Moonbox

Fair enough, it pretty much works out as exactly 39 weeks (196 school days). Compare that to the average Canadian and that means that teachers are working nearly 6 weeks(or 15%) less. Yes, it will, but it doesn't matter that much anyways because even if average full-timers WERE only working 36.6 hours per week, they'd still be working significantly more overall than teachers. We have to, because this is the rhetoric we're getting from the teachers and their unions when it comes to negotiating contracts. We hear it all of the time and we've heard it on this thread. By the numbers and relative to most Canadians, it simply isn't true. Their testimonials of how hard-done they are don't hold much weight either. Everyone thinks their job is hard and that they're overworked and under-appreciated. Not everyone has the benefit of a labour union holding taxpayers hostage for an essential service.

That's funny coming from the guy who hasn't offered anything to the debate aside from testimonials about how well-educated he is and his messiah-like work ethic (70 hours right!? - LOL). Like I've said before, your incompetence in these debates only confirms what most of us already know. Our teachers aren't nearly as smart and hard-working as they'd like us to believe. Except they don't. The 'requirement' for most teachers in Canada has always been 4 years. 5 years was just more likely to get you in. What makes me sick is the crying about how YOU getting paid better would benefit society as as a whole. You clearly don't see the galling irony of these claims. Any ACTUAL data (as in not your pathetic self-plugging testimonials that nobody should believe), teacher pay and quality of education are NOT directly related. Germany has the best-paid teachers in the world, yet Germany regularly lags behind on education indexes, math, literacy and science scores. Canada has the 5th best-paid teachers in the world, yet does not break the top 5 in any of these measurements either. Also, by objective, third-party measurement, you work far less than the average Canadian and get paid significantly more than your education and aptitudes would dictate. http://www.businessinsider.com/pisa-rankings-2013-12 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_Index http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/economy/economy-lab/teacher-pay-canada-near-the-top-of-the-oecd-class/article4541629/

The teachers are getting all of the stat holidays as well, so by not ignoring them you would also have to subtract their stat holidays from their annual total (at least the ones that don't fall on xmas/summer holidays). This makes a whole week's worth of difference for the comparison. The 36.6 hours from HRDC/Statscan was including part-time workers, or at least people who worked less than 30 hours a week. I meant the claims about them being overwhelmed and working so much harder than everyone else (their go-to when people point out their unmatched vacation time when their compensation packages are questioned). The numbers we have would suggest they work significantly less.

Michael thank you for looking into those numbers, but I wanted to clarify. A teacher in Ontario is obligated to spend 32.5 hours a week in the classroom. If they're putting 7.6 hours of extra work per week in, that means they're working a 40 hour week now for ~39 weeks per year. If a teacher is working for 40 hours per week, then their work year is 1560 hours. The average Canadian can expect maybe 3 weeks of holidays and works 49 weeks per year. Stat holidays are uniform and so can be ignored. If the average Canadian works 36.6 hours per year for 49 weeks then a 1793 hr work year is average, meaning teachers work 233 hours/year less. Unfortunately, the StatsCan data isn't presenting the apples-to-apples information we need. Included in the 36.6 average are all the people working part-time and under 30 hours per week (particularly young people) which skews the national average to the teacher's favor, likely by a fair margin. Suppose even that the average full-time non-seasonal worker in Canada works 40 hrs/week, which is a pretty conservative assumption. In this case, teachers are working 400 hours less than the average Canadian, or fully ten weeks less. Combine this with their above average pay (for their level of education AND by international averages for educators according to the OECD). http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/economy/economy-lab/teacher-pay-canada-near-the-top-of-the-oecd-class/article4541629/ The argument for and by teachers about their woeful job conditions are unfortunately not confirmed by the numbers.

What do you think, really? Are you typing just for the sake of saying something? socialist is getting mocked because of his poor reasoning skills and because he's been quoted saying some REALLY stupid stuff. He's also incredibly, unashamedly biased on the topic (even for a teacher) and appears to be oblivious to that fact. Your defense of him is noted and I'm sure appreciates it, but you actually didn't say anything worthwhile. You disagree with me and you agree with him. Thanks for letting us know!

