Teacher Pay Increases (1 Viewer)

[lengstar]

Originally posted by katie_tully
Holy hell.
This made me laugh, it's a list of why the teachers wan't a pay rise.
The professional commitment of teachers has been stretched to breaking point by, for example:
the intensification of teachers' work
deteriorating physical conditions of work
staggering parent and community expectations
increased student welfare needs and behavioural problems
significantly increased numbers of special needs children
rapid curriculum and technological change with little support
increased assessment and reporting demands
negative changes to the student/teacher relationship because of child protection issues.
Hi, my names Johnny and I got a UAI of 69, I can be a teacher. I did standard english, standard maths and CAFS. I just went to uni for 4 years, I'm now earing a mere $46,000 a year FOR MY FIRST YEAR! After 10 years I'll be on $66,000+. I think my wage sucks, I mean I have to mark exams during my weekend, and holidays. I only get more sick leave days than any other job, I get 12 weeks paid holidays, I only have to work from 9-3 (roughly)...BUT THAT LITTLE PRICK UP THE BACK STRESSES ME OUT, I NEED ANOTHER 20%!!!
Hi, my names Jane and I've just spend the last 3 years at university doing a nursing degree. I work in the busiest emergency ward in NSW (Canberra Emergency). I do shiftwork, and my hours vary from 8-12. Sometimes I only get half an hour for a break. I get 4 weeks holidays a year, a fortnight of paid sick leave a year. The health system is stretched to it's limits, I spend my days saving lives and dealing with arse holes on a regular basis. I get $36,728 as a first year. After 8 years I get a total $54,152 p.a.
Seriously people, who do you think is a more valuable member of society? Maybe they're both on par, if so who do you think deserves a better rate of pay in accordance with hours and their conditions? I don't think the teachers have a leg to stand on.

thank you katie tully you are a lovely girl

 

[cro_angel]

there seem to be alot of people here who know more about this issue than i do.. but just a question is that like 60k a year only for high school teachers.. do primary teachers get less (or the same?)
ive always thought it was less but i havent really seen any mention of primary so i was just curious..
but yeh i do think nurses go through a hell of alot more than teachers do.. and its not that they can really strike and leave all the patients by themselves

 

[lengstar]

there aren't enough nurses to go out TO strike

 

[katie_tully]

There aren't enough nurses, they're under staffed. They could go on strike, but I think you'll find they're too compassionate to do so. Alot of nurses I know also enjoy their job, and while they would like more money, they're too professional and too committed to do so.

 

[Ziff]

Nurses generally don't go on strike because they have a CONSCIENCE unlike some other professionals...

Back in the day, when the miners went on strike they used to do it in solidarity with the nurses or something but these days no one strikes for the nurses, not even the teachers. Hell, if the teachers added nurses to their demands I might have a tad more respect for them, at least it would show a social conscience and not selfishness.

 

[Sarah168]

Teachers deserve a pay rise but nowhere near as much as nurses should receive....

 

[400miles]

Originally posted by Asquithian
He cannot judge he is partial towars his owen parents.

Plus i dont know what his stadards of 'hard work' are. Yes i recognise teachers may have to do 5 hours or so of work after school...thats alot of work but (IMO) other professions do just as much or more work and at a higher level.

For me what hard work is has definately changed since i left school...

I can't judge because I've actually seen the work they put in? Whereas you, who has no experience in this field whatsoever are not partial and therefore can judge?

And okay, this nurse argument keeps coming up and no one seems to take notice of the refute that keeps coming up against it... and especially you Katie as you seemed to have a lot to say about it, and didn't think 'teachers have a leg to stand on'...
We're NOT saying that teachers do the most work in comparison to other professions.. We are NOT saying that other professions also don't deserve a payrise..
YES there ARE other proffessions stuck in the same position where they feel undervalued (and often are).. and YES they also deserve more pay.

