"Teachers despite the widespread myth are overpaid and underworked...Here's what the public doesn't know, thanks to millions of dollars in misleading advertising campaigns conducted by the National Education Association: As a result of the contracts negotiated by their unions, teachers are not required to be at their job more than six hours and 20 minutes a day. When you add to that the fact that teachers only work nine months out of the year, and then calculate teachers' pay on the basis of the eight-hour-day and 11-and-a-half-month year that the rest of us work, the pay for a seventh-grade science teacher in New York City is between $60 and $70 an hour. That amounts to an annual salary of well over $100,000."

quote:

---

Here's what the public doesn't know, thanks to millions of dollars in misleading advertising campaigns conducted by the National Education Association: As a result of the contracts negotiated by their unions, teachers are not required to be at their job more than six hours and 20 minutes a day. When you add to that the fact that teachers only work nine months out of the year, and then calculate teachers' pay on the basis of the eight-hour-day and 11-and-a-half-month year that the rest of us work, the pay for a seventh-grade science teacher in New York City is between $60 and $70 an hour. That amounts to an annual salary of well over $100,000.

---

Reading the bile David Horowitz spews forth gives me migraines. The man hates everyone. I recently read an article he wrote about Mexican immigrants while doing research for my paper and I was, yet again, impressed and amazed that he is able to write with his head shoved so far up his own ass. I mean, how can he even see the screen?

*lightbulb*

Oh! Now I get it! He can't see what he's writing and thus, the internet equivalent of verbal diarrhea. Ah, one more mystery solved.

[ 18 July 2005: Message edited by: EFA ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by EFA:
I have no time whatsoever for anyone who thinks teachers are underpaid. My mum has been at school every day from 7:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. She tutors students during her lunch hour. She brings shitloads of marking home every night. Every week, she signs up for some extra thing like a school dance or band concert or whatever. She's approaching retirement and I think she makes about $60,000 and earns every penny and then some. She's been in the same classroom in the same school for well over 20 years. There are literally thousands of young people in the world whose lives have been immeasurably enriched by Mrs. EFA Senior. Next topic, please.

---

I mean, I'm looking at the list activities she does and I think $60,000 is pretty good, but not exorbitant.

[ 18 July 2005: Message edited by: Nikita ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nikita:
I don't want to seem nitpicky, but I need clarification: are you saying you think your mother makes too much money?

I mean, I'm looking at the list activities she does and I think $60,000 is pretty good, but not exorbitant.

---

[ 18 July 2005: Message edited by: EFA ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by EFA:
How does Horowitz suppose all the marking, lesson preparation, curriculum design, etc. magically gets done?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wilf Day:
Anti-education types love to criticise teachers' summer holidays. Here's the summer holiday schedule of an elementary teacher I know:

Wednesday June 29: last day of school
Thursday June 30: PA Day: go to new school assignment and start organizing for September.
Friday July 1: holiday.
Saturday July 2: read materials for on-line summer course, required for September's assignment, which officially started several days ago.
Sunday July 3: first on-line meeting of summer course work group.
Monday July 4: first project submitted to summer course. Also, dropped in to new school voluntarily and helped frazzled new principal re-draft September's timetable.
Summer course continues until and including Friday August 12; final week will have been done from cottage (computer access from rented cottage mandatory).
Monday August 15: in-service workshop, voluntary but expected. Teacher will not attend, in aid of having three days' actual full-time summer holiday with her young daughter and other family members.
Wednesday August 17: last day of three-day summer holiday. Drives home, leaving young daughter with grandparents, in order to attend in-service workshops Thursday and Friday.
Week of Monday August 22: attendance at school voluntary but expected, for workshops and other activities.
Week of Monday August 29: attendance mandatory.

---

Here's MY summer schedule:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Publius:

Here's MY summer schedule:

Working every day from at least 9-5. Usually much later. Usually at least one day of the weekend too. I also am doing a summer course. I do it AFTER work. Somehow I don't have much sympathy for these poor, hard-done-by teachers.

---

So you're flippant and sarcastic about our teachers, who perform one of the most important jobs that exist, because you have to do overtime and you're taking a summer course. Have I got that right?

