When is enough...enough?

[Remiel]

They aren't " mystery " hours, they're variable hours. The teachers know they work outside the classroom, the government knows they work outside the classroom, so why must they pretend they don't when considering their salaries? That's like saying that firefighters and police officers shouldn't get danger pay, because even though they know their job is dangerous, and the government knows, they havent developed a nice little system for rating the average danger of a days work.

[Hydraboss]

If you have read the entire thread, then you have seen my position on this matter. I sit and BS with a pile of teachers quite often (the outlaws), and they don't spend time prepping once they have been in the job for a while.

Again, new teachers spend their time prepping for classes. That's it. In almost all cases that I have been involved in (and that's quite a lot), the students do the marking. The exception is writing assignments, and that is what "prep" periods are for...marking.

As has just been said.....if out of school time is such a big deal, work it into the CBA and do the work at school instead of leaving tire tracks at 3:15pm every day.

If teachers actually worked that amount of time, I would have no problem paying them for it. Fair is fair.

BUT TEACHERS DON'T EARN THEIR EARNINGS AND I GET TO PAY FOR IT!!!

[sideshow]

I took a sample contract of a group of Teachers in Manitoba (my current province). Here is the pay scale:

Salary Scale - Fall 2006

Exp

Class 1

Class 2

Class 3

Class 4

Class 5

Class 6

Class 7

0

28,904

33,654

38,752

44,631

47,631

50,586

53,552

1

30,539

35,533

40,841

47,015

50,090

53,186

56,273

2

32,174

37,412

42,930

49,399

52,549

55,786

58,994

3

33,809

39,291

45,019

51,783

55,008

58,386

61,715

4

35,444

41,170

47,108

54,167

57,467

60,986

64,436

5

37,079

43,049

49,197

56,551

59,926

63,586

67,157

6

38,714

44,928

51,286

58,935

62,385

66,186

69,878

7

61,319

64,844

68,786

72,599

8

63,703

67,303

71,386

75,320

9+

66,087

69,762

73,986

78,041

interesting enough, while the wage scale is huge (28k to 78k) there is NO mention of required hours of work in the agreement-either in class or out. very interesting as i would think both sides would want that. this was just one ca btw, so obviously has no significance, but i thought it was interesting.

[sideshow]

If you have read the entire thread, then you have seen my position on this matter. I sit and BS with a pile of teachers quite often (the outlaws), and they don't spend time prepping once they have been in the job for a while.

Again, new teachers spend their time prepping for classes. That's it. In almost all cases that I have been involved in (and that's quite a lot), the students do the marking. The exception is writing assignments, and that is what "prep" periods are for...marking.

As has just been said.....if out of school time is such a big deal, work it into the CBA and do the work at school instead of leaving tire tracks at 3:15pm every day.

If teachers actually worked that amount of time, I would have no problem paying them for it. Fair is fair.

BUT TEACHERS DON'T EARN THEIR EARNINGS AND I GET TO PAY FOR IT!!!

I guess that is part of the argument on both sides-the amount of work that is required outside of class. For some it will always be higher than others. Because some are more efficient than others. And I would think there would be a bit more prep at the beginning of the year (as teachers get to know the kids, their issues, and their strengths and weaknesses) than near the end.

But there has to be a proper compromise. If teachers need less class time, they have to show why and justify it. And if there is a proper reason to reduce the time, then it only makes sense to decrease the compensation(minus bargained cola increases, etc.) PER HOUR. Unless this is offset by work that needs to be done outside of the classroom-and can be legitimate and proven.

A fair days wage for a fair days work. Its a two way street.

[Hydraboss]

I can refer only to Alberta teachers' CBA's.

In this province, a new grad teacher (0 years) starts at the 1 year experience level. They did away with the 0 level in the last bargaining round.

As for Manitoba, I would have to see the definition of classes 1 through 7 to make any correlation to earnings. The FDE (full day equivalent) will probably not be listed in the online CBA, but simply call a school and ask them for the teachers schedule for the school year. It lists the required days that teachers must work. The CBA should also list the substitute rates, the additional administration rates (principle, vice principle, etc) that are applicable to the different school districts.

Or maybe that is just Alberta.

