LeviF Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 And their asshat parents who just can't understand why little Johnny is a maniacal little hellion with the attention span of a mayfly, but are sure it's the teacher's fault. That's what's always gotten me, the "YOU failed my child" mentality. I can't think of one teacher that actually wants any student to fail (well, except for my senior year physics teacher, but that's a different story ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 Probably the civil servants that waste time on the internet when they should be monitoring the locks. This is where I tell you that you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground. You are going purley on what you think should happen. Your conculsions are far off the mark. But they are monitoring the lock. So what exactly should they be doing that is not getting done? And how is that going to save money? Good thing I took annual leave today... Sorry I am a bit late... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 However, there is another side to the coin: How many people want to move their family fourteen times chasing jobs, deal with just plain awful student situations almost weekly--from guns to dead pigs hoisted on the high school flag pole, be directed by Boards of Education w/ their heads up their collective a$$e$, suffer the humiliation of parent attacks in public, deal with unions that couldn't care less about their members primary work responsibilities, juggle mind-boggling educational and social missions just because they are the current rage.... Life is hard! Many will do it for 80k and do a better job! We are paying for these dolts (administrators) education, plain and simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 Most government employees have defined contribution plans already. The pensions are just added gravy. But I also pay into my pension plan. My wife is a public library director that is employed through the village (it is a village library, not a separate library district)... She is IMRF and kicks into that plan. That leads me to another point... She is doing more than village managers and superintendents and making only a 1/4 of what these fats cats are making... It is a fair salary considering the 10's of miilions budget and the 60 or so people under her. No way should these people be making 1/4+ million dollars a year AND colelct a pension... For what they do, 80 to 100k AND a pension sounds fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 I'm not anti-defined-benefit plans. I'm anti peaying these people too much. Teachers and administrators earn full-year salaries for part-year work. In most districts, it's 180 days of work negotiated into the contract. Make teachers and students go year-round. Make them EARN pensions. If you're not supporting pensions, would you agree to retirement insurance? Problem with contributory plans as a primary method of funding retirement is that most people are idiots and can't manage the investments on their own, and can, consequently experience disasters on par with 2008. Exactly! Like Chef said, pensions are the gravy for taking less in annual pay and job security... Hasn't that been the case historically?... When did it get flipped flopped? Not they get they big bicks, job security, AND a huge pension! For some the term "poor/frugal pensioner" has been thrown out the window. Sorry for not migrating these into one post... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 Dealing with your children.....could never pay me enough. You know what is worse? Drunk boaters... Every idiot seems to seek the water for their enjoyment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keukasmallies Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 A great thing about upper level public school administration jobs in NYS is that the current incumbents are retiring in droves. That makes for beau coup openings, so get qualified, fill out those applications and get on the twelve month, non-tenure track, gravy train. No union dues, fine working conditions, pleasant surroundings, so...come on down.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 A great thing about upper level public school administration jobs in NYS is that the current incumbents are retiring in droves. That makes for beau coup openings, so get qualified, fill out those applications and get on the twelve month, non-tenure track, gravy train. No union dues, fine working conditions, pleasant surroundings, so...come on down.... What they (the states) should do is all collectively lower the pay for these jobs to something reasonable for what they do and their responsilibity they undertake... And knowing they will collect a pension. I mean really, the Baby-Boomers of the past have jacked these (and others) markets way up when it comes to pay. Those Baby-Boomer will be dropping off like flies soon. Now is the time to get back to common sense and lower the salaries. Like I said... About IL and Chicago Heights... There is a residency clause in that town. I can't imagine making a 1/4 mil and living in that town... The town literally borders and serves one of the poorest communites in the nation! It would be like going to Belize to retire... They gotta be living like kings! It is such a shame because that school district is broke and doing poorly... While these fat cats reap personal pay rewards. Every little bit helps... And what we need are a lot more self effacing administrators. It sends a bad message to the taxpayers... And to Tom: I am the first one to agree that me talking on the internet at work is just the same (even know I busted your balls above)... Yet, I am still making chump change AND doing twice as much work! The image problem starts at the top! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted June 25, 2010 Share Posted June 25, 2010 Looks like spending money in a good way does accomplish some things. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/25/educatio...l?th&emc=th If this was a defense program no one would say a word, and congress would probably increase the funding on it just because, but to help our young, especially urban youths, and its way too expensive. Locke High represents both the opportunities and challenges of the Obama administration’s $3.5 billion effort, financed largely by the economic stimulus bill, to overhaul thousands of the nation’s failing schools. The school has become a mecca for reformers, partly because the Department of Education Web site hails it as an exemplary turnaround effort. But progress is coming at considerable cost: an estimated $15 million over the planned four-year turnaround, largely financed by private foundations. That is more than twice the $6 million in federal turnaround money that the Department of Education has set as a cap for any single school. Skeptics say the Locke experience may be too costly to replicate. “When people hear we spent $15 million, they say, ‘You’re insane,’ ” said Marco Petruzzi, chief executive of Green Dot Public Schools, the nonprofit charter school group that has remade Locke. “But when you look closely, you see it’s not crazy.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted June 25, 2010 Share Posted June 25, 2010 Looks like spending money in a good way does accomplish some things. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/25/educatio...l?th&emc=th Sure. All we have to do is find an additional $5k per student annually and we can instill a little discipline and paint some walls. If this was a defense program no one would say a word, and congress would probably increase the funding on it just because, but to help our young, especially urban youths, and its way too expensive. Bull. Everyone knows DoD is rife with graft and corruption - just like every other government program. You libs just love to pick and choose your pets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted June 25, 2010 Share Posted June 25, 2010 Looks like spending money in a good way does accomplish some things. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/25/educatio...l?th&emc=th If this was a defense program no one would say a word, and congress would probably increase the funding on it just because, but to help our young, especially urban youths, and its way too expensive. That's great. They cleaned it up, fixed some lights, got rid of the graffiti, hired some security all good things. But did throwing money, and a lot of money, increase the students test scores? Not really. I'd like to see an accounting breakdown of where all that money went. And I'd also like to see how involved the parents were is this transformation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted June 25, 2010 Share Posted June 25, 2010 Sure. All we have to do is find an additional $5k per student annually and we can instill a little discipline and paint some walls. Bull. Everyone knows DoD is rife with graft and corruption - just like every other government program. You libs just love to pick and choose your pets. Damn right! I'd rather "waste" money making sure these kids have safe, decent schooling than throwing it at some neato new bomb for blowing up some village in Afganistan. No argument there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted June 25, 2010 Share Posted June 25, 2010 That's great. They cleaned it up, fixed some lights, got rid of the graffiti, hired some security all good things. But did throwing money, and a lot of money, increase the students test scores? Not really. I'd like to see an accounting breakdown of where all that money went. And I'd also like to see how involved the parents were is this transformation. Not yet,but did you notice a whole lot more kids were comming to school now that the place was safe? That's results that make a difference. Institutions performing that poorly in our own country because of a lack of resources is totally unacceptable. Undereducating these kids now only means we pay as a society later in lack of productivity and in incarceration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted June 25, 2010 Share Posted June 25, 2010 Damn right! I'd rather "waste" money making sure these kids have safe, decent schooling than throwing it at some neato new bomb for blowing up some village in Afganistan. No argument there The issue with schools is rarely money. Thanks for the ridiculous strawman, really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted June 25, 2010 Share Posted June 25, 2010 Not yet,but did you notice a whole lot more kids were comming to school now that the place was safe? That's results that make a difference. Institutions performing that poorly in our own country because of a lack of resources is totally unacceptable. Undereducating these kids now only means we pay as a society later in lack of productivity and in incarceration. Well keep me posted on when those test score rise considerably. An awful lot of money to put lipstick on a pig. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted June 25, 2010 Share Posted June 25, 2010 Not yet,but did you notice a whole lot more kids were comming to school now that the place was safe? That's results that make a difference. Institutions performing that poorly in our own country because of a lack of resources is totally unacceptable. Undereducating these kids now only means we pay as a society later in lack of productivity and in incarceration. Maybe you should join them, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts