Janus case

It’s not a motherhood penalty. How can you be expected to be paid the same during the period that you are not working and not earning a company money?

To answer your second question, which has an certain element of truth in specific instances:

https://www.google.com/amp/www.chic...-bias-hiring-0504-biz-20160503-story,amp.html

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc.net/fortune/2014/11/04/hiring-racial-bias

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.na...y-disputes-effects-unconscious-prejudice/amp/

http://www.politifact.com/punditfac...name-resume-50-percent-less-likely-get-respo/

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/04/160426162606.htm

 

Read the articles that I posted and watch the videos. All is explained there.

 

Thanks for doing the research and trying to pick good sources. It's so intimidating to think about reading all those and watching videos, I don't think I'm up to the task this week. I think everyone on this board would advocate equal pay for equal work.

The Janus case is about weakening or dissolving union protections for teachers and other public employees. I'm concerned that the far right SCOUS will rule against teachers.

 

No problem.

I actually think they will rule in favor of teacher unions because Gorsuch likes to read and interpret laws and statutes as they are written and relies on established precedence to make rulings. Plus, the Supreme Court has already ruled in favor of unions before in cases involving fair pay and the beneficiaries of collective bargaining, so it probably will stay for those reasons.

 

I would really encourage people to read Lean In. The author does a much better job than I can of explaining all the ways women are discriminated against in the work place. I do think unions help level the playing field. In Ontario, they actually really work to create equity in really concrete ways for women, minorities, the LGBTQ2S community, etc.

One example of how I still see this inequity in the work place is that women make up far more than 1/2 the teachers in Ontario. They make up far more than 1/2 of the teachers with their Principal's qualification and far more than 1/2 of the teachers with their Supervisory Officer Qualifications and yet, we still see less women in administration (which is not unionized). Until OCT released the stats I always thought maybe there were less women interested in leadership but that's just flat out not the reality. The reality is women want the positions and they just don't get them.

 

Show me evidence for this. Did you poll these women or did someone ask them if they wanted to be principals or supervisors?

gender imbalance in a profession =/= hiring inequity

In the US, there are more female pharmacists than there are male pharmacists and there are more female judges than there are male judges. Also, women dominate the fields of elementary education, nursing, and modeling. Concerning the latter, female models make like seven times what male models make, on average. Does that mean that their male counterparts are being discriminated against because there are more females in those fields or they make more money?

Let’s not use non-sequiturs to form our arguments.

 

FMP - I'm not really interested in arguing or proving anything. You clearly have your mind made up and I have no illusion that there is anything I can say that will change your mind. I will take a moment to answer your question. The statistics as I stated come from the Ontario College of Teachers. The OCT found that far more women are qualified to be Principals and Supervisory Officers then men in the province of Ontario. When the College poled teachers who took these courses, the majority of teachers who took the courses said they took them to get a promotion. The information on how many men to women are Principals, Vice Principals and Supervisory Officers is publicly available in Ontario. There is a disconnect between the ratio of men to women who are qualified and say they want the job and the number of men to women who actually hold the job.

I really posted for the benefit of anyone who is open to thinking about their privilege because I really think at least in Canada that we need to start acknowledging our privilege and that unions have a role to play in leveling the playing field. I have benefited from many aspects of my identify: being cisgendered, being white, being middle class. I acknowledge that my opportunities are not ONLY because of my hard work, skills but also because of my privilege.

 

I don’t want to argue either, but this is a debate so...

And I don’t think there is anything I can say to change your mind. My mind WOULD change if a reputable, repeatable, statistical study came out that said women were being discriminated against in the hiring process and the results were statistically significant. However, I have mountains of data which says to the contrary.

I’m not disagreeing with you that these women are qualified. That much is obvious. I’m not calling into question their experience or credentials and I basically agree with the general premise of the study. However, you are interpreting the results to fit your narrative and that’s what I don’t like. Correlation does not equal causation.

It could very well be that these women didn’t interview well. There could be lurking variables at play here and other confounding variables need to be accounted for.

I think it boils down to this: Whenever there exists a disparity in terms of the gender makeup of a profession, you will probably arrive to the conclusion that discrimination has taken place. Maybe I’m speculating, but it seems like you and some others fallaciously seem to think if the gender breakdown isn’t 1:1, then that equals discrimination, which is absurd. In fact, I just showed you examples of several professions which are female dominated and there is no discrimination involved.