Your course, I hardly need to point out, is optional (not many people get paid to go to school). And if your job forces you to work overtime, you can negotiate for payment for that overtime.

quote:

---

And if your job forces you to work overtime, you can negotiate for payment for that overtime.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bacchus:
if you are salaried and if you aint union, forget about it

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bacchus:
Not a complaint, just a pointing out that its not that simple (and not knocking teachers or their union, just EFA's assumptions about the average workplace)

---

Before you take any job, there is room to negotiate over such things as overtime. If you're foolish enough to sign up for a salaried position without making such arrangements, then I guess you have no option but to ask for an increase in salary when your review comes up.

[ 18 July 2005: Message edited by: EFA ]

quote:

---

Before you take any job, there is room to negotiate over such things as overtime.

---

You dont apply for many jobs in the real world do you?

Its usually a we will hire you and here are our terms, take them or leave them.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Publius:
What bothers me is the way they think their situation is so unique.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bacchus:
Unless you are a hot hot hot commodity and can basically write your own contract. And that doesn't happen much anymore

---

[ 18 July 2005: Message edited by: Wilf Day ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bacchus:
You dont apply for many jobs in the real world do you?

---

No, just all the jobs I've held over the last 25 years or so.

quote:

---

Its usually a we will hire you and here are our terms, take them or leave them.

---

Then you need to get specialized skills in a field with high demand for employees.

quote:

---

And there aint anyone offering different.

---

Ive interviewed people for jobs here that present demands before the interview even started and were shocked when I ended it there. And asked me plaintively why they couldnt find a job.

edited to add

give me a union anyday-clear requirements, clear responsibilities and benefits, no surprises

[ 18 July 2005: Message edited by: Bacchus ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by EFA:

don't know about hot commodities and I haven't always been a legal assistant. I've worked in the service industry, in agriculture, and in a few other fields, and I have never been bamboozled into working overtime for free.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erstwhile:
Were you paid an hourly wage, or by salary?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bacchus:
Ive interviewed people for jobs here that present demands before the interview even started and were shocked when I ended it there. And asked me plaintively why they couldnt find a job.

---

But if one of those outrageous "demands" is to be paid for services rendered, and if saying as much is considered poor form, then why would that person even want to work for your firm? Yuck.

[ 18 July 2005: Message edited by: EFA ]

quote:

---

But if one of those outrageous "demands" is to be paid for services rendered, and if saying as much is considered poor form, then why would that person even want to work for your firm? Yuck.

---

Where did I say that? Must you resort to personal attacks when your logic fails?

quote:

---

Ive interviewed people for jobs here that present demands before the interview even started and were shocked when I ended it there. And asked me plaintively why they couldnt find a job.

---

Your post came pretty close on the heels of the unpaid overtime posts. I (wrongly, it seems) assumed that's what you meant by "demands." Sorry. Wasn't personally attacking you just questioning your firm's ethics.

EDITED TO ADD: I agree that asking for things like flex time, coming and leaving at will, no weekends, no evenings, 3-5 weeks holidays, triple time for overtime, car expenses, etc. is coming on pretty strong right off the bat. Seriously, though, how many people actually do this?

[ 18 July 2005: Message edited by: EFA ]

I happen to love my job but I still make a point of rubbing my employers' noses in the fact that they would be absolutely lost without me. I don't mean the particular lawyer who I'm working for right now (he's actually very savvy), but generally speaking lawyers could not run their practices without skilled help.

So we like to keep them scared and intimidated, just were we want 'em. Here's what I mean, brought to you by the "Overheard in the Office" section of the fabulous "Overheard in New York" website:

June 13, 2005
A Sharpie for the None Too Sharp

Suit: Do you have what I call a "sharpie"?

Secretary: ...what you call a sharpie?

Suit: Yes.

Secretary: ...you and no one else?

Suit: It's like a, a felt-tipped pen.

Secretary: Oh, I know what it is.

Suit: Well, most people don't know what it's called.

Secretary: You're kidding, right? It says it right on the pen.

Suit: Well, do you have one?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bacchus:
A friend of mine who was a legal asst got fed up with them and became a lawyer herself. Though shes more of a writer than a lawyer these days

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gir Draxon:
It is very true that ALL teachers are not slackers. Some are, generally the old and bitter ones rather than the young and motivated. But they cannot be seperated based on merit, because the unions will scream bloody murder.

