Teachers’ Union Responds
Kudos to the Daily News for publishing this letter. Here’s a snippet.
(EDITOR’S NOTE: The West Bend Education Association sent this letter to members on March 3, in response to the letter West Bend School Board members sent to teachers Feb. 26.)
Dear West Bend Education Association Member: Recently, you received a letter from the West Bend School Board blaming the teachers and the state for the district’s budget problems. Our organization of professionals sees things differently. Teachers, who stand at the front of the district’s classrooms, will not quietly stand by and let quality education suffer as short-sighted solutions are offered up for long-term problems. The root cause of West Bend’s funding troubles is Wisconsin’s outdated school funding system, not teachers.
Here is an overview of where we stand:
After parents, teachers have the greatest impact on student learning - an impact that benefits the whole community. We take pride in our work, and this pride shows in our students’ performance on ACT exams, Advanced Placement tests and in our high student graduation rate. The West Bend economy depends on excellent schools and staff. It attracts and retains businesses and families to our community. To keep pace with surrounding school districts like Cedarburg, Germantown and Slinger, West Bend must continue to attract and retain the best teachers, and part of that requires offering competitive compensation packages.
In other words, “FU taxpayers, gimmie gimmie gimmie.”
I would love to have an experiment with this. If we cut teacher pay by 10%, what would be the effect? In a community with 12%+ unemployment, would they seriously leave? If they did, would it be difficult filling their positions with comparable talent? I’d say “no” to both questions.
Again, I put the onus on the actual teachers. If the union speaks for you, then fine. If not, then you need to speak up because YOUR union is forcing a crisis that will result in some of you losing your jobs and all of you being viewed as leeches.
While the union wants to whine about the funding formula, the reality is that it won’t change before this contract is written. You have to play the hand you’re dealt. The money has to come from somewhere. Teachers have a choice to insist on an increase, which with result in unemployed teachers, deferred maintenance, programming cuts, or worse, or do what they said they would do in the Fall and accept the circumstances of our economic climate. For those who shouted last year that a tax increase would deprive me of a latte a week, it’s time for the teachers to show that they actually care about the kids and are willing to make the same trivial sacrifice.
If West Bend were a high-tax district that has been giving the teachers whatever they want year after year, you might have a reasonable point. The statistics haven’t borne that out.
It’s nice for you to live in the school district that has the lowest tax rates in the area, but that doesn’t seem to be enough for you. Why? You appear to want to have the benefit of living here, but resent paying the reasonable costs of doing so.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 04, 2010 at 1113 hrs
I’ve lived in three of the highest tax states and two of the lowest and noticed absolutely zero difference in the “quality of life.”
There were always cops, and roads, and fire departments. All the stuff people in Wisconsin are threatening that I’ll lose if I don’t keep raising my taxes higher and higher.
High taxes support high spending (and typically a coddled government working class). They do not make for a higher quality of life.
Posted by elliot on March 04, 2010 at 1124 hrs
Not to get off point but why give kudos to the paper? They are just printing the news.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 04, 2010 at 1129 hrs
Look around West Bend business has been fleeing for years, so the teachers are taking credit for this? We do have a large amount of fast food and big box stores thank you West Bend teachers for your help with the local economy, your outstanding work will assure the well never runs dry of burger cooks and shelf stockers.
Do you think the teachers are just that out of touch of whats happening on Main street U.S.A. ? To continue driving home this theory that they are the catalyst or the coming of Christ of all good things in West Bend. Everybody plays a role in a community, we all have bit parts , its a team game, why are they better then everyone else?
Is time for these folks to give up a latte per week.Again thank you sir may I have another.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 04, 2010 at 1130 hrs
Not to get off point but why give kudos to the paper? They are just printing the news.
Every news outlet makes decisions on what to run and what not to run. They chose to run this. Good for them.
Posted by Owen on March 04, 2010 at 1138 hrs
To answer the question; not as single one would leave after a 10% pay cut.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 04, 2010 at 1311 hrs
“In other words, ‘FU taxpayers, gimmie gimmie gimmie.’”
- You own these words, Mr. Robinson, not the teachers.“You have to play the hand you’re dealt.” - Again, Mr. Robinson, just tell ‘em to accept school funding as it is. Fortunately, we are not discussing Women’s suffrage.
A red herring: John Crane, a U-Illinois sociologist, studied the effect of role models in the community: professionals, managers, teachers, doctors (people who the census bureau defined as “high status”) on the lives of teenagers in the same neighborhood. Crane discovered little difference in the pregnancy rates or school drop out rates in neighborhoods of between 40 to 5% of high status workers. But when the number of professionals dropped below 5%, problems exploded: teen pregnancy nearly double; drop out rates increase dramatically. 92,512 teenagers living with their parents were studied for this analysis.
Obscure, but interesting.Is it true Aurora Health Care is experiencing difficulty finding professionals who wish to live in West Bend due to their concerns with the school district present state and future and community school support? If Aurora is experiencing this, are other employers having the same issues? If this anxiety exists, what effect is this issue having on home starts and sales and property taxes?
