Ontario Budget 2014 -- Election

[jacee]

I disagree.

I feel discriminated against heavily in this situation by Catholics who want to silence me by saying they are offended by how I take issue with how they actively discriminate against me and my children.

I don't disagree with everything you say.

But you destroy your own credibility and discredit and alienate those who may agree when you cross the line.

.

[BobbyS]

Mea culpa. I read the cite wrong. That is much less outrageous.

But it doesn't change the fact Ontario is paying far too much to teachers, and that this needs to stop. Nothing wrong with being generous, but we simply can't afford it any more, not when there are so many of them.

Shocker. Blind PC supporter didn't know his numbers.

[Mighty AC]

Hang on. Hudak has said he would use attrition to lower staffing. If Wynne freezes educational spending, then with inflation, the only way school boards can keep up is by ... releasing staff... probably through attrition.

Tim did state he'd give EAs their pink slips, but whether they are fired of just not replaced we're left with the same problem. Education will suffer for everyone when special needs children spend the bulk of their time in regular classrooms.

So far the Liberal MO has been to provide the necessary staff but under fund maintenance budgets. The Harris government, that Hudak was part of, underfunded both maintenance and staff leading to chaos. Thankfully, the Libs have improved things by providing the necessary people, unfortunately they have less working equipment to use every year.

Eliminating Catholic schools is not going to happen, so you're wasting our time suggesting it. Elminating student testing is merely a sop to the teachers unions, who don't like to have it pointed out that for all their fat salaries and benefit packages, Ontario students are not performing better than jurisdictions with far lower teacher salaries.

Merging out the separate boards will happen, because it's just too big of waste to ignore forever. The Greens peg the savings at a billion dollars. That kind of dough could provide both big savings along with more adequate maintenance funding. Today, it would have to be done by a leader on their way out though. Someone who knows their time is about done and chooses to do a positive but unpopular deed. However, public support for the removal of separate education is growing, so it could easily become a politically popular move within the decade.

As for EQAO tests, their results can be predicted with a high degree of precision for free, by simply analyzing existing SES data. The test results don't add value to education or the decision making process, it's just a way to erase millions. If Hudak was really about saving money instead of just trying to buy the blue haired vote, he'd end the EQAO, Catholic education and wasteful school boards instantly.

Edited June 12, 2014 by Mighty AC

[Moonbox]

You said I couldn't find an economist who didn't believe the public sector jobs were a drain and you are cherry picking your comments.

No, I made a tongue-in-cheek comment on your blanket statement saying 'public sector jobs aren't a drain on the economy', which you were supporting with the trashy circular logic that public sector salaries are good for the economy because they allow public sector employees to spend money in the economy.

That's the comment and idea I was mocking. I followed up with an example of paying public sector workers to dig holes and then fill them, which is a concept ubiquitous to discussions like this and one that economists use all of the time to debunk the idea that a large public sector workforce is good for the economy merely because it reduces unemployment.

Hilariously, you linked an article from a Florida newspaper (lol?) where the exact same example was used (by the economist defending the public sector no less) to explain the exact same thing I was saying.

Does the public sector provide value to the economy? Absolutely. Are there significant portions of it that are completely redundant, overpriced or flat-out unnecessary in the first place? Absolutely.

Edited June 12, 2014 by Moonbox

[PIK]

Trying to back away from that bigotted statement now?

Wait... where exactly do kids learn that stuff in the curriculum? The only thing I remember were religious folk being up in arms because the curriculum was going to be updated to a modern level of tolerance to mention things like "non-traditional couples". Next thing you know, because these religious and intolerant folk hate homosexuals and non-traditional people, they claim that anal sex is being promoted because it mentions same sex male relationships.

So you have no problem teaching little kids about that? Makes me wonder about you. So has the guy that tried to push this thru , has he gone to court yet for his perverted behaviour??

[Big Guy]

I would suggest that when parents deal with the parental obligation to teach their children about sex, tolerance and their religion then what they are told in school will be irrelevant on those topics. When parents relinquish their responsibility to the state then they better expect the state to dictate what their children believe.

[cybercoma]

No, it's very easy to say that teachers, who are making 70-90k per year with enormously generous benefits plans are making too much. Just to start, why should they not be contributing 50% of their pension costs like the federal public service employees are going to be doing? Why shouldn't they be contributing towards their health care costs, like federal employees do?

Is 70-90k per year a lot of money for an educated professional nearing the end of their career?

[Boges]

Is 70-90k per year a lot of money for an educated professional nearing the end of their career?

Yes, when they have an amazing pension waiting for them. Also some can collect their pension and still supply teach.

[cybercoma]

Yes, when they have an amazing pension waiting for them. Also some can collect their pension and still supply teach.

What does their pension have to do with it? What does continuing to work part time after retirement have to do with it? Should everyone who makes a good pension and can continue to work part time after retirement earn less during their careers? I don't see the connection, nor how that's a good reason that an educated professional should make less than $70-90k at the end of their careers.

[Boges]

A good wage is subjective. I think if you have stellar job security and a good pension waiting for you, $90,000 is a very good wage.

Lot's of people who make 6 figures don't get summers off and have a company pension waiting for them. I'm talking sales people and people on commission. People who would be kicked to the curb if they can't keep increasing their sales quotas each month.

[cybercoma]

Let's be clear what we're talking about here. That's all.

Here's the grids for Ontario teacher pay.

http://www.ocetf.ca/collective-bargaining/topics-of-interest/salary-grids.aspx

When we're talking about teachers making $70-90k per year we're talking about a select subgroup of teachers. They are: 10 years @ A, 8 years @ A1, 7 years @ A2, 6 years @ A3, 5 years @ A4.

HERE are the qualifications for the different categories.

