Iwasfrozen wrote: » Chartered Accountants have to spend years doing professional exams outside college, it's not a fair comparison. Also the teaching profession is over subscribed in this country, increasing wages will only lead to more congestion making it harder for new graduates to find jobs. A 50k base cap with bonuses for principals, vice principals etc. is more than enough.
Gebgbegb wrote: » Jeez why do you keep on about principals. What would a typical CEO of a company of 30 staff get in the private sector (you can ignore the 700 children and parents.. not like they need managing anyway)? Anyway... not a fair comparison for accountants!! Because they have to spend years doing professional exams How many years are we taking about? Do they get their pay increased for passing said exams?
Iwasfrozen wrote: » What company with a CEO only has 30 staff? A more accurate comparison would be a manager.
Iwasfrozen wrote: » And come to think of it what private sector manager has guaranteed customers and staff paid for by the state? Your comparisons are asinine and you know it.
Iwasfrozen wrote: » Many years,
Iwasfrozen wrote: » ...and yes they do get pay rises as they pass their exams.
Iwasfrozen wrote: » Teachers don't have to worry about professional exams...
Iwasfrozen wrote: » ... and start out on 30k .
Iwasfrozen wrote: » ...while most accountants start on the low 20s out of college.
Iwasfrozen wrote: » I know what you're going to say "but it takes years for teachers to become full time and make 30k" and yes I appreciate that,
Iwasfrozen wrote: » which is why I want to cap teachers basic wages at 50k
Iwasfrozen wrote: » and lower entrants wages to 25k to lower demand and make it easier new entrants to find positions
Iwasfrozen wrote: » but you bitched about that too.
Iwasfrozen wrote: » Honestly it seems you just want more pay and lower class sizes without any thought to how that will affect the deficit.
Gebgbegb wrote: » Ah now, ok we won't split hairs over CEO/Manager/ 30 staff/700 Pupils/700 Parents. But anyway just entertain me. Is there ANY job in the private sector that would begrudge 50k to any manager of over 30 staff (we'll ignore the teenagers and parents aside if it helps)?
Well you still got to manage them no matter if they are public or private sector. So the comparison and question still stands. Although I get the feeling that when it boils down to it there's loads of bluster about comparisons but a lot of avoidance when it's on the table.
How many ?
Ah like the masters allowance that teachers used to get. It would only seem fair to bring that back no? At least with the allowance you could have your masters paid off in 15 years.
Dunno who you're talking to but any teacher I know knows damn well that you ain't going to get anywhere near a post of responsibility without a masters (and not to mention all the other training that the job requires).
When I came out of college.... I had to go back to college to get my professional qualification (which is another 2 years unfunded now BTW).
Given the following statement I don't think you do appreciate it. So instead of a newer entrant on a portion of 30k you would put them on a portion of 25k!!! So that's going to provide someone with a living!
But yet you begrudge me on 43k! (And I've done loads of exams after graduating too! ... and I'm doing more now just to spite ya. By your standards i should be minted when I finish.)
Great, lower demand by having people scrounging for pennies from sub work. I presume you'd be in favour of having them working for free too if you could get away with it (jobbridge anyone!). It's not like they'd want to have a life/family or anything, shur they can live off the 3 months holidays!
I aint the one bitching about being paid a decent wage commensurate with qualifications and experience.
Ah here's where we get the false dilemma. It's nice of you to offer us a choice though.
Any thoughts on the next budget? Would you like to pay more taxes yourself then? Or are you looking for a cut in taxes?
Iwasfrozen wrote: » What company with a CEO only has 30 staff? A more accurate comparison would be a manager. And come to think of it what private sector manager has guaranteed customers and staff paid for by the state? Your comparisons are asinine and you know it. Many years, and yes they do get pay rises as they pass their exams. Teachers don't have to worry about professional exams and start out on 30k while most accountants start on the low 20s out of college. I know what you're going to say "but it takes years for teachers to become full time and make 30k" and yes I appreciate that, which is why I want to cap teachers basic wages at 50k and lower entrants wages to 25k to lower demand and make it easier new entrants to find positions but you bitched about that too. Honestly it seems you want more pay and lower class sizes without any thought to how it would affect the deficit.
jank wrote: » You accuse the poster of making an unfair comparison then go off and do one yourself. A principal is not a CEO, they are mid level managers if anything.
Kermit.de.frog wrote: » This is the wrong thing to do. It's so stupid that a country that has just come out of a devastating economic crisis goes back to set up another crisis. We can not afford this.
Arsemageddon wrote: » Business as usual so. Did you really expect anything else?
Kermit.de.frog wrote: » No. I had hoped that the trauma of the crisis would instill a bit of common sense and self control. This stuff damages the competitive position of the country and puts private sector jobs at risk and will prevent other investment and that will put the economy at risk.
Dozer Dave wrote: » Whats the weather like tomorrow?
The Backwards Man wrote: » There's an Eminence Front sweeping across the country
Dozer Dave wrote: » I was planning second cut silage.
silverfeather wrote: » You've lost me.
The Backwards Man wrote: » I Can't Explain
Turtwig wrote: » ; hiring more staff
Turtwig wrote: » Restoring pay shouldn't be priority; hiring more staff should be.
Gebgbegb wrote: » Well actually i think a Principals role is comparable to a CEO going by the definition:a chief executive officer, the highest-ranking person in a company or other institution, ultimately responsible for taking managerial decisions. Sure, they may be answerable to a Board of Management but CEO's are answerable to shareholders too! And the principal often has the final say on the BOM (to my knowledge!). So if you claim they are mid-level managers then .... who is above them!! As regards making comparisons i was referring to the poster who said it wasn't a proper comparison because ... "Chartered Accountants have to spend years doing professional exams outside college, it's not a fair comparison. " That was a separate argument to the poster's gripe about capping a Principals wages at 50k (plus bonuses!! whatever that means). I think it is fair to say there aren't many jobs in the private sector that would pay someone who is over 30staff (at least!) (and then 700 odd students and parents)/ plus managing the budget for wages, assigning roles and different rosters year in year out for every teacher/class group. Fighting off potential legal cases that could destroy any school etc. Anyways I'm out of this thread, folk are trying to treat the Public Service like a private company which makes a profit (and can fold at any stage). I've more than paid my share for PRIVATE SECTOR debt (oh but we all partied didn't we!). I've kept my end of the bargain and then some, to the best of my knowledge it isn't a pay rise, it's a pay restoration under an agreement. I accept that the T&C of extra workload will never be rescinded when FEMPI is finished, and that pay terms won't be reinstated all in one go. That's fair enough I think. But if you want to be a dog in a manger the least you could do is to eat the hay. So why don't you come over and join us in the public sector, the grass is obviously greener, you'd be a fool to stay where you are going by your own 'gravy train' logic.
Cookie_Monster wrote: » The election won't but itself you know.