2010 School property tax levy monies $31,132,774 (funds 62% of salaries)
Mr. Robinson’s $250K house at 2009 school tax levy rates:
WBSD 2009 levy rate $8.04 = $2010 for schools
My pay: $57,962 + bennies = $88,069
$2010 / $31,132,774 (2010 WB salary/bennies) = 0.0000645%
$88,069 x 0.0000645% = $5.69
$5.69 x 62% = $3.53Mr. Robinson,
If asked, I’ll refund your contribution to my salary for your latte.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 04, 2010 at 1318 hrs
Right on Owen! Screw the kids and the dumbass teachers that learned ‘em. Why should we have to fork over .00045% to fund this socialist experiment?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 04, 2010 at 1344 hrs
I doubt Aurora has many problems they cant purchase and make go away. They build entire hospitals minutes away from areas that already have shining new hospitals in the name of competition.
You dont make moves like this without a massive bankroll backing you. They can pay anyone an an obscene amount and have them commute. I dont buy your rumor, I bet it derives from the wife of one certain local doctor who also happens to be involved as a friend of the district, or whatever that rubber stamp group is called.
Is this the scare tactic now? Pay teachers or we have no health care in West Bend.
Aurora could shut its doors this week and we still have a nice new hospital and other clinics.Anxiety does exist, it stems from families facing foreclosure, trying to heat their homes, and putting food on the table for children. Yet in the hardest of times because of your great love of children you want these families to hand you more, dig deep, and do it with a smile.
How good is a student if his family is evicted from the home, if he comes to school hungry, or parents fighting over finances.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 04, 2010 at 1414 hrs
-Teacher, “Hey neighbor how are you?”
-Neighbor, “Not good, me and the misses are both laid off now, might be some time until we can get back on our feet”
-Teacher, “That’s not good”!
-Neighbor, “Tell me about it, were worried we might lose our house.
I’ve talked to a lot of people like me, if they weren’t fired or laid off their hours and benefits have been cut. It’s really tough out there”!-Teacher, “Yea”
- Neighbor, “How are things with you”?
-Teacher, “We’ll were putting in for 13% increase in pay and bennys!”
-Neighbor, “But I don’t know how we can afford that right now”
-Teacher,” I really don’t want to, but my Union Masters tell me “It’s for the kids”. And if we don’t this community will go into the toilet.”
-Neighbor “Hey, last year you told us that we needed to make sacrifices (Starbucks) and paraded all those kids in front of the board, we did sacrifice and even passed a referendum to remodel Badger. When will it be enough for a while? I can’t afford this!
-Teacher, “NEVER!”
-Neighbor “Thug!”
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 04, 2010 at 1434 hrs
JP-lunch - what a load of crap.
If I may show my ignorance… is the school district required to even negotiate with the teacher’s union? How about a, ‘thanks for your offer, but we’re done with WEAC…’ from our school board? Logistically (w/o any legal crap with regard to arbitration) hiring a new batch of teachers that don’t make $110,000+ with benefits would provide much value to the community…
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 04, 2010 at 1452 hrs
Tax to the max
You are a complete DouchePosted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 04, 2010 at 1456 hrs
Owen- Would you have the current funding formula continue? Do you, as someone concerned about public schools, believe this funding mechanism is broke or working, all rhetoric about working with the hand we’re dealt aside. If it were up to you, would you change it?
I would.
I choose not to play the damn game of cutting and cutting and cutting. It is ruining the education that communities can provide for their future.
Posted by Mike on March 04, 2010 at 1558 hrs
Owen- Would you have the current funding formula continue? Do you, as someone concerned about public schools, believe this funding mechanism is broke or working, all rhetoric about working with the hand we’re dealt aside. If it were up to you, would you change it?
Good question. Yes. If I had my druthers, I’d scrap two-thirds funding and put the entire burden on the local taxpayers. That way, each local district would be able to spend as much as they choose.
But that doesn’t change the fact that the district must abide by the current system and respond accordingly.
Posted by Owen on March 04, 2010 at 1604 hrs
JP lunch, Let’s assume your numbers above on Owen’s contribution are 100% correct. How many teachers are there? Administrators?
If you all give me $5 bucks, I will gladly pay Owen’s property tax for you. Sound stupid? I had a good model.
I am sure that I pay less than one cent per week for Doyle’s salary. C’mon, that is so cheap. And I probably pay half that for each member of his staff, about the same for each member of State Congress and every one of their aides, oh and then each and every public worker and only about 6 six times that for each public retiree over 65 and probably less than $30/week on all the public retirees between the ages of 55 and 65 (you know, the age of retirement). It is all so cheap! Us conservatives are tightwad pricks to not want to pay so little… and unfunded means you don’t have to pay for it all, right?
If asked, will you give the money back to anyone and everyone? Why not, it’s just $2-5 bucks each.Wanna get away?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 04, 2010 at 1620 hrs
Owen,
Hasn’t the legislature effectively scrapped the 2/3 funding long ago? WB looks like it might get 50/50 funding for next year. Some districts do worse.