It's the Masters Degree that makes them more qualified and likely better teachers, not the higher pay. The vast majority of teachers also don't have one.

that's because it's not obvious, and your reasoning skills are embarrassingly bad. I never said anything about cutting back on education. I said teachers are overpaid and if we spent less on each teacher we could hire more of them, thus reducing class sizes and likely IMPROVING education. You're embarrassing your profession every time you open your mouth. We're supposed to believe YOU see the big picture!? This is the same guy who tried to make up for wounded pride by trying to ridicule me for using the term "teacher" instead of "educator", while he'd been using it himself all along! We're supposed to believe that we should pay YOU more so that YOU can better educate our children!? I've never laughed and vomited at the same time, but I think I might here.

except that's more self-confirming drivel that makes literally no sense whatsoever and requires you to make a large number of logical leaps that conflict with one another. Like I said, you're not doing your profession any favors.

Right, so asking someone how hard they work in a public sector profession was a great way to get unbiased and objective information? but a teacher's negotiated hours are only 6-6.5 hours a day and they only work 75% of the year, whereas the private sector employee spends 7.5-8 hours at the office and works 95% of the year. I can say, because I've seen it first hand, just as you have. which finally reveals your angle and skin in the game. For the record, I lived with a teacher for three years and the during her time at teacher's college. When she was 'marking', she was watching television and marking during commercials, chatting with the rest of us throughout. By the time she was done, 2-3 hours would have gone by and as far as she was concerned she'd been 'working' the entire time. Understood, but it wasn't an apple to apples comparison when you account for a teacher's vacation. No the G&M said 2/3 of Canadians self-report working more than 45 hours a week and surmised that the work/life balance of lower-income families is worse. This does NOT mean well-paid professionals work less. I can understand why you might suggest that, but it's a non-sequitur. A well-paid professional can afford to run a household on his/her own, therefore the spouse doesn't have to be at work or worry as much. You also cited an HRDC analysis with StatsCAN figures, and that along with the G&M article gives us a pretty clear indication that 40-45 hour work weeks average. For a teacher to even match that they need to be doing another 10-15 hours of marking/planning/EC every week, and when you add the extra 9-10 weeks of vacation you need to add another ~10 hours. This means that the average teacher needs to doing at least 50 hour work weeks to even compare how much they work to a full-time private sector employee. Most of this time, as we have discussed, is spent at home. There is a reason most employers require their people to work on-site for 8 hours a day and why most employees would prefer to work from home.

So if your anecdotes are reliable sources, then the ones I've posted are as well, along with anyone who else's who cares to weigh in. Unfortunately, this doesn't validate anything. All it does is tell you which angle the poster wants to believe. The private sector where employees are salaried and a good portion of them are given no allowances for overtime, while the pressure and expectation of their jobs make it difficult to avoid. I'm saying that there aren't any organizations in Canada that require a mandatory and regular 50-60 hour work week (15-20 of that being at home) and that when teachers say they're working for 3+ hours at home every night it's a gross exaggeration and/or misrepresentation of what they're actually doing. I think their work conditions, pay, benefits and vacation time speak for themselves. You're calling yourself a fool then too, because you're peddling "validation" of teacher's (professed) hours worked with no citations, while demanding that people who disagree with your anecdotes provide them. As for the cites you did give, they had literally nothing to do with a teacher's hours. They spoke of hours worked by the general population, and the conclusions you drew from them were conjectures. I worked the numbers out from your own citations (feel free to refute them if you can) and showed how many after-school hours are required for teachers to break-even with the national average of 36.6. What's worse, however, is that your own citation of national averages includes part-time workers working less than 30 hours per week. What we can conclude from that is that the average full-time non-seasonal worker almost certainly works more than 40+ hours a week. For teachers' annual work load to even approach THAT average, they're looking at 60+ hour work weeks during the school year to even break even with the private sector.

