What teachers unions are really all about

[gregintenn]

I too work for the state. I could get a job Monday making twice my salary. I am happy where I am, doing what I do. Part of my job consists of a furnished vehicle, paid State holidays, 80% on health insurance paid, and a pension. I'm happy with the deal, but I'm not going to be happy if I work there 30 years and then they tell me they've decided to forego my pension. It is part of my salary, in my opinion.

[Raoul]

I like Raoul don't understand why so much hate is directed toward Public Employees and why when there is a budget to be balanced it's done on at the expense of those employees.

Because the wealthy have more money to spend on lobbyists.

[mav]

In general, union or not, private industry employees make more money than public employees however the public employees have better benefits and to some extent more job security.

Where are you getting this information? The last that I had read/heard was that federal employees on average were making almost double their private sector counterparts. You can google this and find a plethora of information stating this is the case. This was fairly big news last year and ticked a bunch of people off.

[DRM]

If someone promised you a pension after working for them for 30 years, and you work for them for 30 years, yes! You do deserve a pension. You don't deserve to work for 30 years for less pay than a comparable private sector job with the promise of a pension, and when you get there someone decides to change the rules.

As soon as I can sign up a guaranteed lock-in tax rate to never go up to cover a public employee's legacy pension, I'll agree to public employee's deserving a legacy pension regardless of the finances of the government.

Why does your a teacher get to continue to receive that pension at my expense, just because a bad deal was made years ago on my (The taxpayer's) behalf? Why do I have to pay more of my tax dollars just so that teacher continues to get a benefit that the private sector phased out over 20 years ago, because it was financially unsustainable?

Teacher pensions do not exist in a vacuum.

[DRM]

I like Raoul don't understand why so much hate is directed toward Public Employees and why when there is a budget to be balanced it's done on at the expense of those employees.

Because the alternative is to balance the budget at MY expense.

It's the classic battle of you trying to protect yours, me trying to protect mine.

[Raoul]

As soon as I can sign up a guaranteed lock-in tax rate to never go up to cover a public employee's legacy pension, I'll agree to public employee's deserving a legacy pension regardless of the finances of the government.

Why does your a teacher get to continue to receive that pension at my expense, just because a bad deal was made years ago on my (The taxpayer's) behalf? Why do I have to pay more of my tax dollars just so that teacher continues to get a benefit that the private sector phased out over 20 years ago, because it was financially unsustainable?

Teacher pensions do not exist in a vacuum.

They ain't that great in TN anyway. Of course the way things are going none of are gonna have anything for retirement. They should probably encourage smoking to kill more of us off at 65.

[gregintenn]

As soon as I can sign up a guaranteed lock-in tax rate to never go up to cover a public employee's legacy pension, I'll agree to public employee's deserving a legacy pension regardless of the finances of the government.

Why does your a teacher get to continue to receive that pension at my expense, just because a bad deal was made years ago on my (The taxpayer's) behalf? Why do I have to pay more of my tax dollars just so that teacher continues to get a benefit that the private sector phased out over 20 years ago, because it was financially unsustainable?

Teacher pensions do not exist in a vacuum.

I agree it should be phased out. Civil Service laws make public sector jobs a little different from private sector jobs. If a person has dedicated their life to a profession with the knowledge their retirement is taken care of, I don't see that it's fair to jerk the rug out from under them once they reach retirement. Were they not promised this in the beginning, I'd agree with you, but as I said before, the pay for a public sector job isn't all cash. It would be a good idea to change this in the future, but it doesn't seem right to reneg on prior obligations.

[Daniel]

$55,000 (plus benefits) for nine months work is not bad money. I know a lot of people that would love to only work 10 hour days.

That is not starting pay. I know almost all of my teachers growing up had jobs in the summer as well.