 

Side note, way to go West Virginia teachers!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...eachers-governor-says/?utm_term=.c2e3548a0e14

Is Oklahoma next?

 

Wow, I am excited and happy for the West Virginia public schoolteachers. And thanks for posting the article! It was a great read.

Question: Are they getting just a 5% raise or it is a renewable, yearly 5% raise? A one-time raise kinda sucks, but anything helps I guess.

 

Aw, thanks!

 

I know, I love it!

 

This is great news and I appreciate the link. Interesting read!

Teachers could generate a lot of revenue this way. Maybe now teachers can negotiate their salaries on their own behalves like in the private industry.

 

And then maybe we can all face conditions like they do in those states like Oklahoma and Airzona. That would be the dream. And all so I can put my lil' union dues in my pocket to have a little extra spending cash.

 

Many industries don’t have unions and workers make way more money than us and have better benefits. I like that I can negotiate a higher salary for myself at my current workplace, but public schoolteachers cannot. Why is that?

If unions are doing such a great job, then why are teachers paid so little despite their “efforts”? When teachers strike, the teachers are the ones who cause the change to happen, not the union. I guess they can thank their unions for their measly paychecks.

 

I am compensated very fairly for teaching in my state, and I wouldn't want to change a thing. I will happily continue to pay union dues to ensure that conditions remain as they are.

 

The majority are not, though, and many of those states have strong unions. Some states are atypical, but the common spread is that teachers are still underpaid, even in blue states. Take California, for instance. If you don’t have anything beyond a Bachelors, your salary tops out in the 50k range or below. Yeah, that’s so great, while people with Bachelors degree in the private sector can quickly make beyond that in a FEW years. Great job teachers unions!

 

Do you really think most teachers will be able to negotiate better deals on their own, and that the Board of Education has the time or resources to individually negotiate with each new employee in a larger district?

 

How do middle and large companies do it with their thousands to tens of thousands of employees or more?

 

Heck, I had a coworker at a public school who managed to negotiate a salary difference. It can be done if people work to make it the norm.

 

To answer your first point, I individually negotiated the highest salary increase year to year at my school because I know what I am worth and so does my employer. They initially proposed a $3,000/year raise as we have no “set” salary schedule. (FYI, you can negotiate or use the teacher salary schedule they propose.) This means I would have topped out at $100,000 in year 20, but I wouldn’t back down and said I would accept no less than a $5,000/yr raise (so I’ll max out at the aforementioned amount in year 13). I also have the option to negotiate for lesser incremental salary raises at the end of each year pending performance reviews and test score results, unlike my public school counterparts where once you start on a certain step you’re locked in. Speaking of which, I recently spoke with the principal and board members and they said that they will strongly consider an additional $2,000/yr raise on top of that until 2023 because the minimum wage keeps rising each year in California. (They say this every time for formalities sake, so it means that I will get it and I am stoked.) I’ll still max out at $100,000 but it’s the next few steps closer — no pun intended — over the next couple of years to my making six figures.

I’ve been told by my colleagues that I am less risk averse for asking, but I said the worst they can say is no. What harm is there asking? For my colleagues who are too scared to ask, that’s their loss. I look out for myself, first and foremost.

Would you be able to do that at your public school? Would your teachers union allow that?

We both know the answer.

 

Brilliant!

 

As a new employee? That’s quite common to negotiate starting pay. Once you’re in though, it’s based off salary guides. What makes anyone think all of a sudden teachers will be negotiating these wonderful individual wages and raises when it clearly has not been the case in nonunion states ever? I get a raise every year and top of the line healthcare. I do wish I got paid a little more, but I have a pension and tenure, and I’m currently taking coursework above a masters to earn more money (that my district pays for). In addition, every 3-5 years the union and board negotiate new salary guides, which increases the top pay (so by the time I hit the top, it’ll be much more than it is now.)

 

Teachers have not been allowed to negotiate, for the most part, and I don’t know why. Many public service jobs enable potential employers to negotiate their salary packages not only during the hiring process, but subsequent to being hired following performance reviews. This should be the case for effective and highly effective teachers, heck, even developing teachers whose students show strong positive growth year after year!

 

Right so I don’t think this is really a win for anybody. Maybe the union will work extra hard to keep the customers!!

