Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
LI schools pay more than NYC schools because they want to attract better teachers and administrators. One thing that struck me when looking for a home on LI was how the prices rise and fall with the school district. Take Lynbrook for example. I could tell what school district a house was in not by looking at the address, but on looking at the stats of the house and the price. A Lynbrook house in the Lynbrook district is listed for more than a Lynbrook house in the East Rockaway, Valley Stream or Malverne districts. Same for Rockville Centre with the Oceanside, Baldwin or Malverne districts. Our schools are our pride and joy. That will always be a major advantage to LI.
NYC schools pay less because the Department of Education is huge and has to hire a lot more of everyone -- teachers, administrators, maintenance workers, etc. Every teacher in NYC works on the same payscale -- those who are fighting an uphill battle in low-income areas with parents and kids who don't have the time to care, and those who work in Bayside/Douglaston who are essentially working in LI schools without the LI paycheck. As an attorney who represents suburban school districts, I have to say that the issues that the NYCDOE has to deal with on a day to day basis are more complicated that even the most skilled LI administrators at the best LI districts can fathom. I would not want the Chancellor's job. (OK, maybe I would).
LI schools pay more than private schools because private schools have to make everything work with only the money that they get from tuition and from donations. Public schools may get additional funding outside of what they get from the taxpayers. If you pay $20,000 in private school tuition, that $20,000 may pay the cost to keep the lights on in the building. The tuition that your kid's best friend paid might pay the salary of the person who empties the wastebaskets. The tuition that another kid in your kid's class paid might pay the salary of the person who keeps track of who paid their tuition. Maybe another kid in your kid's class is there on scholarship. That kid's not helping to pay for anything. And so on.
Really, I mean think about it.
I was answering someone else who said that the entire reason for the excessive compensation paid to public school teachers on LI is the cost of living and without this excessive compensation we would not be able to get teachers to work on LI. I disagreed with that reason. As you yourself noted, the private schools don't have to pay excessive compensation on LI to get teachers to work for them, and since parents are paying EXTRA to send their kids to private school, do you think they pay all this extra money so their kids are taught by incompetents? No. The teachers in private schools are performing their jobs satisfactorily or the parents would vote with their dollars and move their kids to another school. So why should the taxpayers have to pay excessively for public school teachers? The sole reason: the teachers' union being in bed with the school boards, administration and the politicians. They have lobbying money; the taxpayers don't. You're an attorney working for school districts. You never heard of all the cronyism and the outright lying and cheating being done? How about that scandal where attorneys from private firms were being falsely categorized as school district employees so they can unjustly eat at the trough of taxpayer-funded pensions? How about the scandal about the school board member in a LI district who just happened to create a small private company in order to get funding from the school they were on the board for to the tune of $500K a year ... all on the backs of the taxpayers?
If you really think the excessive compensation is because they want to attract the best and the brightest, then you should talk to people who have been complaining for years about INCOMPETENT teachers that are never fired. Even when you don't want your kid in their class, the principal tells parents they MUST have at least one of their kids in the dud teacher's class ... a subsequent kid doesn't have to. Both twingles and OhBeeHave can attest to this as they both live(d) in different school districts and had to have 1 of their kids subjected to a known for years dud teacher and their kids ended up needing extra help to catch up the next year. So does that sound like a "best and the brightest" situation? Or more like a cronyism situation where they will keep the union member in place no matter how poorly they perform their job? Another thing you will see a lot of the same last names in teaching, administration and many husband wife or parent sibling groupings in LI public schools. Why? How are all these related people in the same school districts? Because it's WHO you know, not WHAT you know when it comes to getting a teaching job on LI in large part. Don't even go there about the best and brightest either when it comes to layoffs. They will layoff the person with the least seniority who could be a genius instead of the known and talked about DUD teacher with more seniority every single time. Don't even go there when it comes to raises, etc. The raises are UNIFORM no matter how good or how bad a teacher performs their job. So please get out of the dreamworld where LI's schools provide excess compensation for the "best and the brightest." It is not true and who could look at how they actually run things and come to that conclusion. It is all a result of union cronyism.
As for the question of: "So how should public schools on LI compensate teachers?" I still say it's somewhere in the middle of what private school teachers make and what public school teachers make. I'd like to hear other people's opinions on that.
