Striking teachers get pay docked!
- Thread starter JLM
- Start date
Paying more is just one side of the equation. What I'm proposing is paying less money for incompetence so there IS extra money for where it's deserved. I doubt if there are going to be bigger class sizes, at least not for any longer than the very short term. -
I tried giving you a chance to figure this out on your own. It doesn't take an "Einstein". - If you really condone paying bribes it doesn't say much for your repudibility!It must be a pretty damn small pond if a bucket is 10% of the pond, but to answer your question, it gets 10% smaller.
Paying more is just one side of the equation. What I'm proposing is paying less money for incompetence so there IS extra money for where it's deserved. I doubt if there are going to be bigger class sizes, at least not for any longer than the very short term. -
How do you fire 10% of the teachers and not increase class sizes? Are you going to cull 10% of the worst students too?
Last edited:
I would have thought you'd have figured it out by now as no doubt about 99% of the other posters already have. In B.C. we have a glut of teachers and every year more are graduating so like the water out of the pond, more would be pouring in to take up the slack. While I'm on the topic I'm not sure the standard school teacher is the person to put in charge of ALL "special needs" kids. Perhaps they would served better by specialized people for at least part of the school day. Perhaps they could be improved functionally by spending time differently from say learning Physics or History. As for you BornRuff, I suggest a course "Thinking Outside the Box 101" -
I'm backing the teachers 100%. First off, this government has already lost in court for negotiating in bad faith. In court--and they still claim they didn't do anything wrong. Second of all, with all this crap about temporary foreign workers abuse and explosion of these "unpaid internship" positions I'm glad someone is making a stand. Unions, in my opinion, were a chief contributor to maintaining the middle class in Canada.
Plus, I know my kids teachers. Yeah, I can name a few duds, but most of them are good and a few of them are downright excellent that consistently go above and beyond the call of duty, and inspire their kids.
Plus, I know my kids teachers. Yeah, I can name a few duds, but most of them are good and a few of them are downright excellent that consistently go above and beyond the call of duty, and inspire their kids.
I would have thought you'd have figured it out by now as no doubt about 99% of the other posters already have. In B.C. we have a glut of teachers and every year more are graduating so like the water out of the pond, more would be pouring in to take up the slack. While I'm on the topic I'm not sure the standard school teacher is the person to put in charge of ALL "special needs" kids. Perhaps they would served better by specialized people for at least part of the school day. Perhaps they could be improved functionally by spending time differently from say learning Physics or History. As for you BornRuff, I suggest a course "Thinking Outside the Box 101" -
Thinking outside the box? Why don't you start with thinking your ideas through.
If you fire 10% of the teachers, increase the pay for all the other teachers by 10%, and then hire more teachers to make up for the 10% that you lost, you just end up spending spending about 250 million more per year for the same number of teachers. All but 10% of them being the exact same teachers you were paying 10% less for previously, the other 10% apparently being new young teachers, so we can't even be sure if they will be any better.
So, how on earth is this a good deal for taxpayers?
Last edited:
Typical political thinking- just for the short term. For long term prosperity you have to get rid of the riff raff once in awhile or you have a situation just like the rotten apple in the box, it's only a matter of time before the rot spreads. Also when that happens the next 10% or so start to smarten up before they get the axe. The powers that be in the system should start tweaking their screening and short listing process to avoid getting more "rotten apples" when they do hire. Their is too much complacency in the system. Also you want to keep in mind we are not necessarily trying for a cheaper system, just a more efficient one. I like most people don't mind paying some tax, just don't want to see what I do pay, getting squandered which Gov't is famous for doing! -
Typical political thinking- just for the short term. For long term prosperity you have to get rid of the riff raff once in awhile or you have a situation just like the rotten apple in the box, it's only a matter of time before the rot spreads. Also when that happens the next 10% or so start to smarten up before they get the axe. The powers that be in the system should start tweaking their screening and short listing process to avoid getting more "rotten apples" when they do hire. Their is too much complacency in the system. Also you want to keep in mind we are not necessarily trying for a cheaper system, just a more efficient one. I like most people don't mind paying some tax, just don't want to see what I do pay, getting squandered which Gov't is famous for doing! -
It's not a short term issue. The extra 250 million per year would go on indefinitely.
Your idea is just bad. You want to give almost all teachers a huge raise just for not being the absolute worst teachers. I have no problem with booting workers in any field if they can't do their job well, but it shouldn't be based on arbitrary quotas and it shouldn't involve handing over hundreds of millions of dollars to other workers for no real reason.
All else the same, we do want the system to be as cheap as possible. We don't want to pay more than we have to if we can get the exact same thing for less.
Like with any idea there has to be flexibility. Did I mean the figure to be exactly 10%? Of course not. I'm just planting a "seed". Is where we are at today with the automobile industry, where Henry Ford was at when he built his first Model T? You are obviously not a flexible thinker, you just want to carry on with the status quo pissing $millions down the drain year after year!
Hahaha. I literally laughed out loud at this one. You are comparing your plan to pay 250 million more per year for essentially the same workforce as something on par with the idea for the model T?
Your idea is pretty much just status quo but a lot more expensive. Again, how is that in anyway beneficial to taxpayers?
I have a crazy idea regarding flexibility. Why not be open to different pay structures if it can save money and make the government more efficient(i.e. signing bonuses).
Last edited:
Top 10 Canadian CEOs by total compensation
- Gerald Schwartz, Onex, $87.9M
- Nadir Mohamed, Rogers, $26.7M
- Michael Wilson, Agrium, $23.8M
- Donald Walker, Magna, $19.6M
- Gerald Nixon, RBC, $14M
- Doug Suttles, Encana, $13.7M
- Steve Williams, Suncor, $12.8M
- Scott Saxberg, Crescent Point Energy, $12.7M
- Donald Guloien, Manulife, $12.7M
- Bradley Shaw, Shaw Communications, $12.4
Bloody thieves! -
Now there's an idea. What genre of music were you thinking?
... And?
All of these people risked their money, futures and well being of their families to take a risk that they (hoped) would pay off.
Hell, Schwartz is paying somewhere in the neighborhood of $30-$40 million in Cdn taxes per year
For starters X x 30 students a year will get a better education.
You don't think Cats in that category find ways to write it off? I wouldn't be surprised to hear he paid very little tax if any. How much of it is invested overseas?