On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 08:30:26 -0500, "JimH" wrote:


"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 20:24:19 -0500, "JimH" wrote:

~~ snippage ~~

I never equated the skill level to number of years taught.

You did a good job skirting my original question, so I will ask it again:

1. Do you believe that all teachers in a school district, regardless of
skills deserve the same pay increase every year?

All teachers are not paid the same in any school district in CT. It's
based on years of service and education. And by definition a thirty
year teacher is, in theory, paid more than a two year teacher because
of experience, education and in-service skills.

Let me try it this way. If you mean that a two year teacher with a BS
degree should be paid the same as a two year teacher with a BS/MS,
then no - the two year teacher with the BS/MS should be paid more than
the teacher with the BS. That is a skills based criteria.

If you mean that a two year teacher with a BS/MS should be paid the
same as a thirty year teacher with a BS/MS, then no - the thirty year
teacher should be paid more because of seniority which translates to
experience and skills related to that experience.

Does that make more sense?

Of course teachers are paid differently according to the number of years on
the job. I never said anything differently....I said *pay increases* Tom.

Ok, we'll try it again.

A second year teacher, in this state anyway and I believe it's the
same in RI, MA and NY but I'm not sure, does not get the same yearly
contracted increase as a 30 year teacher.

In fact, the two year teacher is generally paid a greater percentage
of the contracted amount of money (which is how it is done here -
there is a pool and the money is apportioned by contract) than the
higher paid (read longer in-service) teachers.

For example (and this is just an example - has no relevance in the
real world) if the contract calls for a 3% increase of the total
amount of money allocated to teacher salaries, that 3% is divided up.
The increase is proportioned into increases based on "steps" (two year
intervals plus education - for example a second step teacher is one
who is in-service for three years with a BS or could be a BS/MS which
would be Step Two plus Masters).

The lower paid teachers receive the largest share of the increase with
the highest paid teachers receiving the least amount of increase both
in terms of money and percentage.

You are asking for a straight answer and I can't give you one because,
at least here, it doesn't work the way you think it does.

You are trying to separate this into one single issue and you can't
because the equation is constantly variable - it's not a linear issue.

I'm sorry - I can't answer the question because I don't understand it.

My fault probably.

Later,

Tom

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 08:30:26 -0500, "JimH" wrote:


"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
. ..
On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 20:24:19 -0500, "JimH" wrote:

~~ snippage ~~

I never equated the skill level to number of years taught.

You did a good job skirting my original question, so I will ask it
again:

1. Do you believe that all teachers in a school district, regardless of
skills deserve the same pay increase every year?

All teachers are not paid the same in any school district in CT. It's
based on years of service and education. And by definition a thirty
year teacher is, in theory, paid more than a two year teacher because
of experience, education and in-service skills.

Let me try it this way. If you mean that a two year teacher with a BS
degree should be paid the same as a two year teacher with a BS/MS,
then no - the two year teacher with the BS/MS should be paid more than
the teacher with the BS. That is a skills based criteria.

If you mean that a two year teacher with a BS/MS should be paid the
same as a thirty year teacher with a BS/MS, then no - the thirty year
teacher should be paid more because of seniority which translates to
experience and skills related to that experience.

Does that make more sense?

Of course teachers are paid differently according to the number of years
on
the job. I never said anything differently....I said *pay increases* Tom.

Ok, we'll try it again.

A second year teacher, in this state anyway and I believe it's the
same in RI, MA and NY but I'm not sure, does not get the same yearly
contracted increase as a 30 year teacher.

In fact, the two year teacher is generally paid a greater percentage
of the contracted amount of money (which is how it is done here -
there is a pool and the money is apportioned by contract) than the
higher paid (read longer in-service) teachers.

For example (and this is just an example - has no relevance in the
real world) if the contract calls for a 3% increase of the total
amount of money allocated to teacher salaries, that 3% is divided up.
The increase is proportioned into increases based on "steps" (two year
intervals plus education - for example a second step teacher is one
who is in-service for three years with a BS or could be a BS/MS which
would be Step Two plus Masters).

The lower paid teachers receive the largest share of the increase with
the highest paid teachers receiving the least amount of increase both
in terms of money and percentage.

You are asking for a straight answer and I can't give you one because,
at least here, it doesn't work the way you think it does.

You are trying to separate this into one single issue and you can't
because the equation is constantly variable - it's not a linear issue.

I'm sorry - I can't answer the question because I don't understand it.

My fault probably.

Later,

Tom

Let me put it another way.

Joe and Bob work for XYZ Manufacturing Company. Joe is new, works his tail
off and produces top notch widgets with close to zero rejects.

Bob is an old timer running at half speed. He feels secure in his position
and produces far less widgets with a high frequency of rejects. He also has
a tendency to get hurt right before a holiday or vacation, taking additional
time off to *mend*.

It is a union shop. Management has tried to get rid of Bob based on poor
performance but the union fights back and Bob stays.

Come contract negotiation time both Bob and Joe will get the same increase %
in their pay.

Fair? Nope.

Does that system eventually lead one to mediocrity? Yep

That is my point Tom. So when I ask if it is fair that all teachers,
regardless of skill or commitment to their work get the same pay increase I
hope you understand where I am coming from.

On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 09:22:13 -0500, "JimH" wrote:


"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message


~~ snippage ~~

That is my point Tom. So when I ask if it is fair that all teachers,
regardless of skill or commitment to their work get the same pay increase I
hope you understand where I am coming from.

To tell the truth, no I don't because we are still talking apples and
oranges.

Hey, that's fine - makes the world go 'round, eh what? :)

Later,

Tom