All data and information provided is for informational purposes only. The opinions expressed by Bloggers are theirs alone.
NBEA makes no representations as to accuracy of the posts. You agree to indemnify and hold NBEA harmless from any claim made by any party due to or arising from your use of or posting upon this blog.
We reserve the right to edit or remove any post at any time for any reason.
If you disagree with these conditions, please do not read our blog or post to it.
No, it hasn't decreased, but look at the inflation index. Almost no inflation- the pay freeze is a pretty low-pain way to spare some jobs. These principals have taken a step in the right direction. It would be so unfair for some to not feel the pain at all and others to be cut right to the bone.
A pay freeze is not an easy answer for any of the unions to agree to. While inflation may not have moved much, it is well known that health insurance will certainly increase as well as many other things. On one hand, it is simply asking to sacrifice perhaps a tank of gas, or a few days worth of groceries. But for some that may be a more painful sacrifice than others. It's unfair for anyone to say that teachers can afford it more than others. Someone made a comment the other day about how teachers make more than double the average salary in NB which is 15K, so teachers should have no problem giving up their raises. May I remind everyone that those individuals making 15K a year also receive MASSHealth, which means no premiums, no copays, they get free glasses and braces. They also qualify for Foodstamps, Fuel Assistance, and possibly even cash or rent assistance. And please let's not forget where that money comes from. If I didn't have to pay for healthcare and groceries, I would gladly take a pay cut since those 2 items cost me about $700 a month. And those of us who are actual contributing members of society pay a thing called taxes, knocking everyone's salary down by about a third. So I have a proposal: They get their pay freeze, keep your taxes, and the government can cut welfare, which is the real drain on society. You want to get angry; Go down to the Office of Transitional Assistance and watch how many people you see pull up in Lexuses, carrying Coach Bags with their children in tow wearing $150 Jordans and toting iPhones. Go into the schools and see the kids getting free lunch, texting on their Sidekicks and sporting more expensive clothes than most. I know a child whose mother was kicked out of Housing because she was letting her drug dealer boyfriend live with her for 4 years before she actually got caught. She did not pay that money back to the state, but thankfully she is banned from receiving housing ever again, so she won't be able to get away with robbing the city a 2nd time. I'm sorry you want teachers to take the pay cut; Fine, but don't sit their and claim that it's fair or easy. I say cut from those who don't contribute. Why are they so exempt? It's called "transitional" assistance not "permanent dependence." It's only getting worse. People are realizing more and more that it's simply too easy to manipulate and rob the system. There's no incentive to being honest and working hard. You're just villainized later when you won't share what you have rightfully earned even though you've already contributed. It's never enough. No wonder no one wants to go into teaching. You'd have to be insane. If you want teachers to take a pay freeze or cut, honey would work better than vinegar. Claims that it is easier or "teachers get too much" is just a cop out and plain insulting to some very incredible individuals that give a hell of alot more than their time. Most teachers care more than their students' parents do these days. Have a little respect. It's not an easy job and without them, where would some of our kids be?
In my opinion this is nothing more than political grandstanding and an attempt to pressure the NBEA into a decision to forego steps and/or raises based on pressure. How many raises would principals have to forego to make as little as a member of Unit A or Unit B? How many principals do we have with 50-100 students? How many schools do we have with 200 students? Considering published events of the past couple of years, how much credibility does this particular administrator who spoke of foregoing her raise (if it is tax deductable) have? Instead of an Administrator for Equity and Diversity at 80,000 dollars, we need an Assistant Superintendent for Equity and Diversity at 120,000? When Dr. Sousa announced his retirement his position with Human Resources was downgraded to Administrator. Why not the same with the position for Equity and Diversity? Why would anyone give a 30,000 dollar raise to a position that was previously eliminated, is currently vacant, and then cry broke? Why not eliminate the school committe and let "the community" run the school system? How many Directors have had their work year extended at contractual per diem rates? Will the NBSD pay two Headmasters at NBHS for the next 4 months until DV officially retires? Was any thought given to the impact of actions that effectively raise class size at the high school while cutting administrators? Why not eliminate the position of Assistant Headmaster at the high school also? What next? The SRO'S?
I have 2 thoughts: I am curious about just where our "donated" step raises would go. Can we guarantee that the money they get from such an action would truly go to save a teacher's position? I am not in favor of foregoing a raise so the equity position can be funded. Also, the cutting of coaches to reduce the number of teachers they need to cut was an impressive propaganda ploy. The plan is to put a teacher in a computer lab and let the struggling students sit in front of a computer to rectify their learning issues. Not even thinking about how ridiculous that sounds.... How, exactly, does that reduce our class numbers? Where is the software coming from? Who is paying for it? And let's think about the IT issues. That whole tap-dancing explanation at the SC meeting was a typical example of what we have to look forward to from our new administrator who can "do it all."
