Pay Teachers Now
Especially because we might not/probably won't/surely won't have the money later.
Joel Klein breaks down what's wrong with how teacher pay and pension are divided in the WSJ:
...While defined-benefit pensions sound good in theory--retirees should have security for their later years--they actually create incentives that impede hiring and keeping the best teachers.To begin with, these pension systems make the total compensation package much too back-loaded: Pay in the early years is needlessly low, so we lose good people who don't find the generous benefits at the end worth the lifetime commitment.
Today in New York City, for example, the average annual per-teacher compensation is more than $110,000. The salary portion is $71,000, and the pension portion is $23,000. (The rest is for health insurance, FICA and other benefits.) A mix that was more typical of what exists in the private sector would help us attract more qualified people into teaching--and keep them there during the first five years, when we traditionally lose a third or more.
Here is an example of what that means. New York City's starting salary for teachers is $45,000, and the increases in the early years are low. If instead we started teachers at $52,000 or $55,000, gave them bigger increases in the early years, and paid for it by reducing their pensions, we would attract and keep better teachers.
...On the other hand, because employees typically get a significant lifetime pension only after working 25 or 30 years, there comes a point at which almost no one leaves the system. In New York, few teachers leave after 10 years. Quite a few of these senior teachers admit they're burned out, or would want to try something else, but they stay simply because they cannot afford to forego the pension. Given that these teachers are already tenured, moreover, it's virtually impossible to remove them. This is not a good way to get the teachers that children need in our classrooms.
I think it makes a lot of sense.
I've heard the average teacher career is 5 years. Forget where I heard that. Ed school, maybe.
NicoleK at January 10, 2011 8:04 AM
Would be clearer if gave comparable numbers private sector.
I know how much it is for mine 10% but not for others overall.
so a teacher making 110,000 gets a 71,000 salary and 23,000 in to pension.
A private sector worker, making 110,000 gets a ? 93,000 salary and 11,000 put into retirement.
True it gives you some disincentive to stay in owhen you just start, and to hang on once you have hit the relatively short half way point. 30 yrs is a very short retirement time.
But some of this is the teachers unions choice as a wayof hiding how much they are really being paid. Like when Iacoca worked for a $1 salary, but was also being given stock options worth millions.
Joe at January 10, 2011 9:33 AM
I've heard the average teacher career is 5 years.
Yes, the attrition rate among new teachers is unusually high in comparison to other professions. Though I don't know whether this results in a 5 year average career length.
Some of this is likely due to dissatisfaction w/ compensation, but it's also impacted by a general frustration w/ teaching, a tendency for teachers to be women who later leave to have children, and 'natural' turnover.
Realistically teachers are paid about what they're worth. You have to keep in mind that teachers don't work a full work year. They work a short day, and a short year. When you adjust their salaries for the actual amount of work that they do, their compensation is in line with similar roles in the private sector.
jerome at January 10, 2011 9:58 AM
"To begin with, these pension systems make the total compensation package much too back-loaded"
It's kind of a corollary to the old saying about youth being wasted on the young. A living wage wasted on the dying?
smurfy at January 10, 2011 10:12 AM
When I was teaching, I usually worked from about 6:30 am to 6pm. The actual school day was approx. 7:30 to 2:30, but then there was photocopying, grading, meeting parents, lesson planning, etc. In one school I worked at we had to teach afterschool activities as well.
Tell me exactly how is that a short day?
Summers, yes, in the beginning you have them off. Had I stayed longer in the field, I would have had to do summer training stuff, though.
You're right about the children thing, given that teachers are mostly middle-class white women.
You're also right about the frustration. I was happier as a horribly paid adjunct at a college (I basically became a housewife whose hobby was teaching college, that is how badly adjunct professors are paid) than as a moderately badly paid teacher at a high school. Of course, I couldn't have been an adjunct if I wasn't married.
NicoleK at January 10, 2011 12:07 PM
OK Nicole, so you're claiming that teachers actually work an 11.5 hour day? Really? That sounds like bullshit. Why the hell would anyone take a job where they had to work for that long each day?
Whenever I hear teachers try to defend their pay, they go to the same sort of BS. Oh No! We don't work less, we actually work more than everyone, twice as much, three times!!
I don't buy it. Sorry.
elza at January 10, 2011 1:02 PM
A school trustee I know who negotiates with the teachers union says they're the ones who keep entry level pay low. Any raises are spread across the board, so the people on top will be happy. The grunts at the bottom don't count, and yeah they might quit anyway.
So when there is increased funding the result is not as significant as people would think.
carol at January 10, 2011 1:58 PM
I have four friends with Masters in Education, all school teachers who quit to be stay-at-home moms.
The last one, a teacher in her early 30s in NYC, did the math and realized she was bringing home $50 a week after child care and work-related expenses, and she and her husband decided it wasn't worth it. If salaries were higher on the front end, she might have stayed.
MonicaP at January 10, 2011 2:28 PM
Something to consider, if you were to go with this system, is that it's probably going to create a financing gap. If the attrition rate for teachers is high, their pension contributions are subsidizing the general pension pool. They're paying in, but never collecting. So attrition actually funds pension obligations.
If you reduce contributions, and reduce attrition, you're going to further defund pension obligations, because of the weight of existing obligations. Basically the contributions at their modified levels won't be adequate to maintain the system due to the level of funding necessary to service legacy pensions, guaranteed under the existing system. Legacy pensions aren't typically fully financed as it is. They're a major liability for many states.
mel at January 10, 2011 5:12 PM
Shockingly, most teachers put in a lot of hours. I worked from 7:30 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. today. My only break was 45 minutes for lunch. I would have never gotten in to the profession if I had known the hours that I would have to put into my work.
I have only worked four years in the field. This may be part of the problem. Each year I have had a different grade and/or subject to teach, so there is a lot of preparation.
I may sound unusual, but many of my fellow teachers are putting in the same hours.
We have new curriculum this year. One co-worker was only sleeping 2-4 hours at the beginning of the year because she was developing computer presentations to go with the new lesson plans.
We have little or no co-ordination, so teachers are duplicating each other’s work. We are expected to utilize technology to create engaging lessons that cater to our particular students. It takes time and a lot of thought. Before I took this job, I thought that I was a genius and schools needed more intelligent teachers. I have learned the folly of my thinking. I now question my intellect daily.
Jen at January 10, 2011 8:28 PM
Elza, I took the jobs not knowing how long I'd be working. Needless to say, I no longer work as a teacher.
Chalk up one more to quitting to become a housewife!
NicoleK at January 11, 2011 1:09 AM
I taught in public school for nine years. Middle school and high school social studies and industrial maintenance in a career center. Unless you have tried it, you have no idea how long the hours are and how hard the work is. Teaching is a performance art, like acting or performing music. You are not paid only for the time you are on stage, but also for the time you spent to get ready. Sometimes, the on-stage part is the easy part. I would not recommend it as a career. If you really want to be a teacher, go into industrial training. They recognize and pay for results.
ken in sc at January 11, 2011 4:48 PM
Leave a comment