[Remiel]

Interestingly enough, I found an article from Britain on this exact same subject from 2002. The article is short, but the comments are LONG, and some of them mirror practically word for word what I have seen in similar arguments in this country over the years.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/1900713.stm

[Catchme]

Teachers in BC are on the school premises from 8am to 4pm. One would assume it is close to those hours in all provinces.

They also do on average 2-4 extra hours/day normally in lesson prep, grading etc, the only time students mark papers is in quizzes, not full tests, nor any that have written components. This number increases at semsister end and finals time and report cards.

They also are dealing with 25 children all at once all day.

Insisting that lesson prep takes no time is absurb. Knowledge and information does not stay static, and if it is in AB no wonder you haven't changed governments in decades.

The same goes for compiling marks and student reports.

[geoffrey]

People could die as an indirect result of a teacher having a bad day, however the results are in the future, not the present. Who is to say that school violence never occures as a result of a teacher having a bad day? The butterfly effect is likely strong in teachers actions.

Rubbish.

They also are dealing with 25 children all at once all day.

I deal with alot bigger children everyday.

--

Teachers, once done their first year, which is likely a struggle with building their lessons plans, really have little outside of the class work. Everyone does this, work doesn't go 8:00-5:00 everyday.

Marking tests? I'm not that long out of high school, and I can tell you that in my graduating year, all of my core class tests were multiple choice, computer graded. Teachers don't mark anymore, don't kid yourself.

The occasional essay marking takes a few hours. That's only 3 or 4 hours per couple of months? Yikes. They must be absolutely crushed with the burden.

Teachers are adequately (if not over) paid and don't need to whine anymore about their status or what not.

Politicans are overpaid? Perhaps, they grant themselves raises. But when dealing with politicans, I like to see somewhat qualifed people in there. Offering a pitance to some of these guys is too much to give up from the private sector. It's about attracting the right people. If we are talking about Federal MP's, they spend most of the year away from their family. That's a big sacrifice. Teachers on the other hand, are rather committed to their line of work from day one, so the attraction affect isn't a big deal. Most of their educations are rather useless outside of education anyways.

[gc1765]

Politicans are overpaid? Perhaps, they grant themselves raises. But when dealing with politicans, I like to see somewhat qualifed people in there. Offering a pitance to some of these guys is too much to give up from the private sector.

There are plenty of qualified people interested in going into politics. Besides, it's not like politicians have to be bright in order to come up with brilliant policies....they just have to know what is popular.

[Hydraboss]

Okay, so the argument seems to be revolving around hours of work. Teachers want pay equity with nurses? Hmmm...time to do a little math experiment.

Teacher (10 years experience, 4 years education) makes $80093/year and works 866.4 hours/year. Let's say that that teacher actually works 2016 hours/year. That would give him an hourly rate of $39.73/hour. Same nurse (10 years experience, 4 years education) makes $34.25/hour (dayshift, non-weekend).

Seems pretty equitable to me.

Except, maybe, for the fact that nurses work 12 hour shifts, some nights, some weekends, some stat holidays, etc. AND......if we extrapolate the nurses earnings at $34.25/hour X 2016 hours/year, we end up with gross earnings of $69048. Remember, the teacher makes $80093.

Anyone here want to argue that teachers work the equivalent of 11.17 hours/day? That's what the math says: 2016/year divided by 180.5 required days of work = 11.17 hours/day.

THAT is not pay equity with nurses. And incidentally, I feel that nurses are overpaid, and my wife is one.

[sideshow]

LOL! Your math is bang on, and that is the point-equity has already been achieved. But nurses overpaid? Oh my! The things that I have seen them have to do I think most in society would not want. Not all of them, but many have to deal with some pretty gross circumstances. At this point in time, I feel that nurses are adequately compensated-for a job well done.

[Remiel]

The nurse gets paid overtime wages, do the not, as well as the same stat holiday bonuses as everyone else? While the teacher does not.

Also, the teacher has a five year education, not four.

[Hydraboss]

The nurse gets paid overtime wages, do the not, as well as the same stat holiday bonuses as everyone else? While the teacher does not.