[DRM]

I agree it should be phased out. Civil Service laws make public sector jobs a little different from private sector jobs. If a person has dedicated their life to a profession with the knowledge their retirement is taken care of, I don't see that it's fair to jerk the rug out from under them once they reach retirement. Were they not promised this in the beginning, I'd agree with you, but as I said before, the pay for a public sector job isn't all cash. It would be a good idea to change this in the future, but it doesn't seem right to reneg on prior obligations.

You and I are about the same age. Let's assume you start your public sector job the same time I start my private sector job.

Now fast forward 25 years.

Why is it "jerking the rug out" if we take away your pension, but it's not "jerking the rug out" if my taxes went up to cover your pension? Doesn't that mean less money in MY pension (retirement income)?

I'm not faulting you for trying to protect yours, but surely you can see that I want to try and protect mine, too.

[Will Carry]

$55,000 (plus benefits) for nine months work is not bad money. I know a lot of people that would love to only work 10 hour days.

What gives you the idea that teachers only work for 9 months? You think it's easy teaching a classroom full of 13 year olds in today's politcally correct society? If the people you know that would LOVE to only work 10 hour days then tell them to go to college for 6 years and get a masters degree in education. Then you can get a job teaching screaming young-uns from the ghetto and make less money than a plummer's helper. If they can hack it for 30 years then they can enjoy the $55,000 salary. Starting pay for teachers is much less. I'm tellin' ya dude, teaching is one of the hardest jobs you can imagine.

The only good thing about teaching is when your kids are off from school, you are too. It makes it possible for a woman to have a career and still raise children. My wife was a good teacher and a good mother.

Edited February 24, 2011 by Will Carry

[Daniel]

Then also you have the fact that not all teaching jobs pay the same or have the same resources, commitment of parents, facilities, etc.

[bubbadavis]

What gives you the idea that teachers only work for 9 months?

I looked up the current Williamson County school calendar. New teacher orientation started on Aug 5. Graduation is targeted for May 29. They also get: Labor Day, Fall break (2 days), Thanksgiving (3 days), Christmas (10 days), MLK day, Spring Break (5 days), and Good Friday. This doesn't include the 10 snow days built into the calendar or the approximately 10 days during the school year without students (some of are professional development days, some are parent/teacher meetings).

Teaching is not an easy profession but you must admit that teachers do get alot of time off compared to other professional jobs.

[Punisher84]

I agree it should be phased out. Civil Service laws make public sector jobs a little different from private sector jobs. If a person has dedicated their life to a profession with the knowledge their retirement is taken care of, I don't see that it's fair to jerk the rug out from under them once they reach retirement. Were they not promised this in the beginning, I'd agree with you, but as I said before, the pay for a public sector job isn't all cash. It would be a good idea to change this in the future, but it doesn't seem right to reneg on prior obligations.

Agreed. One of my best friends is a teacher, for Shelby County no less, and I'm sure it wouldn't please her too much to have her pension yanked before retirement. In my opinion the people who bitch about taxes for teachers, police, fire, etc should feel free to home school, deal with their own problems, and buy a garden hose.

[mav]

I don't really know how this got off track. The OP was referring to the union, not individual teachers.

I believe there was once a time in which unions were needed. However, I believe that time has now passed. Unions are making us less competitive on the world market, and the public sector unions are draining us financially. Perhaps it is time for the unions to be phased out.

Edited February 24, 2011 by mav

[Raoul]

Then also you have the fact that not all teaching jobs pay the same or have the same resources, commitment of parents, facilities, etc.

Commitment of parents... you are so right Daniel. My wife's school is 100% free lunch. You guys do the math. What kind of parental support do you suppose she gets.

The point here is that it's not fair to paint teachers with a broad brush. That and if it wasn't for some very dedicated theachers the spelling would be even worse on this forum.

All this is doing is divide and conquer. We're all fighting for the scraps while that magic 1% is even richer than last year not paying the 30% of there income I paid. Yes that includes SS witholding, but still.

[gregintenn]

You and I are about the same age. Let's assume you start your public sector job the same time I start my private sector job.

