pending teachers strike, BCTF and the gov't

By the sounds of modern kindergarten, kids would be better off just playing with other kids in a park or a forest with a few caring adults around to keep an eye on things.

Messy, chaotic classrooms at that age damage more than they educate.

There is plenty of tolerance but unfortunately it's usually mixed with mistrust that any raised taxes will just be wasted via incompetence and corruption. Many here have expressed willingness to pay more tax if they were certain it would benefit children's education.

It's easy to sit here and say I'd pay more, but that is different from actually paying more when required. Would you give up buying a new mountain bike for the funds to go to education? How about taking a pass on that vacation to fund education?

The reality is that you would have to give something up, what would you be willing to?

I agree on the waste via incompetence issue.

It's easy to sit here and say I'd pay more, but that is different from actually paying more when required. Would you give up buying a new mountain bike for the funds to go to education? How about taking a pass on that vacation to fund education?

The reality is that you would have to give something up, what would you be willing to?

I agree on the waste via incompetence issue.

I don't really see it that way.

I'll buy the Norco instead of the Intense and I'll go to Vietnam instead of Italy. I always live well in the black as it is anyways.
I would approach it as a "this is how much it costs to run a country that doesn't suck" kind of way.

I live in a country that does things how you suggest and let me tell, it sucks fucking balls.

It's easy to sit here and say I'd pay more, but that is different from actually paying more when required. Would you give up buying a new mountain bike for the funds to go to education? How about taking a pass on that vacation to fund education?

The reality is that you would have to give something up, what would you be willing to?

I agree on the waste via incompetence issue.

so why is it you'll share broad opinion but can't or are unwilling to give any specifics? and how do you come to the conclusion that the possible increase in taxes would amount to a $4000 mtb?

Lawyers are billing clients for every hour they spend. Were you paid for only 40 of the 70-80 hours you were working? I’ve recently read that teachers are paid based on an instructional day that starts 15 minutes before class and 15 minutes after class ends. The teachers that I know spend a shit ton more time than that.

No that is wrong. Associates get paid a salary. To bill 7 hours will typically take a lawyer 9 or 10 hours of a working day. I know that because my wife is a lawyer. She went to work when I did around 8 AM and returned at 8 or 9 every night. She did not bill 10 or 11 hours a day. 6 or 7. Some days not much at all. Some days before a hearing or trial she'd be at work till midnight. That is the job. In a good year she billed 1600 to 1700 hours.

When I was a geologist I was paid a salary. We worked until we were done. The reason was that summer was for field work and time was limited. We worked hard to get as much done in the summer months as we could. That was the job. You can`t compare a salaried wage to hourly in terms of compensation. Some teachers will do more in less time that others. Some one in this thread had stated that he had never had a bad teacher. Maybe that is true but could he say all his teachers had the same capabilities? I had some shitty teachers as well as great ones. I think that the better teachers deserve better compensation. That's why I question why teachers are unionized. It doesn't really fit but I understand that with a single employer of the entire group it does make some sense.

No that is wrong. Associates get paid a salary. To bill 7 hours will typically take a lawyer 9 or 10 hours of a working day. I know that because my wife is a lawyer. She went to work when I did around 8 AM and returned at 8 or 9 every night. She did not bill 10 or 11 hours a day. 6 or 7. Some days not much at all. Some days before a hearing or trial she'd be at work till midnight. That is the job. In a good year she billed 1600 to 1700 hours.

That is how it works.

When I was a geologist I was paid a salary. We worked until we were done. The reason was that summer was for field work and time was limited. We worked hard to get as much done in the summer months as we could. That was the job. You can`t compare a salaried wage to hourly in terms of compensation. Some teachers will do more in less time that others. Some one in this thread had stated that he had never had a bad teacher. Maybe that is true but could he say all his teachers had the same capabilities? I had some shitty teachers as well as great ones. I think that the better teachers deserve better compensation. That's why I question why teachers are unionized. It doesn't really fit but I understand that with a single employer of the entire group it does make some sense.

That is how it should work.

What some people find objectionable is the "arrogance" (for lack of a better word) of the statement that every teacher is an amazing teacher and we should support every one of them. In my profession, the same statement about me peers would be incorrect, and my experience is that it has been the same in other fields I have worked in. Performance garners commensurate remuneration.

The teachers are the individuals that are very important in crafting a future adult, and are supposed to be strong role models. They should be above the twisting of facts, taking action that negatively affects students, and ignoring performance in favour of tenure.

It's easy to sit here and say I'd pay more, but that is different from actually paying more when required. Would you give up buying a new mountain bike for the funds to go to education? How about taking a pass on that vacation to fund education?

The reality is that you would have to give something up, what would you be willing to?

I have to make these concessions all the time. I have kids.

Do you?

I think that the better teachers deserve better compensation. That's why I question why teachers are unionized. It doesn't really fit but I understand that with a single employer of the entire group it does make some sense.

What constitutes 'better'? Who gets to make the decision? That's a pretty big ball of wax considering that every student is an individual, with specific needs. No 'one size fits all' approach will work.

