students. ALL Students. Not all countries do this. IMHO, there is no statistical computation that could help 'judge' how good of a teacher you are, and I am pretty math minded. Most teachers I know are good teachers. Sure, there are a few that aren't spectacular, but most I know are pretty good if not amazing. How do you achieve this in a school? Insist on it when you hire teachers. It's a culture. Low performing teachers in my building aren't tolerated and I've seen them be shown the door. It's a culture... Do your job and you keep your job. Don't do your job and you won't stay very long. They aren't afraid to get rid of teachers... and that is something cultural because I witnessed it change while I worked here. It used to be pretty much everyone kept their job. Not so anymore. Tenure is a different story, but I have seen teachers with tenure sweat because of something they did (or didn't do).
Back to the merit pay thing... within the bill, I believe they've put a "cap" on what you can earn with merit pay. That doesn't make sense to me. Oh, and the pay ranges I've heard rumors about (but can't confirm) would mean a significant pay cut for me if I earned the max. And I am not at the top of the salary tables. So in other words, by giving most veteran teachers pay cuts, you're going to successfully bankrupt hundreds of thousands of people. It's one thing to cut a small %age to help balance a budget... but this wasn't a small %age. When my union negotiated our current salary table, there was definitely a give and take with the Board to reach a reasonable wage that kept us competitive with neighboring districts that fit our profile. Our Board, which is comprised of elected officials, needed to stay fiscally responsible before they agreed to new salary tables. The other thing that impresses me is that they are amongst the districts who have already made cuts before asking for a levy from the taxpayer. Some say unions eliminate competition... but our pay scales are somewhat determined by what other districts are doing.
There has been a push for some time now to compensate teachers with more pay. The reason for this is to make teaching an attractive field and encourage young, intelligent future workers to become a teacher. If you're only going to pay $25-$50K, you really won't keep talented teachers around. I don't believe teacher pay has gotten out of control (not in the 6 figure range... ya know?). Teachers who are making in the upper ranges of most pay scales have a Master's degree, many years of experience, and a lot of education beyond a Master's degree (sometimes the equivalent of 2 or more Master's degrees).
Another misconception about teacher pay is that we get paid all year. That's partly true. Say I make $48K/year. Instead of getting paid for the 20 pays that make up the school year, which would be $2400/paycheck, I divide it by 24 pays, getting only $2000/paycheck. So in other words, the Board keeps $400/paycheck from September-June so that they can pay me in July and August. And I'm pretty sure they earn interest on that money. So... it's kind of like they keep their own savings account for me. My health insurance costs have also been rising and continue to rise.
Unions for the public sector are not the same as unions for the private sector. We're negotiating for two completely different types of clientele. The truth is I would love to be able to work in a place that didn't have a union. But the thought of it scares me...
There is an amazing amount of pressure school teachers endure on a daily basis. The demands of students, colleagues, administrators, parents, and legislation can be intense at times. Learning how to cope with it is the key to staying in it. More than 50% of beginning teachers leave the profession within 5 years. That's a huge turnover rate. Every school year when I return from my summer "vacation" I am given multiple "new" initiatives to learn and figure out.
My point is that everyone usually "thinks" they know what goes into a school because they went to school. But the truth is that the other side looks a whole lot different than it did as a student. My job is about 30% teaching, 50% paperwork/email, and 10% babysitting, and 10% political.
The other thing I find interesting about SB 5 is that it is in the name of "saving" the deficit. School districts are partly funded by the state, but also through federal funds and local monies. I heard a statistic along the following lines (these are estimates)... public employees make up $3B of the states budget, and there is an $8B deficit. In other words, you could get rid of all of them and still not balance the budget.
Another thought: "We must close union offices, confiscate their money and put their leaders in prison. We must reduce workers salaries and take away their right to strike." - Hitler... translated from German
Anyway, if you read all of my rambling thoughts, thanks for listening... I am sure I wound up repeating myself. I worked a long day and felt the need to respond.
KEL716-
Thanks for the insights.
My SIL was a teacher. She got her masters in special ed. She originally said she was "duped" into going into special ed, but then enjoyed it. It's a long story. My best friend was a teacher and is trying to go back. She and her hubby were in SC then moved to NC. She taught in one of the poorest schools in state there. I know she spent well over $2,000 out of pocket one year getting things for students (like maxi pads or tampons for the girls, and even a jacket for one boy). I am still appalled at how she was treated. My other good friend is a teacher in a small private school in TN. She doesn't make a lot but still has a lot of the same issues that I know public school teachers have and others that are a bit stranger.
All in all teaching is hard. I know that in college MOST of my friends went for education degrees. It seems everyone I know is either a teacher or nurse!!! Anyway, what I am getting at is I haven't seen the numbers or the actual bill here in OH. What I read and learned about was Wisconsin because their budget issues and woes are UNREAL. I mean, you cannot sustain a state that gives the benefits and pay that they were giving to many areas of public works. They found a maintenance worker at a prison making $82,000 a year plus full benefits and he didn't speak any English. He'd been there for 15 years though and had no degree, just a GED. You cannot sustain a state government on that. Again, that is WI, not Ohio.
After reading a lot of this today I can see that private vs. public is different, but I still feel like individuals should be treated as such and I still don't see why collective bargaining is better for the individual. Many times unions in both public and private screw over their members as well as the companies that they serve and even the public.
When I heard friends complain about how their husbands weren't making $100k at Ford because they weren't getting overtime, but they got 80% pay and 3/4 of a month OFF work plus full benefits I was appalled. That is what unions in the private sector have become. These friends married men with little to no education (some didn't graduate high school) and they were doing very well financially. Then to hear them complain about $150 a paycheck for medical insurance and $15 copays, that annoys your average working Joe. Those are the types of unions I am used to seeing/hearing about.
I see that it is different and I am much more familiar with Kentucky, specifically Jefferson County in Louisville and how it is ran. But I can appreciate where you are coming from and why you feel the way you do. Reform has to happen but perhaps the best way would be to take each sector individually.
It seems like all politicians from Mr. Obama on down, seem to just be doing a Duct tape job of trying to fix problems. Here's a problem, well duct tape it, we don't have time to assess where the real issue is and why it is happening. Duct tape works on everything! It's going to make for a worse situation over the next five years, no matter what state you live in! At least, that is my fear.
Totally against this bill and I too feel sorry for these individuals affected. My prayers are with them and their families because they too will be affected.
P.s. Kasich makes my skin crawl and fear for my kids education as well. His whole agenda is not for the State of OH. Ive been wanting to leave OH for a while. Its deteriorating at a fast pace.