Local increases in property taxes are coming because the legislature consistently failed to develop a rainy-day fund and now has to cut expenditures even to meet the ‘balanced’ (deficit in reality) budget they are running. Rather than actually making the hard decisions about taxes and spending, they decided that they could most easily screw local government.
The legislature, with the connivance of every governor in recent history, has had this problem during every economic cycle. They have never learned to build reserves during the good times, so they never have money for the bills in a recession. I’ll vote for anyone who seriously tries to fix this problem. Every economist knows that governments should be doing contracyclical spending to help moderate the economy, but the legislature in this state refuses to do anything about their screwups and voters don’t punish them for this.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 04, 2010 at 1638 hrs
Local increases in property taxes ... hard decisions about taxes and spending, they decided that they could most easily screw local government.
This is off-topic, a seperate subject from high school chemistry teachers asking for $130,000 in total compensation…
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 04, 2010 at 1646 hrs
Smeety and bajaskier -
You both seem to think that teachers don’t have any choices and will work for the district, no matter what pay is offered. What gives you the idea that a teacher would bother to stay in the district if the taxpayers make it clear to them that they don’t really care about the quality of teachers?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 04, 2010 at 1655 hrs
You both seem to think that teachers don’t have any choices and will work for the district, no matter what pay is offered.
Where could a high school chemistry teacher go to make $130k in total compensation, if not a starving school district?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 04, 2010 at 1733 hrs
It’s not like they are taking a cut in pay or bennies for goodness sake!!!!! They just won’t get a raise. They should all be thankful they still have a job. I am so sick of the arrogance of the teachers and their supporters on this issue I could just scream!!!!!
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 04, 2010 at 1739 hrs
Owen—didn’t you hear? MPS is offering $100k pay/benefit packages ON AVERAGE for their teachers.
What is the average for WB teachers in that regard?
You’ll probably need to up the WB package to $125 or $130k to keep pace.
On a serious note, I’ll make a deal with the teachers. We’ll go for the higher salaries and benefits, but will you drop the certification requirements and allow those of us in private industry with strong academic backgrounds and teaching capabilities to apply for your jobs? Open competition. No union imposed barriers to entry? No tenure.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 04, 2010 at 1745 hrs
Mike, the problem with “cut, cut, cutting game” is that is truely a game. All these cuts are not cuts at all. 9 times out of 10, when they mean a cut it usually means “Well instead of a 5% increase in this department, we will only have a 3% spending increase”. There’s your cut. Not a real world cut, but a theoretical cut in a theoretical world. The problem is that some would call this “cutting to the bone” while some would call it was it really is.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 04, 2010 at 1749 hrs
I know a high school chemistry teacher who left the job and went to work for a big law firm making way more than the kind of numbers you’re proposing. Just sayin’... great teacher… beloved by all who knew her… there are teahcers with skill sets that are worth lots of money.
Posted by Mike on March 04, 2010 at 1815 hrs
I still don’t believe that over paying under performing teachers is in the best long term interest of our community. I did not say, or even infer, that all teachers are bad, but due to tenure and other work rules, it is nearly impossible to remove bad teachers. The union demands that all teachers with comparable length of service and educational accomplishment be paid the same, and not agreeing to remove bad teachers just seems to be a recipe for disaster.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 04, 2010 at 1826 hrs
brainstew-
I have a list of former colleagues who’d disagree with the “They aren’t really cuts” theory.
Steve A.-
I would personally take you up on that offer. I would also extend it right back into the private sector. I’d feel pretty good about my ability to increase my net worth via a move to the private sector. Don’t know if you could after me a job as good as the one I have, though. Hell, even if I worked 48-50 weeks a year you’d have a hard time matching the job description.Posted by Mike on March 04, 2010 at 1827 hrs
Its not the union’s job to remove lousy teachers. Its the managers’ job. We just make sure they’re doing it right.
Posted by MIke on March 04, 2010 at 1831 hrs
Mike, respectfully, I believe there is not ONE WBSD teacher that has the skillset to earn $130,000 total compensation for nine months work in the private sector; much less the average WB teacher.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 04, 2010 at 1852 hrs
Give me a line-item budget and I’ll cut 25% and nobody will notice the difference. It’s a bureaucracy and full of fluff. By definition. Business and industry are whacking salaries and heads, as well as cutting every expense possible. Schools should do the same. Somebody just do it? Thee “sacrificing the future” argument has worn thin. The public schools are worse than awful.
Posted by Steve on March 04, 2010 at 1859 hrs
9. If the Aurora story is true and some other employers are experiencing the same employee community anxiety , just ignore it?
11. That is the district’s right to fire all staff. It would make things interesting. I’d just move on, frankly.
24. “it is nearly impossible to remove bad teachers”
I have addressed this before; this is a myth, at least in WB.
