On Influential Janesville teacher dies unexpectedly
Posted on November 21 at 8:52 p.m. ( Suggest removal )
Thank you, Mr. Cain, for your many years of service and the many lives you touched.
On Milton teachers – the Yellow Jersey is meant for the Tour
Posted on November 19 at 11:10 a.m. ( Suggest removal )
Fit2tri - I'm sorry that you are in a tough spot. But you miss a very important point. Cutting or freezing teacher salaries does not save the taxpayer anything. The district has already set the tax levy. Paying the teachers less just pads the pockets of the school district. It puts nothing back in your pocket. The question is really: how do I want those tax dollars spent? On new parking lots - or attracting and keeping good teachers for my kids? The teachers aren't asking for the district to tax any more, and, to my knowledge, aren't even asking for raises.
--
Second - I question the sincerity of people who, out of one side of the mouth say "you chose to teach - don't be upset with the low wages - if you want to make money, do something else"....but at the same time criticize teachers and want to cut their pay just because they were smart enough to choose a profession that is not subject to the economic conditions. You can't have it both ways. Teaching is, indeed, a great profession to be in during hard times because kids always need teachers. It is a steady paycheck. The general public did not support sharing the wealth with teachers in the 90's and early 2000's when things were going well, so why should teachers expect to suffer along with the rest when things aren't going so great? Hypocrisy.
On Milton teachers take action
Posted on November 19 at 5:29 a.m. ( Suggest removal )
Rossnmeg - Perhaps it is you who are missing something. Starting when the law was passed in the 90's mandating package costing for teacher salaries & benefits, it started costing the teachers one dollar in salary increase for every one dollar increase in benefit cost. I'll make it simple. Say a teacher was making $1000 in salary and $300 in benefits. The district reports a 4% increase for the teachers - that would be $52. Benefit costs went up to $340, though, so only $12 is applied to salary. (A rather typical situation- 13% increase in health benefits....) So the district reports to the public that they gave a 4% raise - but the teacher paid 2/3 of that to benefit costs and only sees a 1.2% salary increase. In my mind (and that of many others) that shows how the teachers have been paying their own benefit cost increases (in the form of reduced salary increases) every year since 1993. Remember - most of this was during a time where others were making 4-6% salary increases annually.
----
I have no hard figures, but I knowing that the average increase in benefit costs is about 9% per year in that period, and using the rule of 72 (72 divided by the percentage for time to double....) , I'd estimate that teachers are paying about 75% of their own benefit costs in the form of reduced salary. Do you pay 75% of your premiums? How much more do you think is "fair" for teachers to pay for their insurance? Since they are paying that much, don't you think they should have a say in the type of policy they have?
On Milton teachers take action
Posted on November 18 at 4:54 p.m. ( Suggest removal )
Let's consider why the teachers would choose to pass out information at conferences. Could it be, perhaps, because the teachers don't have bi-weekly meetings covered by the press to spread their take on the situation? Clearly the Milton School Board has been effective in getting their message out. Why don't you want to hear the other side?
---
It is in the nature of a teacher to teach, and that is what it appears to me they were trying to do with the brochure. I, for one, would love to see one so I can have both sides of the story. (I've talked to a Milton teacher, but have not seen the brochure.)
---
As for the wearing of a certain color shirt at work or a conference - my question would be this: Did anyone attending conferences have any discussions with teachers about the contract situation - or did they actually act professionally and have normal conferences? From what I've heard, it was the latter.
On Milton teachers take action
Posted on November 18 at 5:35 a.m. ( Suggest removal )
If you all are done basing the entire profession of teaching, I thought some may be interested in learning some of what I learned last night after talking to some folks "on the inside".