The problem with the argument is that it's based on nothing. Your testimonials, mine, a teacher's - they're as substantial as a fart in a storm. In the private sector, if you tried to claim 10 hours a week of work at home that you cannot objectively measure, you'd be laughed at. What we do know is that teachers are only in the classroom for ~6 hours per day and that's only for 3/4 of the year. That amounts to about ~1200 hours of classroom time a year. To even meet the national average of statistically measured hours worked, that means that teachers would be required to put in ~48-50 hours of real work during the school year (not sitting in front of the TV at home auto-pilot marking with friends/family). I'd argue they're not even doing that, but that's beside the point. If we're going to acknowledge stated working hours like you are for teachers, then to meet national averages teachers would be required to work around ~60 hours per week during the school year. Of course there are goofs in the teaching profession (and obviously here too) that are claiming they're all messiahs working 60-70 weeks and spending their summer months planning (for our children ), but only a fool would believe them.

We always get a good laugh about this sort of comment. The gall of someone negotiating for higher pay and then telling everyone it's for the students is hilarious. Yes, you've given us ample evidence of this and the more you talk the more we get. What does the politicking of the BC government have to do with whether or not teachers are overpaid? The government approached the bargaining table in bad faith for political points. While the court's ruling certainly confirms bargaining rights and denies the province the ability to unilaterally set education policy, it speaks NOTHING of teacher's pay or working conditions. It was an affirmation of collective bargaining rights. That's IT. While you may think this amounts to a confirmation of your demands for lower class sizes and higher pay, you couldn't be more wrong. What this does is show you how badly public opinion is against you. When shenanigans like this are considered political gold, the teachers obviously have an image problem. This goes beyond the bargaining table over the last 3-4 years. Taxpayers are fed up with the teachers. Your toxic relationship with the government stems from this and the renewed mandate for the Liberals should be concerning for you. Both sides gained and lost in their positions at the bargaining table, said University of British Columbia education professor E. Wayne Ross. “I think [teachers] gave up more than the government gave up to get the deal,” he said. “But the government had many more cards to play, and they had a lot more time to hold out than the teachers did. Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/business/schools+could+reopen+Monday+after+historic+deal+reached+with+teachers+updated+with+video/10207687/story.html#ixzz3LhOaSUG0

The best part is that the ones complaining the most are the longer-term ones who had such a sweet ride for such a long time. With thousands of qualified teachers trying to get into the industry, older teachers are complaining about class sizes while striking for higher pay - two more or less mutually exclusive items. That is, of course, unless you live in the fantasy world of a unionized public sector worker.

Perhaps, but the suggests that these small reserves are run by the chief like their own petty kingdoms. There's no shortage of examples in world of this system of government failing at the hands of the people. Opposing doesn't mean you need to unilaterally call him out as a crook. You'd have to assume aboriginals talk among themselves and could organize an opposition, unless of course the reserves have their own versions of the KGB.

Depending on who you ask the answer varies widely. When I ask my younger teacher friends, they'll say they might spend 1-2 hours marking/planning every night, but it's while the TV is on so it's hardly the same thing. The hours obviously go up at the end of the semester during report card time, but that's a small part of the school year. Again, this ignores the 6-hour work day and the three months of holidays. In any case Michael, you didn't actually validate anything. You asked some teachers, like I did, how much they work every week. Neither my nor your testimonials are worth much. Keep in mind, however, that everyone likes to exaggerate how hard their job is and how many hours they work. The difference is that most jobs actually require you to be on location for at least 8 hours a day.

It hasn't been debunked at all. A teacher's work week is only "longer" because they're not at the "office" for 8-9 hours a day like everyone else. They end up doing some marking on the weekends but it doesn't amount to the 15+ hours a week most of them like to tell us. While some of the newer and younger teachers are actually that dedicated, they're the exception, not the norm. As for the rest (job security, superb pay/benefits, 3-months holiday etc), that's undeniable fact. Sure, but measures like pay and benefits are easy to objectively measure, and by all objective measurements the teachers have it pretty good. This isn't just me saying this. These are the conclusions of economists, university econ profs, the OECD etc...

