A Different Take on Teachers' Salaries (Compensation)

[DGS49]

It is ALWAYS said when public school teachers' union contracts are coming up for renewal/renegotiation that "We have to pay them as much as possible in order to attract and retain the best possible people." Sounds logical, right?

But does it stand up to scrutiny when compared to their only true "competitors" in the job market?

I read recently that some of the "Hollywood" folks who are in trouble for cheating to get their kids into posh, elite institutions of higher learning, have sent their kids in earlier grades to expensive private or parochial schools in the L.A. area, some with tuitions approaching forty thousand dollars per year. And although private school tuitions in the rest of the country probably don't reach those stratospheric heights, it is fair to say that similarly situated parents around the country are paying well into five figure annual tuitions (plus assorted fees and whatnot) to put their kids into the "best" parochial and private schools.

But the question is, What do those schools pay their teachers? In Los Angeles, the selective private schools are reputed to pay an average of about $50k - significantly less than the median base pay at the LAUSD, which is reported to be $75 thousand. And the Elephant in the Room is the fact that a LAUSD teacher can retire in her early 50's with full benefits, living off the fat of the land for the rest of her natural life; whereas her private school counterparts have to live with un-generous 401k's, for the most part, benefits be damned.

I won't even mention the On-Life-Supports faculty of the remaining Catholic/parochial schools, many of whom would receive significant pay bumps if the $15 Minimum Wage were enacted. These unfortunate saints are not statistically relevant, eh?

Juxtaposing these public & private school numbers begs a number of questions and answers.

1. How can one say that "more pay = better teachers" when the best results come from teachers with dramatically lower incomes?
2. If "more pay = better teachers," Why aren't the parents of the kids in the posh schools demanding better compensation for their teachers? Does it not concern them that their kids' teachers are "underpaid"?
3. What would it take to lure a public school teacher, mid-career, into a private school? Can sufficient money be even printed?

Parenthetically, the teachers' unions are regularly publishing "research" showing that public school teachers are underpaid relative to other "professions"...but they NEVER include salary comparisons with private, parochial, and charter school teachers, which are in fact the ONLY comparable numbers that are relevant. Perhaps those comparisons would "skew" the results.

I have not been able to find any reliable data on what teachers are paid in any major private school. The numbers seem to be based on word-of-mouth information that is of questionable value. But still...

Do any of our correspondents have reliable information on private school teachers?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

It is ALWAYS said when public school teachers' union contracts are coming up for renewal/renegotiation that "We have to pay them as much as possible in order to attract and retain the best possible people." Sounds logical, right?

But does it stand up to scrutiny when compared to their only true "competitors" in the job market?

I read recently that some of the "Hollywood" folks who are in trouble for cheating to get their kids into posh, elite institutions of higher learning, have sent their kids in earlier grades to expensive private or parochial schools in the L.A. area, some with tuitions approaching forty thousand dollars per year. And although private school tuitions in the rest of the country probably don't reach those stratospheric heights, it is fair to say that similarly situated parents around the country are paying well into five figure annual tuitions (plus assorted fees and whatnot) to put their kids into the "best" parochial and private schools.

But the question is, What do those schools pay their teachers? In Los Angeles, the selective private schools are reputed to pay an average of about $50k - significantly less than the median base pay at the LAUSD, which is reported to be $75 thousand. And the Elephant in the Room is the fact that a LAUSD teacher can retire in her early 50's with full benefits, living off the fat of the land for the rest of her natural life; whereas her private school counterparts have to live with un-generous 401k's, for the most part, benefits be damned.

I won't even mention the On-Life-Supports faculty of the remaining Catholic/parochial schools, many of whom would receive significant pay bumps if the $15 Minimum Wage were enacted. These unfortunate saints are not statistically relevant, eh?

Juxtaposing these public & private school numbers begs a number of questions and answers.

1. How can one say that "more pay = better teachers" when the best results come from teachers with dramatically lower incomes?
2. If "more pay = better teachers," Why aren't the parents of the kids in the posh schools demanding better compensation for their teachers? Does it not concern them that their kids' teachers are "underpaid"?
3. What would it take to lure a public school teacher, mid-career, into a private school? Can sufficient money be even printed?

Parenthetically, the teachers' unions are regularly publishing "research" showing that public school teachers are underpaid relative to other "professions"...but they NEVER include salary comparisons with private, parochial, and charter school teachers, which are in fact the ONLY comparable numbers that are relevant. Perhaps those comparisons would "skew" the results.

I have not been able to find any reliable data on what teachers are paid in any major private school. The numbers seem to be based on word-of-mouth information that is of questionable value. But still...

Do any of our correspondents have reliable information on private school teachers?

I love how you use stats from one of the most bizarre states in the nation when it comes to education.

$50,000 a year is a starvation paycheck in the People's Republic of California. My daughter paid half that much in rent for a one-bedroom apartment 15 years ago.

 

[DGS49]

And your point would be...?

For GENERATIONS, teachers have made wages that could not independently support an individual as a middle-class human. Fortunately, the vast majority of teachers have a working spouse (as does everybody else), and between the two (or more) incomes they get by.

And the majority of property owners in Los Angeles could not afford to buy the home they live in, at today's prices, with the income they have, assuming 10% down. It's called a "real estate bubble." I didn't create it.

 

[Unkotare]

.....

Do any of our correspondents have reliable information on private school teachers?

Lots of us do, but you never listen. You just wallow in your obsession against teachers and cling to your ignorance like a security blanket. Hating teachers and hating sports are the only two thoughts playing Pong in your empty skull, troll.

 

[DGS49]

What the fuck is wrong with you? TDS? ADHD?

Do you have reliable information on private or parochial school teacher compensation?

Asshole.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

What the fuck is wrong with you? TDS? ADHD?

Do you have reliable information on private or parochial school teacher compensation?

Asshole.

Do you not know how to quote? Nobody has a clue as to who or what you are yammering about.