Your hypothetical about Johnny was a bit harsh... Your comments about his UAI and the fact he did standard english seem to suggest that you feel those who don't do all the top subjects and don't ace them shouldn't get paid well.... do we base our rate of pay on intellect do we?... Sure Johnny wasn't ace at English, and sure when he was 18 he got a UAI of 69.. Does that mean he deserves to be paid shit for the work he does. You didn't mention that Johnny works hell hard and is passionate about his job. He puts up with a lot of shit and puts in a hell of a lot of effort.

You presented what the teachers claim make them want their payrise but didn't really present any specific argument as to why they're wrong... except for "Holy hell this made me laugh"
Well Holy Hell good for you.

Originally posted by Ziff
And many students do 3-4hrs+ of homework per night

Come on, it's high-school standard, even I can do that!

Mate then why can't we equally say that the hours that lawyers put in after work is high school standard?
So because it's the same amount of time as a student works then this means it's the same amount of effort?
And even if it is... students work bloody hard... so do teachers...

And Katie I don't think you can really assess the value of someone in a community...

Originally posted by Ziff
Nurses generally don't go on strike because they have a CONSCIENCE unlike some other professionals...

That's absolute crap. Their conscience is irrelevant.. They see an injustice is occurring and the only way to fix an injustice is to do something about it.
Nurses don't go on strike because they are UNABLE to... It doesn't mean they have more of a conscience than teachers....
That's such a generalisation and weak point.

Originally posted by katie_tully
There aren't enough nurses, they're under staffed. They could go on strike, but I think you'll find they're too compassionate to do so. Alot of nurses I know also enjoy their job, and while they would like more money, they're too professional and too committed to do so.

Striking for such a small amount of days doesn't mean you don't love your job or that you're not compassionate or that you're not professional. It means that you feel doing your job is worth more than you're currently valued.

Hypothetically, when the Aboriginals marched for Reconciliation... it's not like we stand up and say to them, "No sorry guys piss off... You don't deserve reconciliation because look at the people of Bougainville who only just finished their civil war... Their problem is bigger and you don't see them marching... So guys just go away until your problem is bigger than anyone elses'
That would be crap and wrong.

It's the same with this.
Yeah it's unfair nurses don't get paid more... But it doesn't mean teachers don't have the right to request a payrise.

And I think you'll notice that the latest strike movement was for more than just the payrise. An independant tribunal last year ruled in favour of the teachers, allocating them the pay rise they were after. The case was closed. Suddenly Bob Carr and his government come back this year and say 'No, no wait. We don't like that decision, we want you to open up the case again so we can re-present our argument.'
The government interfering in a case already decided and closed. The strikes were to say that they don't have the right to do that.

 

[400miles]

Originally posted by Asquithian

also contrats to your mum she did a one off presentation...
.

No I'm sorry that's wrong... There, firstly, were many teachers part of that presentation. Secondly there are so many presentations going on all the time that involve teachers. Lectures and presentations. My example of my mum was a convenient example I used to prove you wrong. It wasn't a "one off" presentation. It was one example from many of a situation where she had to present to the board - something you claimed that teachers never did and that the 'hard-working-proffessions' did

Originally posted by Asquithian
rehashing the again - i was like you i thought teachers worked reasonably hard...i even considered being a teacher...

but seriously in all honesty im telling you right now that teachers may work hard but the professions out that that the teachers want parity with in terms of pay are much harder work. Im not trying to bash teachers....but honestly ur foolling urself if you think teaching is a terribly hard job in comparison to other named professions.

Fooling ourselves? "In all honesty" you're telling us now?
Well in all honesty you have nothing to base your argument off. You don't know what it's like to be a teacher. Therefore your comparisons as to how much work they do are completely irrelevant

 

[Ziff]

Originally posted by 400miles
Mate then why can't we equally say that the hours that lawyers put in after work is high school standard?
So because it's the same amount of time as a student works then this means it's the same amount of effort?
And even if it is... students work bloody hard... so do teachers...

That's absolute crap. Their conscience is irrelevant.. They see an injustice is occurring and the only way to fix an injustice is to do something about it.
Nurses don't go on strike because they are UNABLE to... It doesn't mean they have more of a conscience than teachers....
That's such a generalisation and weak point.