7 comments:
That would be wishful thinking, but the cost of milk and bread , not to mention gas, has not decreased.
No, it hasn't decreased, but look at the inflation index. Almost no inflation- the pay freeze is a pretty low-pain way to spare some jobs. These principals have taken a step in the right direction. It would be so unfair for some to not feel the pain at all and others to be cut right to the bone.
How much is the standard times donating to the school system? Shouldn't they share in the sacrifice?
Sacrifice is easy when you're asking someone else to do it.
A pay freeze is not an easy answer for any of the unions to agree to. While inflation may not have moved much, it is well known that health insurance will certainly increase as well as many other things. On one hand, it is simply asking to sacrifice perhaps a tank of gas, or a few days worth of groceries. But for some that may be a more painful sacrifice than others. It's unfair for anyone to say that teachers can afford it more than others.
Someone made a comment the other day about how teachers make more than double the average salary in NB which is 15K, so teachers should have no problem giving up their raises. May I remind everyone that those individuals making 15K a year also receive MASSHealth, which means no premiums, no copays, they get free glasses and braces. They also qualify for Foodstamps, Fuel Assistance, and possibly even cash or rent assistance. And please let's not forget where that money comes from. If I didn't have to pay for healthcare and groceries, I would gladly take a pay cut since those 2 items cost me about $700 a month. And those of us who are actual contributing members of society pay a thing called taxes, knocking everyone's salary down by about a third.
So I have a proposal: They get their pay freeze, keep your taxes, and the government can cut welfare, which is the real drain on society. You want to get angry; Go down to the Office of Transitional Assistance and watch how many people you see pull up in Lexuses, carrying Coach Bags with their children in tow wearing $150 Jordans and toting iPhones. Go into the schools and see the kids getting free lunch, texting on their Sidekicks and sporting more expensive clothes than most. I know a child whose mother was kicked out of Housing because she was letting her drug dealer boyfriend live with her for 4 years before she actually got caught. She did not pay that money back to the state, but thankfully she is banned from receiving housing ever again, so she won't be able to get away with robbing the city a 2nd time.
I'm sorry you want teachers to take the pay cut; Fine, but don't sit their and claim that it's fair or easy. I say cut from those who don't contribute. Why are they so exempt? It's called "transitional" assistance not "permanent dependence." It's only getting worse. People are realizing more and more that it's simply too easy to manipulate and rob the system. There's no incentive to being honest and working hard. You're just villainized later when you won't share what you have rightfully earned even though you've already contributed. It's never enough. No wonder no one wants to go into teaching. You'd have to be insane.
If you want teachers to take a pay freeze or cut, honey would work better than vinegar. Claims that it is easier or "teachers get too much" is just a cop out and plain insulting to some very incredible individuals that give a hell of alot more than their time. Most teachers care more than their students' parents do these days. Have a little respect. It's not an easy job and without them, where would some of our kids be?
In my opinion this is nothing more than political grandstanding and an attempt to pressure the NBEA into a decision to forego steps and/or raises based on pressure. How many raises would principals have to forego to make as little as a member of Unit A or Unit B? How many principals do we have with 50-100 students? How many schools do we have with 200 students? Considering published events of the past couple of years, how much credibility does this particular administrator who spoke of foregoing her raise (if it is tax deductable) have? Instead of an Administrator for Equity and Diversity at 80,000 dollars, we need an Assistant Superintendent for Equity and Diversity at 120,000? When Dr. Sousa announced his retirement his position with Human Resources was downgraded to Administrator. Why not the same with the position for Equity and Diversity? Why would anyone give a 30,000 dollar raise to a position that was previously eliminated, is currently vacant, and then cry broke? Why not eliminate the school committe and let "the community" run the school system? How many Directors have had their work year extended at contractual per diem rates? Will the NBSD pay two Headmasters at NBHS for the next 4 months until DV officially retires? Was any thought given to the impact of actions that effectively raise class size at the high school while cutting administrators? Why not eliminate the position of Assistant Headmaster at the high school also? What next? The SRO'S?
I have 2 thoughts:
I am curious about just where our "donated" step raises would go. Can we guarantee that the money they get from such an action would truly go to save a teacher's position? I am not in favor of foregoing a raise so the equity position can be funded.
Also, the cutting of coaches to reduce the number of teachers they need to cut was an impressive propaganda ploy. The plan is to put a teacher in a computer lab and let the struggling students sit in front of a computer to rectify their learning issues. Not even thinking about how ridiculous that sounds.... How, exactly, does that reduce our class numbers? Where is the software coming from? Who is paying for it? And let's think about the IT issues. That whole tap-dancing explanation at the SC meeting was a typical example of what we have to look forward to from our new administrator who can "do it all."
Post a Comment