Tenure only protects one from arbitrary and capricious reasons for dismissal. ...and having the legal backing of a district and a union can be helpful; otherwise, one false accusation and poof - gone.21. “No union imposed barriers to entry” - Many of the barriers were created by DPI, in collusion with teachers, union reps, education, experts, lawyers, college professors, administrators, etc. Electricians, welders, pipe fitters, doctors, lawyers - many have licensure requirements.
28. The awful schools typically exist in the harshest socio/economic environments, but there are success stories both in the public, private, and charter school sectors. Education is typically the only way out of poor socio-economic conditions as luck is a rare commodity.
14. “scrap two-thirds funding and put the entire burden on the local taxpayers. … each local district spends what they choose.”
In this situation, Open enrollment would disappear. District lines would be strongly drawn and enforced. State “public” school system would be replaced by a clear feudal system. But actually this system is already in place, just not so distinctly. The well off districts protect their own across the entire nation (I can suggest a few examples). Truly equalizing Public education will never happen, but what exists now is a lot better than a feudal system, which leads to prison costs down the road when the kids from the poor district start envying how the rich kids live rather than trying to build themselves the right way.
Wow, 28 posts.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 04, 2010 at 2142 hrs
I support the district,the board and usually,the teachers.
However, this letter left me cold and confused.
The earlier point was well made.Saying we need to change the system is swell,but that doesn’t feed the bulldog we face today.
I believe the teachers were ready to take the freeze,then got their noses out of joint over the additional benefits expenses they would incur.
The union says, correctly,that some of the folks here on the board with the most invective will never support them .
They believe teachers are overpaid,over protected and unwilling to speak out about the mediocre or worse teachers making the same as the very best teachers,I don"t agree,don’t agree and do agree.
But that doesnt make those folks wrong in this instance
I believe we should pay the best teachers more than they currently make and let the the worst 15% go every year regardless of their time or grad work in the field.
The competition for these jobs would guarantee better efficiency.We sometimes confuse effort with efficiency.
My changes will happen on the same day that the funding formula swings wildly back into the WB school districts favor (and pigs fly)
However,this time,the teachers need to do the smart thing and the right thing.
take the freeze-
pay higher but otherwise ridiculously low benefit costs-
and understand that while we appreciate what they do-they have to live in the real world
-until that real world gets well.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 04, 2010 at 2204 hrs
“If we cut teacher pay by 10%, what would be the effect? In a community with 12%+ unemployment, would they seriously leave?”
Depends- if they a science, math or special ed. teacher, they would leave be able to find a job quickly. If they are a gym teacher, french, english or social studies teacher, good luck finding another job.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 04, 2010 at 2231 hrs
I’m always amazed the the liberal response to every problem is more taxes or a different tax. The school funding formula is not a problem, actually it has been quite helpful lately in controlling local spending. The problem is paying twice the going rate for a position, just because we let the unions write all the state laws.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 0129 hrs
The good custom thesis should be needed by some students in the world but everytime I demand the dissertation writing or unique dissertation workshop connecting with this good topic.
Posted by TaylorMorales on March 05, 2010 at 0607 hrs
“If we cut teacher pay by 10%, what would be the effect? In a community with 12%+ unemployment, would they seriously leave?”
If you cut teacher pay by 10% would that really make a difference on the 12%+ unemployed rate in West Bend? The unemployed need jobs not a freeze or reduction in teacher pay. Freezing, or reducing teacher pay isn’t going to do shit for the 12%+ unemployed in West Bend, they would still be unemployed. Where are all the good jobs in West Bend? What on earth is drawing any jobs to West Bend? Why should any business come to West Bend?
The people who are screaming the loudest about teacher pay are not the unemployed but are either business owners, who evidently aren’t hiring any of the 12%+, or people with good jobs making good income. If the unemployment rate in West Bend was 0% the same people would be pissing and moaning only finding some other fictitious reason for complaining about teacher pay.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 0700 hrs
Pat;
The reasoin the two are related is taht the 12%+ that are unemployeyd are living on a reduced income. The money they have has better things to do than pay for a pay increase for the teachers. A pay cut for the teachers, especially if taken voluntarily, would show the public at large that everyone is in this together, that WB is a COMMUNITY that shares its good times as well as its bad. It would show a SOLIDARITY to try to deal with the problems. And it might just show that the teachers understand and acknowledge the fact that they are PAID by the community, both the employed and unemployed, and that they appreciate the fact that have a pretty good gig here.
So yes, cutting teacher pay by 10% would definitely impact teh 12%+ that are unemployed.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 0858 hrs
Teachers should be paid well but not overpaid.
What people fail to see is what caused this problem in the first place: politicians spending taxpayer money satisfying the special interests that fund their elections, rather than spending it on legitimate community services. Live with it, or fix it.
I’d double the politician’s salaries if they (a) quit taking bribes and took only public funding for their campaigns, and (b) ran the state without a budget deficit, and (c) ran the state with minimum spending and taxes.
But we have some yokels who like to buy their politicians and object to this.