No, I meant that the level of work teachers have to mark is of a high school standard. Not that the time period was. They're marking high school work and doing high school level work - so am I.

Nurses don't strike because they have a conscience - they won't let their patients just hang and die. Teachers will strike and let their students lose valuable time and lessons thus affecting their overall marks.

 

[400miles]

Originally posted by Ziff
No, I meant that the level of work teachers have to mark is of a high school standard. Not that the time period was. They're marking high school work and doing high school level work - so am I.

Nurses don't strike because they have a conscience - they won't let their patients just hang and die. Teachers will strike and let their students lose valuable time and lessons thus affecting their overall marks.

The fact that nurses have people's lives in their hands is a bit different from what teachers do. And before I get this huge backlash of "SEE WE TOLD YOU NURSES WORK HARDER" I never said they didn't.
Your argument about teachers not having a conscience is crap, generalised and based on nothing. There is no evidence. There is no facts. Just you bitching about teachers.

The level of work done by teachers is the same done by students? Because, of course, coming from all your experience as a teacher you'd know this? Or is that just another generalisation?

 

[katie_tully]

I was thinking about that later. The point I was trying to make wasn't that people who do standard are "below' and "stupid", but that it's all you need to get into the teaching profession.
Frankly, they don't have a leg to stand on compared to other more worthy professions. 12% is heaps, considering since 1993 they've increased their salary by 50 or 500%, I'm not sure what the figure was, 5 something, maybe 2 or 1 0's

 

[steph@nie]

Sorry, but I thought this was about the stupid 19% for catholic teachers and 12% for the state school teachers.

No one denys the fact that nurses and those working in the appalling conditions in the health system deserve more money but you can't say that teachers don't deserve a pay rise.

What's wrong here isnt the fact that teacher's went on strike in the first place, it's the fact that they're saying that Catholic school teachers deserve more than state school ones. I attend a Catholic school, and I don't think they're any better than a state school teacher that does the same job for less money. We should be angry at the idiots who make these decisions in regards to pay rises, and not the teachers themselves.

 

[iambored]

Originally posted by blue_chameleon
no denying where they stand in society when compared to the likes of nurses, or ambulance officers especially with the hours and conditions of nurses. The public health system is in a much worse state than the education system. I would love for somebody to tell me differently, please, try.

that's not what this argument is about, no one will deny that they deserve a major pay rise. so are teachers supposed to think "the nurses deserve a rise before us, they're not striking so we shouldn't"?

Originally posted by 400miles
Your hypothetical about Johnny was a bit harsh... Your comments about his UAI and the fact he did standard english seem to suggest that you feel those who don't do all the top subjects and don't ace them shouldn't get paid well

actually, you were just proving the point that pay = uai level in a way. if lawyers didn't get paid so much the uai wouldn't be over 90. do you want the quality of teachers to go down?

Originally posted by Asquithian
WHAT YOU MAY THINK IS HARD WORK IS NOT WHAT OTHER PEOPLE WOULD TERM HARD WORK !!!!!!!!!!!!

working from 9 till 3 and 5 hours after work is not in my opininion any different to that of other professions. Ie it aint any different...

can someone give me an example of other jobs and what they do after hours? i have given my examples on previous pages. i want to know other jobs and how much work they do at home.

the argument above doesn't work without examples.

so they work 9 til 3. but most schools i know start at 8.45 at least, maybe a teacher's meeting before, maybe not depending on the school. therefore they have to be there at either 8.15 or 8.30, maybe 8.45. i don;t know of any schools that finish at 3, it's either 3.15 or 4. so they go home, say they get home 4 or 4.30. without doing housework, resting or anything, if they do 5 of work at home hrs as mentioned above, they are then working from 4.30-10.30, no break, no eating, no housework, nothing. how is a job from 8.30am-10.30pm justified by almost no pay?

it just pisses me off because i would see how some students treated the teachers, they tried so hard, they did so much for us, they did everything we asked and more and all people would do was badmouth them for one thing they did wrong. it seems this goes on not just at schools, but outside schools.