---

Be that as it may, I really don't think that removing seniority or tenure is all of a sudden going to make our education system fart sunbeams.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gir Draxon:
It is very true that ALL teachers are not slackers. Some are, generally the old and bitter ones rather than the young and motivated. But they cannot be seperated based on merit, because the unions will scream bloody murder.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Aristotleded24:

I've seen Draxon's other posts on unions, and I get a feeling that Draxon dislikes unions because that prevents employees from advancing based on merit. If you work in a non-unionised environment, the decision as to whether or not you can advance based on merit is up to the employer, and you have no control over it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by C.Morgan:
Actually you have every bit of control over the decisions of the employer. You have to convince them that you are worthy of promotion or pay advancement. If you can't convince your employer that you are worthy of advancement, perhaps you are not worthy or you need to seek a new employer. The ball is much more in the employee's court than some like to admit. It is easier to blame personal failure on evil employers.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by C.Morgan:

Actually you have every bit of control over the decisions of the employer. You have to convince them that you are worthy of promotion or pay advancement. If you can't convince your employer that you are worthy of advancement, perhaps you are not worthy or you need to seek a new employer. The ball is much more in the employee's court than some like to admit. It is easier to blame personal failure on evil employers.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by C.Morgan:
Actually you have every bit of control over the decisions of the employer. You have to convince them that you are worthy of promotion or pay advancement. If you can't convince your employer that you are worthy of advancement, perhaps you are not worthy or you need to seek a new employer. The ball is much more in the employee's court than some like to admit. It is easier to blame personal failure on evil employers.

---

I'm with you. Much as I hate Rah! Rah! business types, I do agree with them on this -- the union can't guarantee you work, the employer can't guarantee you work, only the customer can guarantee you work.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Aristotleded24:
You have absolutely no control over advancement in a workplace. You can do what you feel will prove yourself to be worthy to the company, and the employer has complete freedom to either let you advance based on what (s)he saw, or the employer can ignore you completely. It's a decision that the employer ultimately makes, and you, as an employee, have absolutely no control over it whatsoever.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EFA:
No, employees aren't powerless. How you do your job affects very much your opportunities for advancement.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Aristotleded24:
The criteria for advancement are always set by the employers. Employees who meet the criteria advance. Employees who do not meet the criteria do not. It's that simple. In some workplaces, doing a job well is the criteria for advancement. In other places, you can get away with sloppiness as long as you're cozy with the boss. Ever read Dilbert?

---

quote:

---

Generally speaking, in non-union workplaces, the best employees get the best opportunities.

---

If you mean, "best employees as defined by the employer," I'd have to agree with you.

quote:

---

If you find yourself at a job where sucking up to the boss counts more than being a great employee, you can always hunt around for a better job.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EFA:

No, employees aren't powerless. How you do your job affects very much your opportunities for advancement.

---

Which in absolutely no way provides "control" in any meaningful sense of the word.

quote:

---

Originally posted by EFA:

I'm a big fan of Scott Adams and Dilbert.

---

Not surprising, but disappointing, given Adams' generally shallow outlook towards the workplace.

Personally I liked the Tom Tomorrow riff on Dilbert, summarized here:

quote:

---

Perhaps the most astute critique has come from cartoonist Tom Tomorrow. A few months ago, the talkative penguin in his "This Modern World" comic delivered a lecture to Dilbert and sidekick Dogbert: "You poke constant fun at stupid corporate behavior -- but never examine the underlying reasons for that behavior."

The penguin went on: "I'm beginning to think you're providing a valuable service for all those idiotic bosses you parody -- by giving their employees a safety valve that's just edgy enough to ring true, without inspiring anyone to actually question the fundamental assumptions of corporate America."

---

[ 18 July 2005: Message edited by: Erstwhile ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Aristotleded24:
Horowitz started out as a Marxist...He then switched sides to the right,...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EFA:
Generally speaking, in non-union workplaces, the best employees get the best opportunities.

---

*cough nepotism cough*
*cough favoritism cough*
*cough sex with the boss cough*

quote:

---

Originally posted by DrConway:

*cough nepotism cough*
*cough favoritism cough*
*cough sex with the boss cough*

I swear, some people seem to act like non-union workplaces shine with golden righteousness.

---

Are you saying nepotism, favouritism and sex are the only opportunities for advancement? Don't know what line of you're work in but, in mine, those aren't factors.