I was answering someone else who said that the entire reason for the excessive compensation paid to public school teachers on LI is the cost of living and without this excessive compensation we would not be able to get teachers to work on LI. I disagreed with that reason. As you yourself noted, the private schools don't have to pay excessive compensation on LI to get teachers to work for them, and since parents are paying EXTRA to send their kids to private school, do you think they pay all this extra money so their kids are taught by incompetents? No. The teachers in private schools are performing their jobs satisfactorily or the parents would vote with their dollars and move their kids to another school. So why should the taxpayers have to pay excessively for public school teachers? The sole reason: the teachers' union being in bed with the school boards, administration and the politicians. They have lobbying money; the taxpayers don't. You're an attorney working for school districts. You never heard of all the cronyism and the outright lying and cheating being done? How about that scandal where attorneys from private firms were being falsely categorized as school district employees so they can unjustly eat at the trough of taxpayer-funded pensions? How about the scandal about the school board member in a LI district who just happened to create a small private company in order to get funding from the school they were on the board for to the tune of $500K a year ... all on the backs of the taxpayers?
If you really think the excessive compensation is because they want to attract the best and the brightest, then you should talk to people who have been complaining for years about INCOMPETENT teachers that are never fired. Even when you don't want your kid in their class, the principal tells parents they MUST have at least one of their kids in the dud teacher's class ... a subsequent kid doesn't have to. Both twingles and OhBeeHave can attest to this as they both live(d) in different school districts and had to have 1 of their kids subjected to a known for years dud teacher and their kids ended up needing extra help to catch up the next year. So does that sound like a "best and the brightest" situation? Or more like a cronyism situation where they will keep the union member in place no matter how poorly they perform their job? Another thing you will see a lot of the same last names in teaching, administration and many husband wife or parent sibling groupings in LI public schools. Why? How are all these related people in the same school districts? Because it's WHO you know, not WHAT you know when it comes to getting a teaching job on LI in large part. Don't even go there about the best and brightest either when it comes to layoffs. They will layoff the person with the least seniority who could be a genius instead of the known and talked about DUD teacher with more seniority every single time. Don't even go there when it comes to raises, etc. The raises are UNIFORM no matter how good or how bad a teacher performs their job. So please get out of the dreamworld where LI's schools provide excess compensation for the "best and the brightest." It is not true and who could look at how they actually run things and come to that conclusion. It is all a result of union cronyism.
As for the question of: "So how should public schools on LI compensate teachers?" I still say it's somewhere in the middle of what private school teachers make and what public school teachers make. I'd like to hear other people's opinions on that.
So are you saying about 75K (before federal and state [and property and sales] taxes)?
Unfortunately, sneakyvegan has a very good point. As long as there are places where residents are willing to pay teachers and admins those unrealistic salaries no matter what, there will always be a job waiting for them and the districts paying less are stuck with the less capable. Earlier this year, Bronxville's librarian left for Larchmont because she was unhappy about getting a $10K bonues instead of $20K promised to her earlier. Their residents have been told by the teachers and admins that they will lose the best of them if compensation is cut and residents have bought the warning.
Private schools are different. While they pay less, they also offer teachers a lot of freedom in conducting the lesson plan as well as admins to implement their own policies. They can also be selective with the kinds of students they admit. That's why good teachers in private schools are willing to settle for lower pay and benefits.
On LI, the job protection of the teachers' unions can also serve to protect the worst of the bunch. I am sure Bronxville will be able to attract a librarian who is just as good as the one who left. Is Bronxville actually doing something about their out-of-control school taxes? I remember reading a NY Times article about how the residents of Bronxville were complaining about their school taxes and wanted changes made in how the school compensated teachers. Did you read that article?
As for private schools and teachers "willing to accept lower pay and benefits," yes, what you are saying is reasonable. But note they are not considering themselves as being offered pay so low that they cannot afford to take the teaching job. The supporters of the status quo on LI think that we HAVE TO pay EXCESSIVE compensation to public school teachers or nobody competent will even be bothered to take the job.
I was answering someone else who said that the entire reason for the excessive compensation paid to public school teachers on LI is the cost of living and without this excessive compensation we would not be able to get teachers to work on LI. I disagreed with that reason. As you yourself noted, the private schools don't have to pay excessive compensation on LI to get teachers to work for them, and since parents are paying EXTRA to send their kids to private school, do you think they pay all this extra money so their kids are taught by incompetents? No. The teachers in private schools are performing their jobs satisfactorily or the parents would vote with their dollars and move their kids to another school. So why should the taxpayers have to pay excessively for public school teachers? The sole reason: the teachers' union being in bed with the school boards, administration and the politicians. They have lobbying money; the taxpayers don't. You're an attorney working for school districts. You never heard of all the cronyism and the outright lying and cheating being done? How about that scandal where attorneys from private firms were being falsely categorized as school district employees so they can unjustly eat at the trough of taxpayer-funded pensions? How about the scandal about the school board member in a LI district who just happened to create a small private company in order to get funding from the school they were on the board for to the tune of $500K a year ... all on the backs of the taxpayers?