Posted by Jack Lohman on March 05, 2010 at 0952 hrs
“Teachers should be paid well but not overpaid”
This isn’t an argument, but how, and based on what, should teachers paid be determined? And who would determine?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1019 hrs
Pat, until you get the politicians off the payroll of the special interests (including the teachers union) their pay should be based on community standards and established by a nonpartisan commission. At the moment the only one I know of is Wisconsin’s Government Accountability Board (GAB).
Posted by Jack Lohman on March 05, 2010 at 1032 hrs
This isn’t an argument, but how, and based on what, should teachers paid be determined? And who would determine?
free market
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1131 hrs
amen smeety.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1135 hrs
Ah, it’s that free market thingy again. Isn’t that what we now have? Who is going to negotiate, the politicians who get gobs of cash from the teachers unions??? Duh!!!
Posted by Jack Lohman on March 05, 2010 at 1232 hrs
Isn’t that what we now have?
No. Not even close.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1246 hrs
Then I repeat: Who is going to negotiate, the politicians who get gobs of cash from the teachers unions???
Posted by Jack Lohman on March 05, 2010 at 1258 hrs
The employer (school) and the employee (teacher). It’s not complicated.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1314 hrs
My contention is that if the school district REALLY grew a pair, called off the negotiations with the teachers union, and posted every teaching job in the district with realistic pay and benefits, and included working full time .... they would fill every position without affecting quality. In fact I believe they could improve quality, by using resource$ elsewhere….
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1321 hrs
A free market school system like in Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged? An ideal created by a woman who arrived in the U.S. from the former Societ Union where her family had been penalized for be middle class? An ideal created by a woman who arrived in the U.S. to a society that was reasonably respectfull of human rights and socio-economically stable due to a democratic government and a socialized educational system in place for over 100 years?
Rand is wonderful reading, wonderfully logical , but her society is an ideal. A absolute free market system would leave many behind: We end up over time with a Russian revolution, and the true thugs would arrive.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1330 hrs
A free market school system like in Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged?
No. A free market school system like private schools.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1332 hrs
Ah Smeety, you are really following the money. You want the schools who are funded by the politicians who are funded by the teachers union to negotiate with the teachers…. I see. Good thinking. Or am I hearing that you want public schools dumped in favor of privatized schools… sort of like our privatized healthcare system where the CEOs are making $15 million per year and increasing rates by 39% per year? More good thinking. And in the process we should get rid of the unions in the newly privatized industry.
Where has my head been?
Posted by Jack Lohman on March 05, 2010 at 1342 hrs
Jack… what a strawman. I wish only the politicians were funding the schools, but unfortunately my property tax bill says otherwise. And I highly doubt there will be anyone in the West Bend School District making $15,000,000 per year any time in the near future.
The crux of this ‘topic’ is that teachers are overpaid. Please reread comment #45, and throw in an expansion of vouchers to boot…
I hope this helps you find your head.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1349 hrs
Smeety, How would the children of the poorest be educated? would they? What about children with special needs? Any hope for them? Both populations are quite expensive to educate and very often come from families with limited economic means. How does the market model account for their education?
Posted by Mike on March 05, 2010 at 1357 hrs
I’m fine with increasing the voucher amount dramatically for special needs children, (my awesome wife works with these kids by the way).
With regard to poor ... I believe giving more choices and rewarding good systems (vouchers) would ultimately produce better results. Heck, they can’t get much worse than MPS…
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1404 hrs
Smeety, you have absolutely no idea how your politicians are affecting the funding of your schools. Talk to one of your school board members.
Posted by Jack Lohman on March 05, 2010 at 1405 hrs
Jack,
How a school is funded is independent of teacher pay.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1429 hrs
Oh, I see… totally unrelated to political corruption….
Posted by Jack Lohman on March 05, 2010 at 1432 hrs
Whatever point you are trying to make I’m not getting. If, ultimately, you are saying that somehow, someway, teacher’s deserve $130,000 worth of total compensation for nine months worth of work, and it’s due to political corruption ... then we’ll have to agree to disagree and move on…
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1439 hrs
With regard to poor ... I believe giving more choices and rewarding good systems (vouchers) would ultimately produce better results.
Because market models have traditionally favored the poor/under class, haven’t they?
Posted by Mike on March 05, 2010 at 1439 hrs
Pterhaps “favored” wasn’t the best word. “offered a level playing field to” would be better.
Posted by Mike on March 05, 2010 at 1441 hrs
@Mike:
as opposed to MPS?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1442 hrs
Well let’s see. What are our top educational leaders making now? $2M a year? No I don’t believe that eith $2M or $130K are the correct and fair numbers, but I also don’t believe that turning the system over to for-profit CEOs and the free-for-all market is correct either. And I am not so blind as to believe that our politicians taking gobs of cash from the teacher’s unions have no affect on this and every other economic issue plaguing the state. So I will move on. You have the floor.
Posted by Jack Lohman on March 05, 2010 at 1445 hrs
Because market models have traditionally favored the poor/under class, haven’t they?