Engineers don't get three months of vacation, 6-7 hour work days or unbeatable job security with vague/fluffy job performance standards. It's not about attacking teachers, or the profession itself. It's about ridiculing their hilarious complaints and sense of entitlement when they have it as good as they do (by all objective measures).

I guess you missed my previous post (on this page) where I said: Struggling to get by is not a plight that's unique to the natives....These sorts of conditions were ripe breeding grounds for questions being asked and for change everywhere in the world, before and after radio, internet, tv or even newspapers. What's uniquely interesting about aboriginals in Canada, however, is that outside help is mistrusted and vigorously resisted. When the people who are sending support money to the reserves are saying that band leaders are abusing trust and essentially stealing the money, something insane is happening. Rather than getting angry at the band leaders, the band members are getting angry at the people who are sending the money that's being stolen, telling them to mind their own business and bugger off.

Except it pays way better and you work way less. 3 months of holidays a year is a sweet ride.

I'm judging it based on how easy it is/was to become certified as a teacher (even for a slacker!), how exceptionally well teachers are paid and how much of the year they don't work. All of these things are facts which can be easily verified and have been throughout this thread. Your flimsy attempts to refute them have been literally nothing but moronic self-serving testimonials about how wonderful/smart/hard-working you and your friends are. Whether or not we call you teachers or educators is completely irrelevant to the point anyone is trying to make. We could call you "People who are paid by the government to impart learning on students" and none of the arguments get any weaker or stronger as a result. You're not doing any favors to your profession with this sort of flimsy reasoning. Combine that with your incompetent hypocrisy (you've been using the term 'teacher' all along, genius) and you're only reinforcing people's negative perception of your profession.

How is your question relevant to my comment and conclusion?

Nope, not at all. It has to be more than that. Struggling to get by is not a plight that's unique to the natives. It can't be simply that they're too busy to pay attention to the crooks stealing from them. These sorts of conditions were ripe breeding grounds for questions being asked and for change everywhere in the world, before and after radio, internet, tv or even newspapers.

Those jobs are nowhere even near a fraction of what would be necessary to recover the money we've wasted on them. Well that's sort of how contracts work. When you sign a really stupid, really bad contract, you're stuck in it. You don't get to go "Ooops! I'll take a mulligan on that!"

Good question. We can, however, probably conclude that the lack of interest/action on the part of the ordinary natives demonstrates that they're either against the government on this, or they just have their heads buried so deep in the sand that they don't care.

The government didn't appoint or force leaders upon the reserves that steal from them. They also can't remove them whenit's obvious that's what they're doing. The government certainly set up the overall system, but it takes the ignorance and/or negligence of the bands to allow themselves to get fleeced by leaders they're responsible for choosing. As for opening the books, this about transparency along with the optics you suggest. When the government sends money to the reserves and then sees it literally stolen by crooked leaders, it's fairly reasonable that they'd want this to stop. The only people that can stop it, however, are the band members themselves. If they actually knew how their leaders were essentially embezzling hundreds of thousands from them, they'd be angry. Instead they make a concerted and fully moronic effort to ensure they are not made aware of how they're being robbed and instead take direction from the people stealing from them and rant against the government. It's tragically stupid. Yes, you absolutely do see it happening all over the planet and throughout history. It's called Social Identity Theory. Read a book or two about world history and you'll see how it's been responsible for some of the stupidest and some of the most violent undertakings in human history. They don't have to speak out against their own people. Working together to remove corrupt leaders is not an embarrassing undertaking. It shows some integrity and some responsibility. We're not in Pakistan. This is Canada. Yes, the auditor general of Ontario just lambasted the Liberal government. The response from the Ontario government was, "You don't know what you're talking about." The response from the public, however, is outrage against the government, not the auditor general.