 

A free market economy is not supposed to be a win-win for everybody. Brain surgeons make what they make because they are in such short supply and very highly skilled. Fry cooks at McDonals do not because they are considered unskilled and are easily replaced. I like the capitalist model and am not concerned if someone does not get a raise if they are a mediocre or horrible teacher, in this instance. At my school, if you continually underperform you’re let go just like you would in the private sector and that’s the way it should be. I am renewed year after year after year because I am exceptional — my employer’s words not mine. We’ve had workers let go half-way through a semester because they were so lousy. That’s their fault not mine.

 

The problem with wanting to love it though is that the numbers aren't accurate -especially since they claim to b representative of all California teachers. In a lower post he claims that teachers with nothing beyond a BA top out in the 50k range which is completely bogus.

I also have a higher base salary than future, and I work in the lowest paying district around. All this to show that private schools really do pay less. Also, to address his claims in a lower post about topping out at 50k-in my district teachers without a masters currently can earn up 100,000 a year. And again, we are the low paying district, but also that number goes up with each contract negotiation.

The real stinker here is that the COL is so high that even earning more than future as a fourth year (63,000 a year base pay) I still have to tutor and do side jobs to get by. I teach home bound instruction and summer school and I barely make ends meet. I would really like to make enough to live off of my base pay. My union is working on it thankfully. If I had 2 nickels to rub together for investments it might get easier-he has very striking claims about his investments paying off in the extreme which I would love but 63,000 a year in Ca is not enough to have money left over for investments.

 

You may think it’s much more, but it’s not really. In case you haven’t noticed, but I like money and talking about it. A lot. And I habitually look up salary schedule after salary schedule in my state and have been doing so for almost 8 years, month after month. (Obsessive, I know, but I can’t help it!) Anyway, the most I’ve seen is a two to four grand increase at the top and the shifting of the other steps by 1-2 grand. In the grand scheme of things — See what I did there? — that does not amount to a whole lot over the course of one’s career.

Due to my negotiating skills, I’m now looking at getting a $7,000/yr increase (the original $5,000 I initially negotiated upon my hiring plus the $2,000/yr bump until the minimum wage increases cease) for the next few years until 2023. This means instead of the $60,000 (I made $55,000 for the 2017-2018 year) I would have gotten next year as a 5th-year teacher, I will now make $62,000, then $69,000, then $76,000, then $83,000, then $90,000, and then back to my original $5,000/yr boost until I hit $100k. This means that I will max out my pay in much less time because I NEGOTIATED a higher salary. I would be making pittance comparably in a public school down the road.

Show me a public school salary schedule that compares with that nationwide and I will concede defeat.

 

I will admit I don’t look at every salary schedule as there are hundreds and hundreds, but I do look up a fair few. I should amend my original statement to this: Oh the ones I’ve examined — at least a hundred different ones over the years — the salaries max in the 50k range with JUST a Bachelors, meaning no additional units. You proceeded to talk about Masters degrees and their impact on one’s salaries. I didn’t.

Yes, I started off much lower than you did, but look how quickly I’m catching up (see my previous post) and I will quickly surpass most teachers eventually, especially teachers who are much more experienced than I am with “strong” unions. I am doing this all by myself. No union was necessary.

 

Future I'm not sure where you are looking in ca - seriously - because I have seen a fair amount also. I keep looking thinking if I relocate to another part of the state I could do better especially as COL varies a lot within the state. I see salaries begining where you say they are ending. Especially if you work in a big city like San Francisco or LA (of course any additional pay is more than made up for in increased COL). I'll admit that Sacramento area teachers are making a bit less but their benefit packages is better so it evens out. All over The state I see pay scales higher than you mention (I admit I don't bother looking in bad/unsafe areas)

So could you possibly name a few of these hundred s of districts where teachers top out at 50k

 

My search is not defined to any particular locale:

Woodland Joint Unified School District
Dixon Unified School District
Yuba City Unified School District
Marysville Joint Unified School District
Fairfield-Suisun Unified School District
Sacramento City Unified School District
Petaluma City Schools
Roseville City School District
Rocklin Unified School District
Elk Grove Unified School District
Berkeley Unified School Districts

Oakland Unified School District (Even though this one makes out at about $68,000, look at the step increases. They stagnate and then plateau rapidly.)

My original comment still stands: Great job teachers unions!