Nurses get overtime pay if they work more than full time hours. The 12 hour shifts are at straight time as per the UNA CBA. They do receive double time on stat holidays, but they must work them.

Also, the teacher has a five year education, not four.

Wrong. The minimum required is a four year degree. That is why their CBA's do not have numbers for a five year education.

But nurses overpaid? Oh my!

Come on, this is a great source of personal enjoyment for me. My wife is an anti-union union nurse, and I am an anti-union oilfield worker. You should hear some of the conversations we have!!! I tell her to quit being such an overpaid, underworked whiner. By the way, I don't suggest this with a wife that is of Irish and Scottish heritage (red hair and all).

[sideshow]

Just out of curiosity, what is your problem with, and what is your wife's problem with the union(s)? Do you feel that you would be better off without a union? And if so, how would that be since you feel your wife is overpaid?

Oh, and I hope you don't tell her that too close to bed time-a couch is never as comfortable as a bed.

[Hydraboss]

Although this is a thread drift...

My wife and pretty much every single nursing friend of hers believe that the union does nothing for them except cost them an armload in union dues. In negotiations, the union reps drop any and all concerns that the nurses have, and chase the money. In day to day life on the floor, the union is impotent in getting action on grievences if they even bother to file them. And what pisses them off the most......the useless nurses that nearly kill patients are never disciplined and hide behind the union when called to answer for their actions.

In society today, there is absolutely no need for a nursing union. The simple fact is, they cannot practice as nurses unless they are part of the union. No dues - no RN registration.

Me...I just hate unions.

[gc1765]

I have a question....if teachers are really making $60-$100 per hour, why don't you become a teacher? Do you make this much money?

[geoffrey]

There are plenty of qualified people interested in going into politics. Besides, it's not like politicians have to be bright in order to come up with brilliant policies....they just have to know what is popular.

You need the connections to run a proper government. $50-60k earners don't have 'em.

Just out of curiosity, what is your problem with, and what is your wife's problem with the union(s)? Do you feel that you would be better off without a union? And if so, how would that be since you feel your wife is overpaid?

Oh, and I hope you don't tell her that too close to bed time-a couch is never as comfortable as a bed.

I was forced into a union because of a ridiculous CBA that wouldn't allow me professional status in a professional position because I hadn't finished my degree yet. If they were to strike, as they are an irrational bunch of power hungry crazymen, I'd lose alot of money.

That's why I hate unions. They forbid workers from negotiating privately, they hurt business. If my boss thinks I'm worth more (I took a slight paycut because of the union paybands), tough shit, you do what the union tells you to do.

I'd also cross the picketline in a heartbeat. Kick my ass, slash my tires, whatever, I'll take my salary and the respect of my managers over a bunch of union rednecks anyday.

You see, unions can't function without the strong armed coercion against those that dissent. They are far worse in limiting bargining power than pre-union. I have no power to negogiate or change my contract, where as when I had professional status, I'd be able to make things flexible for myself whenever.

Trust me, when I finish school, I won't think for a second before putting in the stop payment on the union dues. Unions have lowered my personal standard of living signficantly, and my economic freedom is severly infringed upon by their existence and strong armed tactics.

[gc1765]

You need the connections to run a proper government. $50-60k earners don't have 'em.

How so?

[geoffrey]

How so?

You need connected people for a government to function. Government interacs with business everyday, you need to know who has the power and how to manipulate that for your party's and the country's advantage.

Not many $50-60k earners likely have speedails for bank execs that can manipulate behind the scenes to acheive your governments goals, on the ATM's issue. I'm sure the roughly $500-700k a year salaried VP of Law for Standard Life Financial Mr. Maxime Bernier knows a few. Or Mr. Emerson in forestry? You don't think Bernier's power and influence in the banking sector helps the government acheive it's policy goals. Emerson's in forestry. Just as in the Liberal party you have many corporate power brokers in cabinet.... again, Emerson, John McCallum (Chief Economist, RBC) being two prime examples.

The big industry guns and former execs are needed for your government to push it's agenda.

To make things happen fast, you need to know who calls the real shots. You learn that by being high up in industry, not by any other means.

[gc1765]

You need connected people for a government to function. Government interacs with business everyday, you need to know who has the power and how to manipulate that for your party's and the country's advantage.