A fine point and sentiment. However, I do not believe the current public school model favors the poor/under class very well either. It is precisely that road (trying to equalize everything) we have traveled to this point in MPS history and every other major city public school system. Mike, you are not wrong that in a free market, have nots often get left behind, but the sad state of so many public schools and the inferior teaching and conditions of those schools was not fixed by equalizing or ever increasing spending.
There are sensible fixes available, but, unfortunately no real fixes are ‘politically viable’.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1457 hrs
There are sensible fixes available, but, unfortunately no real fixes are ‘politically viable’.
And these are? What?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1505 hrs
No, as opposed to public schools in general which do a very good job at educating a wide swath of our nations children.
Why is nobody carping about the amount of money (a large part of the mythic $130,000) that goes to corrupt health care practitioners. I know its easy to lambaste the fat, lazy, part-time working (a pseudonym for lazy) teachers for dragging down our tax bills so much, but if one health insurance exec, or one rising corporate whore at a pharmaceutical company were to forgo their bonus, and be forced to live on a salary (only salary) trending downward towards $130,000, then my school district’s budget deficit would be nearly erased. Health Care companies are charging more and more for a product that does not get any better.
What the hell?
Posted by Mike on March 05, 2010 at 1507 hrs
TUERQAS-
I’ll grant you the point that MPS is currently not serving the poor/underclass very well. But public schools across the state and nation are really doing very good jobs. I’ll also grant you the fact that Kris is dubious about. There are politically taboo, or unpopular models that serve our youth in poor/urban districts pretty effectively. Further, I’ll grant that my union that I work pretty hard for, sometimes stands in the way of meaningful reforms.But I remain pretty confident that business models are not the answer to public schools. Nor do I accept the growing sentiment among conservatives that pblic schools are dragging our society down. Indeed, I see every day the great good that public schools do. I will fight against “widget model” reforms for education. The education of a human being is not a product responsive to market forces.
Posted by Mike on March 05, 2010 at 1525 hrs
There is nothing mythic about WB High School Chemistry teacher receiving $130,000 total compensation after these proposed raises.
And my family plan thru work for health insurance costs $13,000 per year, and it’s a decent plan ... a far cry from the gratuitous health care plan for teachers…
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1533 hrs
I’m not dubious. I just want to know what his viable ideas are.
If you think that $130,000 is too much to pay for a quality teacher then you need to look at how much civilian laundry people were being paid in Iraq. I was told that number is $120,000 per year. So, if you think that the cost of a teacher is breaking your budget think about the way that money is being wasted elsewhere. My source for that fact is a US Army Sargent.
I’m not against eliminating waste in any organization, but when people keep harping on the pay teachers get and I see the value teachers bring to society it becomes disheartening,
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1558 hrs
Kris,
Civilian laundry people in Iraq risked their lives due to the political circumstances of the day… your source for this info is a US Army Sargeant.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1606 hrs
Kris
How can you compare wages in West Bend to that of a war zone? There is no sense in that statement. Now you want to argue about Iraq ? and money wasted there?
What about a soldier Kris they bring freedom to society and keep us safe what is that worth? More than a teacher?
Whats disheartening is to see a proposed member of bargaining management go soft , no wonder they have a hand out for more cause its breaking Krissys heart because its such a value and nobody can see this. Talk about a pushover.
How valuble is the garbage man when we get two weeks of warm weather?
How valuble is a policeman if your in danger?
How valuble is a mechanic when your on the side of the road.
Lets pay them all 130,000 a year, because shucks its a value.Thousands of occupations bring much to the table, can we afford to pay everyone this, is teaching the only occupation worthy of such honor.
Kris you do much better if you just dont say anything at all, you and Biden have many simular attributes.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1648 hrs
No, clearly I did not say it the right way. i would never begrudge a soldier even one cent of their pay. I spoke to an army sargeant the other day and he was astounded at the fact that a civilian laundry person was making $120,000 for washing clothes. While he was making significantly less and riding through areas of danger that civilian never dreamed of seeing. War zone or not doing laundry should never pay you that much money.
As for the rest of your examples. Yes, many jobs bring value to society. No I don’t think that most of them should be paid more than $100,000. Since you were never in the bargaining room I can tell you that I am not a pushover. i also never said that teachers are more valuable than any other profession, but you and others have degraded teachers and how they are paid. I think that is disheartening, because teachers provide a great value to society.
You will notice that at no time have I been snarky or rude like you.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1711 hrs
Kris, while your example might be true and if so an awful waste of out money for something you could contract out locally, however that has ABSOLUTLEY nothing to do with the argument at hand.
Because we waste money over there, we shouldn’t be concerned with a waste of money over here, that is just misdirection. Kind of like if we just fund them differently. (somehow taking my money from my left pocket instead of my right to pay for waste makes it ok….)
I really don’t have a huge problem with teacher salaries, they are low at the starting end, and high at the other (since we pay teachers by what degree they have and how long they have taught, rather than by what they teach and how good they are at it) But the cadilac benefits that are 3 times that of the private sector need to go, as does binding arbitration.