Originally posted by katie_tully
I was thinking about that later. The point I was trying to make wasn't that people who do standard are "below' and "stupid", but that it's all you need to get into the teaching profession.

and why do you think that is? as i mentioned above if lawyers got so little pay they wouldn't have a 90+ uai. there's no question the quality of some teachers is going down these days.

 

[*~Dazed~*]

Pay rise on the cards for senior teachers
By Anne Davies and Kelly Burke
June 18, 2004

Page Tools
Email to a friend Printer format
Principals and head teachers in public schools are poised to win extra pay rises after the NSW Industrial Relations Commission last night took the dramatic step of re-opening the long-running teachers' pay case. ...

The Government is under pressure to agree to a higher pay rise for the principals and head teachers than that set by the commission only last week, adding $60 million to the $700 million extra it must already set aside for unplanned teacher increases.

The intervention, triggered by the commission on public interest grounds, comes after last week's unexpected decision to award a 3 to 7.5 per cent increase to Catholic principals, assistant principals and head teachers on top of a 12 per cent pay rise awarded 24 hours earlier to all government school employees.

ok correct me if i am wrong but going by this it wasnt that the catholic school teachers got a pay rise, it was all those in head positions following a pay rise that ALL government school teachers got. So really the argument shouldnt be about it being unfair that catholic teachers got a pay rise because it was in actual fact the other way around
?????

 

[400miles]

Originally posted by Asquithian


working from 9 till 3 and 5 hours after work is not in my opininion any different to that of other professions. Ie it aint any different...

Yes and I'm not arguing that... I'm arguing that many of these other professions, eg. lawyers have the potential to get so much more money for their long hours...

Originally posted by Asquithian
We if little johnnie gets paid just as much as someone who has worked their arse off for a uai of 100 and is a surgeon there is no incentive to work hard is there?

Check out people put up with a alot of shit, have awful conditions, and many put in alot of effort...you telling me that they deserve the same amount of money.

Government school cleaners put in alot of effort put up with alot of shit have awful conditions and many put effort into it....

both of the above is admirable...but are you telling me they should get the same amount as a teacher?

Based on your notion of effort the above professions should get paid 100 000 or at least as much as teachers...as a government cleaner you have to get up at 4am go home at 8...go back at 3 go home at 6...do physical jobs...possibly dirty jobs have to put up with teachers who treat you like garbage cos they think they are something really special...

if its effort and trying hard school cleaners should be paiud more than teachers ?!?!

pay has never been determined on the basis of effort...

in terms of menial work people can put in massives of effort...doesnt mean deserve 100 000 a year.

no that wasn't the point I was making at all... the point I was making was that by saying that johnny had only done standard english and gotten 63 as a UAI doesn't mean that johnny doesn't deserve to be paid well for whatever job he's doing.
You can't say "I'm not going to pay you as much as I pay this guy because in an exam that only tests SOME of your intellectual constructions this guy achieved better." You can't say, "Because you were unable to do Advanced English, because your skills don't reach into that particular subject, you're going to be paid less".

As for your example about the surgeon with the UAI of 100 I believe there is still incentive to work. The UAI is still 100 so obviously they'll have to continue to work to be a surgeon. And if they get the 100 then they'll be doing the job they are passionate about and the job they want to do - a perfectly valid incentive.
If they don't get 100 and have to do some other job they dont' necessarily want to do, such as teaching, they may still put in a hell of a lot of effort and passion and therefore deserve to be paid accordingly.