I'm sure the PM would make contacts fast. I'm sure business leaders are just as eager to make contacts with the PM.

[geoffrey]

I'm sure the PM would make contacts fast. I'm sure business leaders are just as eager to make contacts with the PM.

Contacts made in 5 minutes aren't really reliable. The last thing we really want is a lineup of execs when the PM desperately needs them. What is he willing to give away to get them on side?

When your already friends with industry, you don't give up as much.

[sideshow]

There are plenty of qualified people interested in going into politics. Besides, it's not like politicians have to be bright in order to come up with brilliant policies....they just have to know what is popular.

You need the connections to run a proper government. $50-60k earners don't have 'em.

Just out of curiosity, what is your problem with, and what is your wife's problem with the union(s)? Do you feel that you would be better off without a union? And if so, how would that be since you feel your wife is overpaid?

Oh, and I hope you don't tell her that too close to bed time-a couch is never as comfortable as a bed.

I was forced into a union because of a ridiculous CBA that wouldn't allow me professional status in a professional position because I hadn't finished my degree yet. If they were to strike, as they are an irrational bunch of power hungry crazymen, I'd lose alot of money.

That's why I hate unions. They forbid workers from negotiating privately, they hurt business. If my boss thinks I'm worth more (I took a slight paycut because of the union paybands), tough shit, you do what the union tells you to do.

I'd also cross the picketline in a heartbeat. Kick my ass, slash my tires, whatever, I'll take my salary and the respect of my managers over a bunch of union rednecks anyday.

You see, unions can't function without the strong armed coercion against those that dissent. They are far worse in limiting bargining power than pre-union. I have no power to negogiate or change my contract, where as when I had professional status, I'd be able to make things flexible for myself whenever.

Trust me, when I finish school, I won't think for a second before putting in the stop payment on the union dues. Unions have lowered my personal standard of living signficantly, and my economic freedom is severly infringed upon by their existence and strong armed tactics.

I wont even touch this one-so many misconceptions I would get RSI responding.

[geoffrey]

I wont even touch this one-so many misconceptions I would get RSI responding.

Please point out my misconceptions rather than do a drive by smear. If your going to comment, put up or shut up.

I'm prepared to defend any of the arugments I've set forth above.

[sideshow]

I was forced into a union (no you werent-you voluntarily took a job-if you dont like the rules, look somewhere else) because of a ridiculous CBA (ridiculous to who? the majority voted on it, so that must mean the majority does not believe it is ridiculous)that wouldn't allow me professional status in a professional position because I hadn't finished my degree yet. If they were to strike, as they are an irrational bunch of power hungry crazymen(according to who-you, the bitter guy without a degree?-once again, an emotional, not intellectual statement), I'd lose alot of money.

That's why I hate unions. They forbid workers from negotiating privately, they hurt business(prove it. business seems to do quite well it seems. look at CNs profits. billions). If my boss thinks I'm worth more (read, you kiss ass, no boss pays more than they have to)(I took a slight paycut because of the union paybands), tough shit, you do what the union tells you to do(the union doesnt tell you to do anything-a contract is negotiated between the union, on the employees behalf and the employer).

I'd also cross the picketline in a heartbeat. Kick my ass, slash my tires, whatever, I'll take my salary and the respect of my managers over a bunch of union rednecks(once again, bias shown, and prove that they are rednecks) anyday.

You see, unions can't function without the strong armed coercion against those that dissent(prove this statement. what authority do you have? have you studied labour history? have you been involved in the collective bargaining process? or just watch a lot of Fox News?). They are far worse in limiting bargining power than pre-union(you are obviously very ignorant of the facts historically. please study and come back to us). I have no power to negogiate or change my contract, where as when I had professional status, I'd be able to make things flexible for myself whenever.(if you are such a professional, and so employable and everyone wants to pay you more money but the big bad unions keep you down, why not sell your services elsewhere? you are in great demand are you not?)