We let the unions fund the politicians that give money to the unions. We’ve given our employees the power to tell us what they should be paid. There has to be a way to grab that power back. I love the teacher in Rhode Island who fired the entire school. I’m sure if she posted all the jobs at 60% of what they made, she would still have a line of qualified candidates, and suddenly management might be taken seriously.
I really think if you can keep your hands off the kids, there is now way to be fired as a public school teacher once you have enough years in.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1722 hrs
Kris, note that I said sensible fixes that were not politically viable.
That said, one of my first orders of business as US Dictator would be to eliminate all public servant unions. The whole reason unions were invented was to protect workers from management/Owners abuses and to wrest a fair amount of profits from them for the average worker. When there is a deadlock, a non-partisan (usually) Government official was used to negotiate fair terms. If Government is the mangement/owner and Government is the workers (public servants) where is the dynamic? Really, Government is the management and the taxpayers are the ‘workers’, but we are not being represented at the table. Government is spending money within itself to fight with itself for more of our(taxpayer) money.
The union is totally irrelevant and misplaced. And how is it perpetuated? Why, Government regulation of course. ‘We can’t eliminate a union…’ (In your best West Virginia accent)
Take that away, and I am confident that we could come up with a fair and equitable payscale for all public servant jobs. That would include healthcare issues as well. The average public servant is insulated from soaring healthcare. Take away that insulation and everyone is a lot more willing to come to the table. It is not politically viable to be sensible with money, though. Special interests pay lots of money not to have fair laws, but to have favorable laws.
Most sensible ideas to save money in Government are not politically viable. Republicans are pro tort reform because trial lawyers pay big bucks to Democrats for those bad torts. Democrats are anti insurance company because they pay big bucks to Republicans to keep as many rules as possible to make money and minimize pay outs.
So it goes with most any issue. No matter how much or how little we need to change our CO emissions on this planet, one political party is making money going green and the other party is making money for the status quo. The issue is unimportant when actual legislation is made, as long as the controlling party makes more money for itself and its special interests than the minority.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1741 hrs
Curt,
I agree with most everything you say. My point with the comparison was that on this blog and in th paper many people want to demonize teachers. I think to paint with as broad a brush as some people do is unfair to teachers.I disagree with you on your last point. While you are correct that it is difficult to get rid of a teacher it is not impossible. I have been on the board five years and in that time we have gotten rid of seven teachers and one administrator for poor performance. It requires management to be diligent in their evaluation process and hold people accountable.
Tuerqas,
While I don’t know if unions are totally irrelevant I believe they have absolutely lost their way and don’t represent their memberships the way that they once did. Otherwise, you make some very good points.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1756 hrs
Just once I’d like to hear a school district or a teachers union (one in the same???) say “If you give us $XXXXX it will solve all of our problems and we won’t ask for more.” But they ALWAYS ask for more. We never seem to give us enough of our wealth. What percentage of our total wealth do we ahve to give these people in order for them to shut up? If every year we forked over half of all of our personal income to the schools, would that be enough? Or would they still be whining that we don’t care enough about our kids? Just tell me how much money they nee dto have to make them shut up and stop complaining about being underpaid!
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1811 hrs
Jim,
Enough? It’s Never ever,ever…...never ever enough!
It’s interesting that the teachers have plenty to say about referendums, programming etc. They’ll Parade themselves/ kids in front of us, to not cut a thing in the budget.
But when it comes to sticking their hand out asking for more, they blame that on their Union Masters.
Didn’t you get the memo? “It’s for the Kids”!
Come on Jim It’s for the kids, what more do you need?
Every dime is for the kids… Jim, “It’s for the kids”!Jim, their Professionals- It’s for the kids!
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1909 hrs
70. “The whole reason unions were invented was to protect workers from management/Owners abuses and to wrest a fair amount of profits from them for the average worker.”
To this day, this is true. The union provides leverage for position equity, it protects workers from capricious/arbitrary accusations from all colleagues, admin, the board, and the people public entity unions serve (I would not want to join a police force without union support). Wrest “fair” compensation - absolutely. But the key word in this whole debate is fair. Hey, someone come up with a fair teacher performance evaluator, and I’ll toss aside raises for grad credit and years experience. Note though, if the greatest teachers from the suburbs switch places with the MPS teachers, I doubt little will change in MPS and similiar districts in similiar cities with the same socio-economic problems. Frankly, MPS wouldn’t look so bad if the grades and graduations rates of the dropouts and chronic absentees were ignored. But if schools wne this route, I’d want guaratees no school is receiving money for ghosts - a problem noted at some of the charter schools.
60. “...I do not believe the current public school model favors the poor/under class very well either. It is precisely that road (trying to equalize everything) we have traveled to this point in MPS history and every other major city public school system.” I agree. Wealthy areas fight darn hard to keep their money, but this is more prevalent in some other states.