A geologic analysis is either done accurately or not, education is not the same.

I had some shitty teachers as well as great ones. I think that the better teachers deserve better compensation. That's why I question why teachers are unionized. It doesn't really fit but I understand that with a single employer of the entire group it does make some sense.

What metric is used to measure a "good" teacher? I had teachers that were widely disliked for no other reason than they demanded more from their students. You did the work, you showed you understood it and you knew how to apply it. Too much work. Too hard. There was stuff on the exam that wasn't in the textbook. Just like the real world. Is that a good teacher? Or a bad teacher? Or neither?

Should teachers who teach students who get higher academic scores be paid more than ones that don't?

So a teacher who teaches in a low-ranked high school in the DTES (like Britannia Secondary) where special needs kids are 25% (many I'm guessing with Fetal Alcohol Syndrome) be paid less than the teacher at Sentinel School in West Vancouver or Lord Byng in Point Grey? How would they ever convince anyone but the most desperate (and probably worst) teachers to teach at lower-performing schools for less pay? It would be a death spiral for public education.

Meanwhile, you can sit on your ass in Point Grey or West Van and recommend to the parents of the lower-performing kids that they hire an after-school tutor and keep getting performance bonuses.

We aren't talking about people who assemble cars, and rewarding whoever does it faster and with fewer QA problems with a bonus.

What constitutes 'better'? Who gets to make the decision? That's a pretty big ball of wax considering that every student is an individual, with specific needs. No 'one size fits all' approach will work.

A geologic analysis is either done accurately or not, education is not the same.

Yet private schools seem to be able to make these decisions.

Just a couple of thoughts.

- Like most jobs where one is paid by the hour for their work there is I believe it is called cost of living increases to one's wage. Is the money increase being argued a cost of living increase or something else.

- at a certain point increasing wages in a work place must hit a certain point where it begins to become a negative. Meaning something has to give. So for example at a certain point an employer will be faced with increasing wages. The problem they face to do this will have certain negative effects like hiring less workers. So in the end everyone gets a nice pay increase and other benefits but in the end you lose because you are doing individually more work. Because the employer hires less staff those what got the wage increase now have more tasks added to their job description.

Yet private schools seem to be able to make these decisions.

private schools tend to operate under different conditions to public schools - it's not an equal comparison.

What metric is used to measure a "good" teacher? I had teachers that were widely disliked for no other reason than they demanded more from their students. You did the work, you showed you understood it and you knew how to apply it. Too much work. Too hard. There was stuff on the exam that wasn't in the textbook. Just like the real world. Is that a good teacher? Or a bad teacher? Or neither?

Should teachers who teach students who get higher academic scores be paid more than ones that don't?

So a teacher who teaches in a low-ranked high school in the DTES (like Britannia Secondary) where special needs kids are 25% (many I'm guessing with Fetal Alcohol Syndrome) be paid less than the teacher at Sentinel School in West Vancouver or Lord Byng in Point Grey? How would they ever convince anyone but the most desperate (and probably worst) teachers to teach at lower-performing schools for less pay? It would be a death spiral for public education.

Meanwhile, you can sit on your ass in Point Grey or West Van and recommend to the parents of the lower-performing kids that they hire an after-school tutor and keep getting performance bonuses.

We aren't talking about people who assemble cars, and rewarding whoever does it faster and with fewer QA problems with a bonus.

i'm actually shocked that many seemingly intelligent people on this board are overlooking or are oblivious to this extremely important facet of the debate.

so why is it you'll share broad opinion but can't or are unwilling to give any specifics? and how do you come to the conclusion that the possible increase in taxes would amount to a $4000 mtb?

I have no idea how much the increase in taxes would be. What I am trying to point out is that there are consequences and sacrifices. It is fine to say that you are willing to pay more, fight for a 'just society', teachers are 'worth every dime and more', etc… but, if you ask someone to actually pay more, they will have to sacrifice elsewhere to do so.

I don't know anyone who buys a new $4,000 mtb every year, I would guess the average rider would do that, what, every 5 - 6 years ? That is $667 - $800 per year.

Let's look at some facts and see if we can figure this out, granted, this is a general google search . . .
- There are about 2.2 million tax payers in BC.
- About $4.5 billion is spent on public school instruction.
http://www.bctf.ca/uploadedFiles/Public/Publications/ResearchReports/RR2014-04.pdf
- Teachers are asking for about 20% over 5 years, so, $900 million in additional wages by 2020.
- $900 million over 2.2 million taxpayers = $410 per taxpayer extra tax by 2020.
- if we look at it on a per-person basis, there are about 4.5 million residents in BC, so, an extra $200 per person. That's $1000 for a family of 5. You go and knock on someone's door, ask them for a cheque for $1000 and see what reaction you get. But, I'm sure if you explain it's for the teachers they will willingly hand it over.

Show of hands . . .. who out there would write that cheque ?

Yet private schools seem to be able to make these decisions.

Similar ball of wax. In addition to helicopter parents putting their kids just as behind the curve as the kids at the other end of the socio-ecomonic spectrum by raising them in a failure-free and entitled environment.