Now fast forward 25 years.

Why is it "jerking the rug out" if we take away your pension, but it's not "jerking the rug out" if my taxes went up to cover your pension? Doesn't that mean less money in MY pension (retirement income)?

I'm not faulting you for trying to protect yours, but surely you can see that I want to try and protect mine, too.

You are assuming I don't pay taxes as well. Let's make this a fair comparison. We both work for twenty five years, me with the state, you in the private sector. I'm making 25K per year with the promise of a pension. You're making 50k per year without a pension. To make this an apples to apples comparison, let's say that when they take my pension away, your company decides they've overpaid you the last 25 years, and you need to repay half of what you've earned in that time. A portion of my income is deposited into the Tennessee Consolidated Retirement System. It really isn't as good a deal as cash, because if I die before I can collect it, it's gone.

When your taxes increase, so do mine. You'll never meet a more conservative guy than me, but whan I make a promise, I try to keep it.

Edited February 24, 2011 by gregintenn

[Will Carry]

I don't really know how this got off track. The OP was referring to the union, not individual teachers.

I believe there was once a time in which unions were needed. However, I believe that time has now passed. Unions are making us less competitive on the world market, and the public sector unions are draining us financially. Perhaps it is time for the unions to be phased out.

I have never been a part of a union but blaming unions for the fact that we have lost our competitivness just ain't right. There are other factions involved. Like CEOs giving each other millions, no billions, in bonuses for doing nothing. I think we are all to blame. Unions, big money, all of us.

BUT we ain't beaten yet! When we put our minds to it Americans can still work harder and smarter than anyone in the world. Just not cheaper

[Raoul]

I have never been a part of a union but blaming unions for the fact that we have lost our competitivness just ain't right. There are other factions involved. Like CEOs giving each other millions, no billions, in bonuses for doing nothing. I think we are all to blame. Unions, big money, all of us.

BUT we ain't beaten yet! When we put our minds to it Americans can still work harder and smarter than anyone in the world. Just not cheaper

Agreed.

[mav]

I have never been a part of a union but blaming unions for the fact that we have lost our competitivness just ain't right. There are other factions involved. Like CEOs giving each other millions, no billions, in bonuses for doing nothing. I think we are all to blame. Unions, big money, all of us.

BUT we ain't beaten yet! When we put our minds to it Americans can still work harder and smarter than anyone in the world. Just not cheaper

Oh, I agree totally. You are mistaken if you think that I am laying blame for all of our problems solely at the feet of unions. They are only part of the problem, but a huge problem nonetheless. Ultimately, the blame lies with the citizenry. It is the people who vote in their government, and it is that government that has setup this environment of corruption.

No, I don't think we are beaten yet, but to be honest with you, it is looking pretty depressing.

[Guest clownsdd]

Why should the "rules" be different for a teacher, or any other public employee be any different than those of us in the private sector. Tenure, pensions, sick days, I could go on and on. The work for us, if they don't like it find another job with all the perks they got.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Ah, isn't it so fun to play the blame game? We must be done with unions so let's go blame

those greedy assed-corporations. Hell, I'll be glad to take up your slack, mav:D No one

understands, I guess what a moocher or a looter is.

Those greedy corporations just need to pay reparations for all those years they have kept us down?

Yeh, right. Who makes your paycheck? I guarantee when all the arguing is done on the issue and

all the chest thumping is over you might realize that your pay check was made on the backs of others

by their innovation, creativity and achievement. And those government employees should realize

that the people, otherwise known as "taxpayers" pay their salaries as well, and shouldn't feel so

damned entitled the next time they expect a raise or benefit.

Yeh, wipe out those damned greedy corporations that make your paycheck. Look around and see

how it feels to be so entitled with no one left to pay your paycheck.

Just remember, children, Socialism fails when you run out of "other people's money". Spend it, wisely!

This from a union member.