Note: True equitable spending of the public education monies in the U.S. has never been attempted, and I doubt ever will. Solution: When the state sets an academic standard to be reached, the state has to provide the financial resources to reach that standard; if the resources can not be garnered, retract the standard. If standards were rated in importance, this would not be difficult. Still, standards are affected by socio-political, economic, cultural and historical forces. Example: Up until 1945, the arts (music, dance, drawing) were well supported. After ‘45, education was pushed to create workers; after Sputnik and the book A Nation at Risk, this push became even more pronounced.62. “But the cadilac benefits that are 3 times that of the private sector need to go, as does binding arbitration.”
This would make an excellent separate discussion.
Let’s discuss health benefit plans and costs in separate sectors some time.
Family time.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 2015 hrs
jpenterman,
It isn’t that health costs are too high, it is that we give teachers cadilac plans for free, and pensions, where we pay their share too. I’ve been in finance for a half dozen large area firms with fantasitc benefits. I’ve been very blessed. But on average, those firms with the best benefits in town pay around 20 percent in fringe benefits, and that would include ss tax, health, dental, life. I’ve seen most of the public employee unions with benefit loads in the 60 percent range. It obviously isn’t the cost, if I can do it for 1/3 the price. Your savings has to come from lower benefits, not blaming the health insurance companies.
And those ridiculous benefits are on top of the way over market wages we pay in the first place. Forty years ago, the private sector used to pay more than the public sector and the public sector made it up on benefits. Now they get us coming an going.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 06, 2010 at 0322 hrs
The benefits were given in the 70’s in exchange for lower salary increases.
At that time- ( some of us remember the 70’s) benefits were cheap but inflation- and salary increases were inflation based.
Over that 30 year period, teaching went from a lowly paid passion to a profession that could offer good compensation , great benefits and a terrific retirement.
if a husband and wife can teach for 30 years-no easy task- they retire with the combined benefits of the CEO of a Fortune 1000 company
It’s become a good gig- and if I had it- I’d try to keep it.
The union that represents them is no less effective for the teachers than the AMA is for the doctors.
The teacher,the doctor and the guy who fixes my breaks are all important to me.
If my breaks fail-I’m dead
If my doc screws up- I’m dead-
If I have lousy teachers- I may not be dead- but my long term economic chances are probably- dead
They say unions are dying- but in 2 cases above- members are doing just fine.
The union has done it’s job well.
Now it’s time for the union to take a time out-take the freeze and the benefits increase and come back to negotiate hard in the teachers behalf in 24 month’s when the economy -hopefully -is in a recovery
The co Presidents need to to heed the message.
Cut the deal-and leave the table-knowing that even with a freeze and a benefit increase- you’re winning.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 06, 2010 at 0917 hrs
Health care benefits are high because half our costs are totally wasted. 31% goes to the insurance bureaucracy, which never lays hands on the patient, and 20% are waste, fraud, and over-use. If our politicians were smart (and they’ve never been accused of that) they’d pass a Medicare-for-all system that would cover 100% of our people… including teachers, firemen, county and city workers, federal and state workers, Medicaid and SCHIP, and 100% of our taxpayers. And in the process we’d save $400 billion per year.
The reason they won’t do that is the insurance industry would be left out of the system and they make a lot of profits and share those profits with the politicians themselves (in the form of legal campaign contributions and trips to the Caribbean).
We’d pay for the system differently (in taxes rather than wages) and we’d free corporations of this expense, which they could instead spend on new hiring and a reduction in outsourcing of our jobs.
But all of this hinges on the words “if we were smart.”
Jack Lohman ...
MoneyedPoliticians.netPosted by Jack Lohman on March 06, 2010 at 0957 hrs
The union provides leverage for position equity, it protects workers from capricious/arbitrary accusations from all colleagues, admin, the board, and the people public entity unions serve…
Yes, it does provide position equity and that is one of its worst qualities, yea. And all of us non-union workers, by contrast, are susceptible to capricious/arbitrary accusations and inequity? If I am accused of something, I trust the law will make sure I am acquitted, so should a teacher or a sewage worker. The AMA is a worthy union supporting a private industry. In today’s ‘sue for everything’ society, I can see the need for a group support system in a life and death service industry. In that way at least, the teacher’s union and the AMA are apples and oranges.
At that time- ( some of us remember the 70’s) benefits were cheap but inflation- and salary increases were inflation based.
That is an excellent point and one I had not considered. It is kind of like public workers were forced to buy a stock, it went through the roof, and now the public is crying about giving them the stock instead of cash… Huh. I have to think about that.
True equitable spending of the public education monies in the U.S. has never been attempted, and I doubt ever will.
I think it has constantly been attempterd for years, say rather that it has never succeeded, in part because of wealthy special interests, and I am with you.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 08, 2010 at 0857 hrs
Total Entries: 19656
Total Comments: 129831
Most Recent Entry: 02/11/2012 09:52 pm
Most Recent Comment on: 02/11/2012 04:55 pm
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 107
Total anonymous users: 1
Most Recent Visitor on: 02/11/2012 11:24 pm
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).