---
First - the teachers primary concern is not getting raises. Apparently they have asked for about 2%, but have been backing off that. They are primarily looking to keep benefits. Apparently they way that teacher pay is calculated includes the cost of benefits, so for the past 15 years or so they have paid all increases in benefit costs out of their salary - meaning they pay about 80% of their benefit expense in the form of lower salary. How many of you who are employed pay 80% of your insurance premiums? (Yes - it is paid pre-tax as an "employer paid benefit" for tax advantage reasons, but the cost comes out of the teachers paycheck.)
---
Now the Board wants to take total control of the benefits (make them non-negotiable), or make the teachers pay and additional percentage of the premium (in essence pay twice), and reduce those benefits. The teachers took a voluntary reduction in the last contract already.
----
The big gripe, however, is what was described to me as the constant "doom and gloom" financial predictions from administration. Every department had to cut last year - and there was suddenly a huge surplus at the end of the year. Same thing the year before that, and before that. While enrollment has been flat for the district, or slightly declining the past year (down about 30 across the district), revenue has been steady or increasing. So the economy is terrible, but the District is still raising more revenue via taxes and aids than in the past, but demanding cuts from everyone while spending big on capital projects and socking away millions in a "fund balance".
====
Bottom line seems to be that the cuts and freezes are not a reflection of district finances - which are fine - but a way to appease the general public. Let me tell you - the freeze in administrator pay and a potential freeze in teacher pay and cut in benefits does not put one dollar back into the taxpayer pocket. The Board, however, gets more money to spend on things like an apparent new keyless entry system.
On Milton teachers take action
Posted on November 17 at 12:49 p.m. ( Suggest removal )
Thanks for illuminating some of the issues, Stout66.
----
For the rest - the only "whining" I'm hearing is coming from most of the folks posting on this forum. You're upset because of yellow shirts? Yeah - that is painful. (roll eyes) Being at work when they are supposed to be at work? Sounds reasonable to me.
On Milton teachers take action
Posted on November 17 at 11:26 a.m. ( Suggest removal )
As in Janesville - once again we see that people want to treat teachers the same as the private sector when things are going badly, but had no problems limiting them to meager increases when the economy was booming and the private sector was getting much larger raises than allowed under the old QEO. I really hope all the "look at my lousy situation" folks are out there campaigning hard for huge pay increases for teachers when things turn around for you.
On Milton teachers take action
Posted on November 17 at 10:49 a.m. ( Suggest removal )
Anybody know what the issues are? Why are the teacher's apparently upset with the Board's offers? I'm seeing a lot of assumptions here that the teachers are being "greedy", but the brochure I saw being passed around was about the Board claiming to have no money while at the same time socking away hundreds of thousands of dollars into long-term savings and throwing hundreds of thousands more into parking lot resurfacing and other nice, but not critical, projects. Perhaps the Board is being greedy and trying to take advantage of economic conditions to "stick it to" to the teachers. I'd welcome any inside comments.
On Woman says she awoke to find deputy assaulting her
Posted on November 10 at 9:52 a.m. ( Suggest removal )
"the right side" - congratulations on knowing all the evidence already and hearing all sides of the story. I'm glad you can come in, conduct a trial, and convict the accused all based on media stories and blog entries.
Page 1 of 32 | Next
On Family Size: When to Say When?
Posted on November 23 at 10:44 a.m. ( Suggest removal )
Once once has a child, one is never "done" with children. Oh, to be sure, they grow up, move out, have children of their own, but no matter what, they are still your children. Even in the very sad event of the death of a child, they are still your child.
Deciding when to stop having more children has to be a mutual decision between the partners. This is one of those decisions where the "no" trumps the "yes". You stop having children when one of the partners says "no".
Making that decision is intensely personal. Some couples can have 8 children and manage just fine - waiting for more. For others one is too many. I do think many of the factors you mention (personal finances, housing, transportation) are important to consider, but it has also been (correctly) said that "if you wait until you can afford a baby - you'll never have one".
Every child is unique and an instant life-changer. Sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worse. All I can wish you is happiness with whatever decision you and your spouse make.