[mav]

Ah, isn't it so fun to play the blame game? We must be done with unions so let's go blame

those greedy assed-corporations. Hell, I'll be glad to take up your slack, mav:D No one

understands, I guess what a moocher or a looter is.

Those greedy corporations just need to pay reparations for all those years they have kept us down?

Yeh, right. Who makes your paycheck? I guarantee when all the arguing is done on the issue and

all the chest thumping is over you might realize that your pay check was made on the backs of others

by their innovation, creativity and achievement. And those government employees should realize

that the people, otherwise known as "taxpayers" pay their salaries as well, and shouldn't feel so

damned entitled the next time they expect a raise or benefit.

Yeh, wipe out those damned greedy corporations that make your paycheck. Look around and see

how it feels to be so entitled with no one left to pay your paycheck.

Just remember, children, Socialism fails when you run out of "other people's money". Spend it, wisely!

This from a union member.

No need to take up any slack, there isn't any. Don't misread from my agreement in the previous post that I am on the Bolshevik party train headed to the worker's utopia.

You cannot, however, discount the well documented cases of crony capitalism over the last couple of years.

Back on topic. If I could make the choice, I would take the federal government out of the education business altogether. It should only be on a state and local level. Our public school system is pretty much failing. What is Washington's response? We need more funding. What is the unions response? We need more money. The education budget is increasing every year, and what do we have to show for it. Increased dropout rates? Lower test scores?

Just to be clear so nobody comes on and pounds their chest that their spouse or relative is such a great educator, this is not solely the fault of teachers. There are some good teachers who are caught in this quagmire. The failure is in the entire system. Should our answer be to send more money or give more of this or that? Absolutely not. Continuing to pour money into a failed system and bottomless pit is nonsensical.

Now I know this is pie in the sky thinking, but if we were to reform the system by dumping the unions and taking the federal government out of the education business, we might actually see some positive results. Perhaps, if the market deemed such, quality secondary education teachers might command a salary of $100k.

[Lumber_Jack]

I still don't understand the pension argument. Why do you want a government plan to control your future retirement. If you planned and contributed to a 401k plan you would have MORE money, and you could chose how it's managed. Plus I really don't think anyone wants to jerk pensions from those who were promised that as part of the jobs. But why can't we switch to a normal (private sector) retirement plan, pro-rate the pension according to years served. I know a lot of you are married to teachers and I think they, for the most part, do great work. But the idea that they work harder than me and get paid less therefore they deserve a pension, just seems silly.

[Raoul]

No need to take up any slack, there isn't any. Don't misread from my agreement in the previous post that I am on the Bolshevik party train headed to the worker's utopia.

You cannot, however, discount the well documented cases of crony capitalism over the last couple of years.

Back on topic. If I could make the choice, I would take the federal government out of the education business altogether. It should only be on a state and local level. Our public school system is pretty much failing. What is Washington's response? We need more funding. What is the unions response? We need more money. The education budget is increasing every year, and what do we have to show for it. Increased dropout rates? Lower test scores?

Just to be clear so nobody comes on and pounds their chest that their spouse or relative is such a great educator, this is not solely the fault of teachers. There are some good teachers who are caught in this quagmire. The failure is in the entire system. Should our answer be to send more money or give more of this or that? Absolutely not. Continuing to pour money into a failed system and bottomless pit is nonsensical.

Now I know this is pie in the sky thinking, but if we were to reform the system by dumping the unions and taking the federal government out of the education business, we might actually see some positive results. Perhaps, if the market deemed such, quality secondary education teachers might command a salary of $100k.

Until you get the parents of that 47% that lives on a "check" involved in the education of their children you can forget it. They are not the only issue either. Parents don't discipline their kids. parents don't expect anything from their kids. If you expect nothing you get nothing. Schools cannot truly discipline kids.

Why should they give a .

[Seaslug]

The point here is that it's not fair to paint teachers with a broad brush. That and if it wasn't for some very dedicated theachers the spelling would be even worse on this forum.

Oh, the delicious irony...