 

Maybe now teachers unions can work a little harder.

 

I gladly tutor in addition to receiving my base salary as I am generating about $30,000 in extra cash each year (this is the average for the last four years). Yes, I have less time to myself, but why would I want to give up that kind of cash — that’s a lot of money! Right now, I make $82,000, which is not good enough in my eyes. Imagine how much I’ll make in the next few years as my business continues.

 

The BA only columns do have less growth-because you can't hold a clear credential in the state with a BA only. Those are intern pay columns. You can't compare intern pay to regular, fully credentialed teacher salaries. The Microsoft/Google/anything intern can't be compared with a full staffer. That's apples to oranges. All credential programs begin after one gets a BA so a teacher with the minimum education would be BA+30. A rigorous program would complete with a lot more. For example I got my preliminary credential with a BA and 54 units. I was BA+60 just by getting my credential and complete my BTSA requirements to clear my credential with nothing extra beyond what was required by the state to get my clear credential. Those who transfer in from states with less requirements might be BA only or BA+15 but they still wouldn't hold a full clear California credential even if they granted them a preliminary (which I think would be questionable with a BA only). They would need to do 2 years of BTSA coursework. Most districts are even doing away with that column on their pay scales since requirements about highly qualified teachers are increasing. School are supposed to be doing everything they cannot to hire those that aren't fully qualified.

Another thing to keep in mind with the figures is average annual incomes for an area. Where I live your base pay in near poverty.

For example In my part of CA you qualify for low income housing if you are a family of 2 and earn 49,00 a year. That means that any single parent earning in the mid 50's is hovering near the poverty line. I'd be surprise to see people topping at out around here at the poverty line.

 

This is fair, but many teachers forgo getting a Masters for some reason and are locked into crappy pay.

And I was willing to start at a lower starting salary, despite being offered in the 50k range at public schools because of the salary growth I would receive at my private school.

Show me a PUBLIC salary schedule that does this, with a Masters + 15 + Clear Credential:

40,000
45,000
50,000
55,000
62,000
69,000
76,000
83,000
90,000
95,000
100,000
.
.
.
100,000 n times

I weighed the opportunity cost and I come out on top. My publicschool teacher friends are flabbergasted at how much I will make eventually and thought I was mad for accepting my base salary of 40,000 with a Masters and credentual, but look who’s laughing now. I am, and all the way to the bank.

 

Look we can’t argue that you have a great job, are happy, and are financially satisfied. Too be honest, it’s an anomaly. But you’re still st the whim of your employer. The majority of private schools are not like this. Many are underpaying their employees and offering minimal benefits. This is honestly the first time I’ve ever heard of such a private school. I have had quite a few friends and acquaintances who have worked in private schools and they don’t tell the same story. A colleague worked for many years at an ideal Californian private school, loved it, was promised many things by their employer, was even sent abroad to do a masters program 100% on the House. Well halfway through the program, new management came in and then didn’t have the money to pay tuition anymore and gave them the choice to either quit the program or pay the rest on their own. They chose to pay the rest and complete it. Then they went through and did a lot of downsizing. Another friend of mine had their pay reduced (along with everyone else) over a certain amount of years to pay for new additions in the school. I’ve had other people I know work for a year or two in private schools and eventually move to public. Not necessarily complaining, but certainly not bragging about where they were. Why do you think that is? Historically, private school teaching is a vocation, and you’re not in it to make much money and you’re certainly not doing it cuz you need the money. I also know someone working at a nice independent school near me and makes significantly less as a high needs teacher. So I dunno. We all are very happy for you and hope for the best, but let’s not pretend it’s like this everywhere in every or even many private schools.

 

I hope the plaintiff wins. I have negotiated contracts in both arenas.

 

Umm ...... the decision was announced on Wednesday on the last day of the term. Alito wrote the majority opinion, if that gives you a hint how it turned out.

 

Until your private school figures out they can hire a brand new teacher who will do the same job for $40,000 and forces you out. You'll have no protections.

 

Yeah, no. I’ve been personally told by the Chairperson of the school board and the head of school that I’m irreplaceable. I’ve heard the same thing by the other school board members and am great friends with a lot of them. And as far as I know, no other staff member has been told this or has been asked numerous times not to leave by the principal and parents.

I have the most supportive administration and parents out there and have been asked to stay until retirement. I’m not going anywhere anytime soon.