If you really think the excessive compensation is because they want to attract the best and the brightest, then you should talk to people who have been complaining for years about INCOMPETENT teachers that are never fired. Even when you don't want your kid in their class, the principal tells parents they MUST have at least one of their kids in the dud teacher's class ... a subsequent kid doesn't have to. Both twingles and OhBeeHave can attest to this as they both live(d) in different school districts and had to have 1 of their kids subjected to a known for years dud teacher and their kids ended up needing extra help to catch up the next year. So does that sound like a "best and the brightest" situation? Or more like a cronyism situation where they will keep the union member in place no matter how poorly they perform their job? Another thing you will see a lot of the same last names in teaching, administration and many husband wife or parent sibling groupings in LI public schools. Why? How are all these related people in the same school districts? Because it's WHO you know, not WHAT you know when it comes to getting a teaching job on LI in large part. Don't even go there about the best and brightest either when it comes to layoffs. They will layoff the person with the least seniority who could be a genius instead of the known and talked about DUD teacher with more seniority every single time. Don't even go there when it comes to raises, etc. The raises are UNIFORM no matter how good or how bad a teacher performs their job. So please get out of the dreamworld where LI's schools provide excess compensation for the "best and the brightest." It is not true and who could look at how they actually run things and come to that conclusion. It is all a result of union cronyism.
As for the question of: "So how should public schools on LI compensate teachers?" I still say it's somewhere in the middle of what private school teachers make and what public school teachers make. I'd like to hear other people's opinions on that.
Another simplistic argument. Who said "best and brightest"? Not me. I talked about market forces.
Just because some people are willing to work for a low salary doesn't mean that everyone will. Earlier in this thread, I posted about a job posting for a Boston law firm -- $10,000 for a full time attorney position that drew hundreds of applicants. But just because that firm found people willing to apply for that job doesn't mean that hiring a $10,000/year attorney is right for every firm. Some firms want to hire new lawyers just out of law school and don't care if the attorney leaves after 6 months. Some firms want the stability and are willing to offer more so that when they find someone they are comfortable with, they will stick around.
I know private school teachers who are private school teachers because they couldn't get a job in a public school. I don't think that teachers are the reason why parents send their kids to private school. Some parents think it will ensure some kind of "quality control" w/their child's friends. Some parents want their kids to get a religious education. Some parents think their kids will be catered to more in that kind of setting. I don't know. I don't claim to know why people do the things they do. You shouldn't either.
The attorneys that you mentioned (the ones wrongfully listed as district employees) had their careers destroyed, and rightfully so. And I also have suffered with bad teachers, even in LI schools. And, as an attorney, you can be sure that I've seen some of the worst of what the profession has to offer. There are bad seeds in every profession and in every aspect of anyone's life. I don't get how cutting salaries changes that, except that it may make you feel better.
So, I don't know what to tell you. Go to your school board meetings, if you don't already. Get your neighbors together. Make it clear to the board and the administration that you want teachers to be accountable. Vote down your district's budget. Tell your neighbors why they should vote down the budget.
Or you can just be bitter. It sounds like you have a lot of anger. Now, I hate when teachers complain about sissy things as much as anyone else, but I can't for the life of me figure out why teachers are targeted more than any other profession. Hey, at least attorneys kind of deserve it.
Another simplistic argument. Who said "best and brightest"? Not me. I talked about market forces.
Just because some people are willing to work for a low salary doesn't mean that everyone will. Earlier in this thread, I posted about a job posting for a Boston law firm -- $10,000 for a full time attorney position that drew hundreds of applicants. But just because that firm found people willing to apply for that job doesn't mean that hiring a $10,000/year attorney is right for every firm. Some firms want to hire new lawyers just out of law school and don't care if the attorney leaves after 6 months. Some firms want the stability and are willing to offer more so that when they find someone they are comfortable with, they will stick around.
I know private school teachers who are private school teachers because they couldn't get a job in a public school. I don't think that teachers are the reason why parents send their kids to private school. Some parents think it will ensure some kind of "quality control" w/their child's friends. Some parents want their kids to get a religious education. Some parents think their kids will be catered to more in that kind of setting. I don't know. I don't claim to know why people do the things they do. You shouldn't either.
The attorneys that you mentioned (the ones wrongfully listed as district employees) had their careers destroyed, and rightfully so. And I also have suffered with bad teachers, even in LI schools. And, as an attorney, you can be sure that I've seen some of the worst of what the profession has to offer. There are bad seeds in every profession and in every aspect of anyone's life. I don't get how cutting salaries changes that, except that it may make you feel better.
So, I don't know what to tell you. Go to your school board meetings, if you don't already. Get your neighbors together. Make it clear to the board and the administration that you want teachers to be accountable. Vote down your district's budget. Tell your neighbors why they should vote down the budget.
Or you can just be bitter. It sounds like you have a lot of anger. Now, I hate when teachers complain about sissy things as much as anyone else, but I can't for the life of me figure out why teachers are targeted more than any other profession. Hey, at least attorneys kind of deserve it.
You said this exactly:
Quote:
LI schools pay more than NYC schools because they want to attract better teachers and administrators.
So what do you mean by "better?"
Where did I say I want to pay teachers a ridiculously small amount similar to $10K a year for a lawyer? I didn't. Why do you keep trotting that one out? The way I heard it was the law firm would give a $10K base but a very generous commission for bringing in new business, so it wouldn't be "only" $10K a year. And I heard they got something like 30 applications, not 100s. Anyway, for the third or fourth time, I said I think the right pay for teachers is somewhere between what private school teachers make and public school teachers .. not the equivalent of $10K for lawyers. Of course that would attract bad or no teachers.
All I know is if someone thinks lower pay and benefits than what LI public school teachers currently make is bound to attract lousy teachers, then they should look at private school compensation. That is the point I was trying to make but I have to say it 10,000 different ways for it to sink in.
For what we pay teachers on LI, NOBODY should have to suffer with bad teachers.
Here we go with the accusations of "bitter." I am exasperated, not bitter. Cutting compensation or at least not raising compensation 2x a year every single year into infinity (teachers get 2 raises a year) would make me "feel better" because it would be a step in the right direction of controlling runaway property taxes. Do you "get" that?
Teachers are targeted for only one thing in my book -- their excessive cost in the public school system on LI. That is the heart of the problem. I am not complaining about people in the private sector, like attorneys, because they are not a line item on my property tax bill that is costing more than I think they are worth.
Teachers are targeted for only one thing in my book -- their excessive cost in the public school system on LI. That is the heart of the problem. I am not complaining about people in the private sector, like attorneys, because they are not a line item on my property tax bill that is costing more than I think they are worth.
And pharmaceutical CEOs and management salaries are taking money from BOTH your taxes and health insurance. Oil company CEOs and management salaries are taking money from you everytime you pay an exorbant amount to put gas in your car now. Curious, why target teachers when these CEOs and management probably make 100x more money than a LI teacher salary and pension.
And pharmaceutical CEOs and management salaries are taking money from BOTH your taxes and health insurance. Oil company CEOs and management salaries are taking money from you everytime you pay an exorbant amount to put gas in your car now. Curious, why target teachers when these CEOs and management probably make 100x more money than a LI teacher salary and pension.
Believe me, I'm not pleased about that.
That's a whole other problem which we can discuss on "Politics and Other Controversies" as it has to do with national politics and the whole USA, not just LI. If you make a thread to discuss it, please let me know. I can go on and on about the unfair advantage corporations and their lobbyists have over the taxpayers too. It's a similar power story to our local public sector unions.
And pharmaceutical CEOs and management salaries are taking money from BOTH your taxes and health insurance. Oil company CEOs and management salaries are taking money from you everytime you pay an exorbant amount to put gas in your car now. Curious, why target teachers when these CEOs and management probably make 100x more money than a LI teacher salary and pension.
+1
It's not pharmaceutical CEO's who teach our children, it's teachers. Pharmaceutical CEO's do not have to deal with large classrooms full of children, they do not have to put up with aggressive, delusional and sometimes violent parents, their compensation isn't voted by the local general public, they aren't constantly bashed by the taxpayers and Newsday, and they get million dollar bonuses. All things considered, I'd say tax payers are getting a steal with what teachers are paid.
It's not pharmaceutical CEO's who teach our children, it's teachers. Pharmaceutical CEO's do not have to deal with large classrooms full of children, they do not have to put up with aggressive, delusional and sometimes violent parents, their compensation isn't voted by the local general public, they aren't constantly bashed by the taxpayers and Newsday, and they get million dollar bonuses. All things considered, I'd say tax payers are getting a steal with what teachers are paid.
FYI -- the taxpayers do not vote on teacher compensation like they vote on the rest of the school budget. That is determined by the school board and superintendant privately. We just have to pay what they come up with.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