Now I don't know what they do in other places, but I think logically a person with a first class or honours undergrad plus grad school (master's or doctorate), plus teacher training (BEd) and additional academic credentials such as specialist training, should be making a pretty good salary. With that much education it still takes 5 years to break into $70,000 range and they max out at $92,821 after 10+ years.

What I'm trying to show here is that teachers who are making this much money have been either teaching for a long time (10+ years) or are highly educated and even then it takes over 5 years to break into $70,000 territory. I don't think these wages are outrageous for highly educated professionals that have just as much schooling as some lawyers, doctors, and professors.

[cybercoma]

A good wage is subjective. I think if you have stellar job security and a good pension waiting for you, $90,000 is a very good wage.

Lot's of people who make 6 figures don't get summers off and have a company pension waiting for them. I'm talking sales people and people on commission. People who would be kicked to the curb if they can't keep increasing their sales quotas each month.

Well, I"m not saying that it isn't a good wage. Of course it's a good wage. I don't think it's too much is what I'm saying.

[Boges]

Well, I"m not saying that it isn't a good wage. Of course it's a good wage. I don't think it's too much is what I'm saying.

It was thought that civil servants traded in the expectation of being rich for job security. Now we live in a society where civil servants make much more than their private sector counterparts but get the job security thrown in.

[cybercoma]

That's not true at all. Someone with that amount of education could be making a lot more in the private sector doing consulting or research.

[Boges]

That's not true at all. Someone with that amount of education could be making a lot more in the private sector doing consulting or research.

People with Education BA's often get 6 figure consulting jobs? Is that why many teachers subsist on a waiting list for supply teaching gigs?

[cybercoma]

And I'm not sure how $70,000/year is rich. There's people on this forum who make at least 4 times as much as that and claim they're not rich and never will be.

[cybercoma]

People with Education BA's often get 6 figure consulting jobs? Is that why many teachers subsist on a waiting list for supply teaching gigs?

Teachers with just education BAs also don't make $70-90k at any point in their careers.

Edited June 12, 2014 by cybercoma

[cybercoma]

That's actually not true. If they move to the arctic they can make that. But then again, a bottle of orange juice is $20.

[CPCFTW]

Let's be clear what we're talking about here. That's all.

Here's the grids for Ontario teacher pay.

http://www.ocetf.ca/collective-bargaining/topics-of-interest/salary-grids.aspx

When we're talking about teachers making $70-90k per year we're talking about a select subgroup of teachers. They are: 10 years @ A, 8 years @ A1, 7 years @ A2, 6 years @ A3, 5 years @ A4.

HERE are the qualifications for the different categories.

Now I don't know what they do in other places, but I think logically a person with a first class or honours undergrad plus grad school (master's or doctorate), plus teacher training (BEd) and additional academic credentials such as specialist training, should be making a pretty good salary. With that much education it still takes 5 years to break into $70,000 range and they max out at $92,821 after 10+ years.

What I'm trying to show here is that teachers who are making this much money have been either teaching for a long time (10+ years) or are highly educated and even then it takes over 5 years to break into $70,000 territory. I don't think these wages are outrageous for highly educated professionals that have just as much schooling as some lawyers, doctors, and professors.

What type of professional liability do teachers have compared to lawyers and doctors? Their wages are commensurate with their education and risk. Also they don't get pensions, job security, or sick days, which are all factors of total compensation. I'm not sure why you think it's fair to only look at wages.

[Boges]

Also the idea of teachers automatically getting pre-set raises due to their tenure seems ridiculous to people in the private sector.

[cybercoma]

What type of professional liability do teachers have compared to lawyers and doctors? Their wages are commensurate with their education and risk. Also they don't get pensions, job security, or sick days, which are all factors of total compensation. I'm not sure why you think it's fair to only look at wages.

Doctors and lawyers also make several times more than teachers for that reason. But the way you and some other talk, you would have teachers making just a bit more than people working at McDonalds or Walmart.

[cybercoma]

Also the idea of teachers automatically getting pre-set raises due to their tenure seems ridiculous to people in the private sector.

So? People in the private sector can leave their jobs and work for someone down the street if they don't get raises appropriate for their experience. Teachers can't quit and go get a job at the school down the street for more money.

Edited June 12, 2014 by cybercoma

[waldo]

final 308 aggregate polling projection:

[Boges]

Ipsos released a poll that had the NDP up to the high 20's while Forum released a poll saying the NDP had tanked. Wynne is pretty much saying a vote for the NDP is a vote for Satan.

If the NDP have tanked the Liberals will cruise to victory. Who's right though?

I kind of hope we do see a majority only to prove that Pollsters are absolutely full of crap. Apparently pollsters had this Eric Cantor guy in Virginia with a 20 point lead.

[MiddleClassCentrist]

Also the idea of teachers automatically getting pre-set raises due to their tenure seems ridiculous to people in the private sector.

Maybe people in the private sector should understand that the whole point of the grid is to spread out the cost of a teacher...

Starting pay of 45k isn't lucrative, especially for those with engineering, accounting or business backgrounds. If you are already working you'll now need to take 2 years off after this year to work toward your teaching degree too. Top end pay of 90k is worth working toward as the "light at the end of the tunnel" for those people.

The argument of making more money in the private sector is somewhat true, if mostly for those with practical and in demand education(the people you actually want teaching). The reality for arts, socialology, history, phys ed and other interesting, fun or charitable but, not economically valuable degrees is they would have a hard time pulling off 60k, let alone 70k a year. The globe and mail had a good report on it awhile back where you could enter degrees to look at how better off you'd be if you took a degree over just going into the workforce with a High School diploma. You are actually worth less than a high school grad if you take an Art degree as a male.

Edited June 12, 2014 by MiddleClassCentrist