Trust me, when I finish school, I won't think for a second before putting in the stop payment on the union dues(if you are in a non union environment you can do this. excepting for religious reasons, you are required (the Rand formula ) to pay the dues-such is life). Unions have lowered my personal standard of living signficantly(prove this statement-you havent even finished school yet), and my economic freedom is severly infringed upon by their existence and strong armed tactics.(once again, would love to see some proof other than a misguided tangent)

[geoffrey]

I was forced into a union (no you werent-you voluntarily took a job-if you dont like the rules, look somewhere else) because of a ridiculous CBA (ridiculous to who? the majority voted on it, so that must mean the majority does not believe it is ridiculous)that wouldn't allow me professional status in a professional position because I hadn't finished my degree yet. If they were to strike, as they are an irrational bunch of power hungry crazymen(according to who-you, the bitter guy without a degree?-once again, an emotional, not intellectual statement), I'd lose alot of money.

I had the job as a non-union professional before the union decided to throw a hissy fit over it. You see great offers from the company for raises, over industry standards (like 6 or 7% a year) and rejection, rejection, rejection. Let me negoiate my own pay like I did before and I'd be done in 20 minutes or less.

That's why I hate unions. They forbid workers from negotiating privately, they hurt business(prove it. business seems to do quite well it seems. look at CNs profits. billions). If my boss thinks I'm worth more (read, you kiss ass, no boss pays more than they have to)(I took a slight paycut because of the union paybands), tough shit, you do what the union tells you to do(the union doesnt tell you to do anything-a contract is negotiated between the union, on the employees behalf and the employer).

Or how about you look at the 33,000 related industry jobs lost because of the CN strike. Arrogant, ignorant fools.

And no, I don't have to kiss ass, I know what I'm doing and my boss wants to keep me at this company instead of wandering over to oil and gas for massive raise. Can't do that because I'm in a union.

I have the ability to negoiate my own contract, a much more favourable one, pre-union. Now I have to go with some peice of crap deal. Oh well, not too long now.

I'd also cross the picketline in a heartbeat. Kick my ass, slash my tires, whatever, I'll take my salary and the respect of my managers over a bunch of union rednecks(once again, bias shown, and prove that they are rednecks) anyday.

Because the threat of such action is all that prevents people from crossing. Any rational person will take their salary over some $10 a day picket line duty pay.

(prove this statement. what authority do you have? have you studied labour history? have you been involved in the collective bargaining process? or just watch a lot of Fox News?)[/b].

Yup, actually I have taken a few labour negoiation and collective barginning courses. And a full big one year course in employment and human resources law. I'm no human resources/labour relations professor, but I'm far more educated on the topic than most.

They are far worse in limiting bargining power than pre-union(you are obviously very ignorant of the facts historically. please study and come back to us).

Sure, if I worked in 1700's conditions where I had to change the bobbins without proper machine guards, I'd see your point. The system is now setup though through labour/safety laws that prevent the abuse of employees.

I have no power to negogiate or change my contract, where as when I had professional status, I'd be able to make things flexible for myself whenever.

(if you are such a professional, and so employable and everyone wants to pay you more money but the big bad unions keep you down, why not sell your services elsewhere? you are in great demand are you not?)

I am, I have two outstanding open offers from oil and gas. But right now I'm on a fantastic project that I want to finish up with first. I am committed to the managers of my company, I made that commitment when I signed a highly lucrative contract with them. It's not their fault the union pulled out some small print rule from their book. As soon as I finish up school, I'll be back in professional status with my old, better, contract.

I'm sure the unions wherever I went would try to hold me back as well. They hate to see people get paid what they negoiate themselves, when it's far far better than the CBA.

Trust me, when I finish school, I won't think for a second before putting in the stop payment on the union dues(if you are in a non union environment you can do this. excepting for religious reasons, you are required (the Rand formula ) to pay the dues-such is life). Unions have lowered my personal standard of living signficantly(prove this statement-you havent even finished school yet), and my economic freedom is severly infringed upon by their existence and strong armed tactics.(once again, would love to see some proof other than a misguided tangent)

I made more pre-unionisation (cost me about $400/month), I had more flexibility in my work. I may not have finished school, but I've been working in professional level positions in my field for quite some time. I make a considerable income (quite above the national average). I'm not a $10hr labourer here. I have no reason, nor does anyone else I work with, to be in a union.