On 6/18/09, NC teacher wrote:
> To Marina and others-while it is true that teachers in NC are not
> unionized, we are not oppressed slaves either. Your comments
> indicate a lack of knowledge and a clear anti-Southern bias which is
> somewhat condescending.
I'm more anti-Right-to-Work state than anti-Southern. Granted, most
southern states are RTW, but so are many Great Plains states. North
and South Dakota, for instance, have some of the lowest teacher pay in
the nation. Granted, there's cost-of-living considerations, but SD
teachers still make an average of 38000 per year. That's average
teacher salary, not starting salary!
Personally, I like the south, as a region and culture. I like
Atlanta, Charlotte, and most anywhere that has moderate winters and a
nearby beach. I LOVE New Orleans and have been there 3 times since
Katrina. I'd live there if I could make anything close to my salary.
I grew up in Maryland. I love living and
> teaching in NC. I imagine some of you draw your opinions of NC
> teaching from the NC board on this website. It represents the views
> of perhaps a dozen people.
Actually, I hadn't looked at North Carolina's salary scale, but you've
induced me to look at it. So, let me say that even though my opinion
wasn't data driven, it has been justified by the data. Now, it
appears your state pays everyone the same money, but districts have
the option of paying a "supplemental" wage. Hopefully that's a
significant supplement based on the low salaries.!
Here's what I see. In 2008, a teacher with a BA and no experience
will be paid 30,430 per year. A teacher with a MA and 0 years will
make$33,470. Now, at the TOP of the salary scale, a teacher with a MA
and 31 years will make $57,810. If they get National Board Cert, a
process which I've heard is like getting a second Master's, he/she
will make $64750.
Now, in my Illinois district, a BA with 0 years will start at $40,315.
In NC, a teacher with a BA would have to have 12 years to make a
comparable wage. An MA with 0 would make $48,892. In NC, they'd have
to have 19 years experience to make that money. We start a MA with 0
years where you would be at almost 20 years experience!
Now, your MA teacher tops out after 31 years at 57,810. In my
district, an MA teacher makes just over that at 7 years. At the top
of my salary scale, a MA makes $81,804 at 20 years. If that MA
teacher adds another 30 graduate credits, that climbs to over $90,000
at 20 years.
Just for giggles I googled the supplements to see how much more they
pay. I read that Charlotte-Mecklenberg provides the highest
supplement in the state at 13-16.5%. Some districts provide nothing
or next to nothing (1-2%). So, the state salaries are just about it
in most of NC.
>At this moment, it would appear that the
> NC legislature is doing a better job of trying to protect teaching
> jobs in NC than the union of Florida or some other states.
>
No, its supply and demand, plain and simple. At 20 years, my
district's top, a Charlotte NC teacher makes 56,600 with the
supplement. Most NC teachers make less. Because your teachers are
cheap, they don't have to cut as deep. The IL teacher makes almost
82,000 (granted this varies by district, we don't have a state
schedule).
So, my question for you is, are NC teachers worth 26,000 less than IL
teachers? Or, are IL teachers better REPRESENTED than NC teachers.
Basically, with no union at all (which is bad because most RTW state
teachers have an optional union that does some bargaining) you wait to
take what the boss gives you. You have no say, except to quit, which
is what many NC teachers do. This is why NC was traveling around the
country (until this year) looking for teachers, because they don't
generate proper supply locally due to poor, poor pay. Yes, some IL
and other state teachers will be laid off this year, but overall, we
will make MUCH more money and have better treatment throughout our
careers. If NC and the other RTW states would push to unionize, then
you might get a bigger piece of the pie.
>
>
> On 6/18/09, job seeker wrote:
>> I see that teachers are not in the same situation in the south,
>> where it is the 'old way' of poor pay/conditions.
>>
>> Mark, you made some great points. The reason everything is so
>> good now for teachers is because of the unions (and the opposite
>> for those non-unionized.)
>>
>> There are few jobs out there that offer the security and
>> pension, protections, etc. of a teacher. If you work for the
>> post office you get protections, but the pay is not that good.
>> Work for Walmart of Joe & Joe Law Firm or other corporation, you
>> are 'at will' and can lose your job easily. I've worked in 9-5
>> jobs, and you get 2 weeks vacation a year, which is very hard.
>> Where else do you get as much time off as a teacher?
>>
>> I can sympathize with teachers in NC or wherever where they have
>> none of these benefits and perks, but the teachers in my area
>> who complain about not having enough money or having to work an
>> extra 15 minutes....I'm sorry, that is not right.
>>
>> And yes, young women (mostly) are flooding into the education
>> degree program. To get a BA in education is not that difficult,
>> and most other professions require a Masters. I have seen
>> student teachers at my school who could not spell, and who
>> frankly did not seem to have talent. (I understand they are
>> young, but still they just did a bad job controlling the class
>> and creating a lesson.) So yes, the level of teachers will go up
>> because it has become a very desirable situation, and more and
>> more talented people will be choosing teaching instead of
>> marketing, accounting, computers, etc.