Originally posted by katie_tully
I was thinking about that later. The point I was trying to make wasn't that people who do standard are "below' and "stupid", but that it's all you need to get into the teaching profession.
Frankly, they don't have a leg to stand on compared to other more worthy professions. 12% is heaps, considering since 1993 they've increased their salary by 50 or 500%, I'm not sure what the figure was, 5 something, maybe 2 or 1 0's

"all you need" to get into the teaching profession is the same point that people who do standard or get 63% are below those who don't... A point that seems to keep getting missed is that different courses such as teaching have low UAI's because of the lack of people wanting to become teachers. The reason medicine and law need like 99UAI is because it's so competitive to get into and so many people want to be there. So a UAI of "only" 63 to get into teaching only means there's a shortage of teachers more than teachers don't have to be smart... Anyway, rate of pay shouldn't be determined by intellect.

Originally posted by iambored


actually, you were just proving the point that pay = uai level in a way. if lawyers didn't get paid so much the uai wouldn't be over 90. do you want the quality of teachers to go down?

Just because the UAI is low and people who do standard english or do not ace the HSC get into teaching does not mean that the quality of the teachers will go down. The quality of the teachers depends on how well they are able to teach their desired subject not which english course they did and what UAI they received.

Originally posted by Asquithian
i cant give examples cos 400miles will say i have no idea how difficult these jobs are

You can give as many examples as you like but I don't see how you can compare them to the workload of teachers if you have no experience or evidence of the matter.

 

[hipsta_jess]

Originally posted by jm1234567890
Teachers don't deserve more than uni lecturers since they don't have to do research....

but lecturers dont have to put up with immature little shits constantly stirring up crap just for the sake of it.

 

[400miles]

Originally posted by Asquithian
are you saying surgeons and lawyers deserve the same as teachers? or that teacher deserve the same?

capalist society ...whats wrong with those professions getting more than teachers...dont suggest they dont work harder...cos how would you know?

I never said teacher's deserved the same... I'm just saying that you can't use that argument 'other professions work longer hours than teachers' because they get paid so much more... and personally, IMO, teachers do deserve the same as lawyers

As for capatalist society, there is NOTHING wrong with otehr professions earning more than teachers. The argument I'm presenting is that I think teachers deserve more. You're the one who keeps comparing it to other professions, I'm the one who keeps saying it's just about teachers.

Originally posted by Asquithian
how else are you going to determine someones ability...any other ideas?

if a guy gets a 100 and becomes a doctor and little johhny gets 69 and wanks his way through uni and gets paid the same as the 100 UAU guy where is the incentive for academic excellence?

I just gave you an example of the incentive for academic excellence... if timmy wants to become a surgeon, because he's passionate about it and loves the work, then he's going to strive for the UAI of 100 that he needs to get in...
Again, the UAI is not based on pay (and shouldn't be) it's based on how many people are trying to get into the course.

Originally posted by Asquithian
The UAI for teaching is into the high 80s at unsw usyd and maqu

63 is like for ...i dunno...university of Ballarat.

I was just using the example given.

Originally posted by Asquithian
how can you compare a teachers workload with other professions....do u have an intimate knowledge of what it takes to be an optomitrist doctor or lawyer? do you have any idea of what it takes to be anything other than a teacher...?

I wasn't comparing, I wasn't tryign to compare, I wasn't going to compare. I don't know where you got that from. THis is what I said: "You can give as many examples as you like but I don't see how you can compare them to the workload of teachers if you have no experience or evidence of the matter. "
If you look you'll see I SAID that you couldn't compare (as I've been saying the whole time)... so for you to come back and say 'how can you compare' is just arguing the same point as me

 

[*~Dazed~*]

i love how everyone just ignored my comment

 

[steph@nie]

Originally posted by *~Dazed~*
i love how everyone just ignored my comment

I see your point, but you know how much we all hate admitting we've misread the facts.

I don't see why it should be different for Catholic and State. In all seriousness, if teachers were really serious about this pay thing, they'd strike all together and get the same pay rise.

Catholic schools can be selective in who they choose to take, whereas normal state schools can't and in that case, I seriously think that State school teachers, principals, head teachers, whatever they are, deserve more.

 

[Ziff]

Yeah but to go to a catholic school you have to pay. To go to a public school you don't. It's a little something called "value-adding" and from this both the students and teachers benefit from it through better resources and more $$$.