Granted, the MPS District is more than likely liable for costs incurred under the current contract, and I'm sure they know that. I'm not arguing that. I'm simply looking forward in time, and as negotiations continue, I think contract changes need be made.
And, to compare the situations of Lawrence Coss, Kevin Garnett or other seemingly outrageous pay situations in the private sector with teachers' ability to make a livable wage is ridiculous and misses the point entirely. Corporate CEO's and star athletes are not paid with public funds. Their wage/benefit situations have nothing to do with that of public employees. Corruption and greed in the private sector should not be used to scapegoat or justify compensation packages (wages AND benefits) for public employees-- in this case teachers, that go beyond what most college-educated professional workers in the private sector receive for often comparable work throughout our economy. It remains my contention that guaranteeing increased wages based simply on increased years of service, and for getting more education, is a wasteful and not necessarily productive use of public money. Overall, not many everyday workers enjoy this degree of teacher wage/benefit privilege-- and in effect, it is these everyday workers who are being asked to subsidize the public employees with such contracts, even though many of those paying the taxes may have no health insurance themselves, and get no automatic increases based on time on the job and classes/degrees completed. Cost of living and performance-oriented increases are just fine-- they should serve to reward good teachers over time relative to mediocre teachers. These particular teacher-incentives (tying wages to years on the job and classes/degrees completed) have a questionable relationship to classroom performance and no relationship to the government's (read taxpayers) ability to pay, and should be eliminated. If the money is there, perhaps an added degree could be compensated, but it should not be a given. In a more competitive environment, some teachers will pursue advanced studies/degrees because they believe it will enhance their capabilities and effectiveness in the classroom, and that it may result in enhanced pecuniary gains, relative to those that don't seek advancement, over time. In tough times, the advanced degree might even be thought to be an advantage in keeping one's job... absent a blind seniority-based tenure system. Michael Hohmann Linden Hills > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of > Ken & Karla > Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 11:48 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Mpls] Greedy teachers? > > > As I read the news, the Minneapolis teachers are asserting that the > contract -- which remains in force -- calls for certain salary > adjustments. > If that's the contract language, that's what should happen. That's the > issue. > > -- Ken Bearman, King Field > > REMINDERS: > 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager > at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. > 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. > ________________________________ > > Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn > E-Democracy > Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
