[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Sliver

Of course teachers work less hard than any other professional. They get three months off a year, work 3/4 of a day and get multiple breaks throughout the day (lunch, spares, recess, etc.). On top of that, they work a short career with insane life-long benefits and a pension that pays out more than they put in.

Salaries aren't out of line (though they're higher than almost anywhere else in the world), but I don't see a lot of taxpayers complaining about it.

The time off is of course extorted through collective bargaining, and is an example of how when the interests of teachers, parents, and students are on conflict, it's almost always teachers who win out. My kids have three fewer school days than last year, which in turn had three fewer than the year before. Taking the entire summer off is bad for learning. That is no longer seriously disputed anywhere, and North America is about the only place in the world where schools still take all summer off. And yet here we are.

The biggest issue, though, is the early retirements. Just as it is evident to most people how much time teachers really get off until they have kids, it won't be evident to most people how much earlier teachers (and police, etc.) retire than workers in the private sector until we're all in our 60s. When workers in the private sector are grinding out their last year or two of employment at 65 or 67, it won't pass their notice that their teacher friends have been retired for a decade or more already.

Originally Posted by Sliver

I think it's the union that makes a lot of noise. It's always asking for more. And to get more, it needs to make the case to the public that teachers currently have a raw deal, which is of course ridiculous. But that pisses off taxpayers, as it should. And some teachers believe their own union's propaganda, which is really annoying, but I honestly don't encounter any of those in real life. Just see them yelling on the news during strikes or whatever.

I don't know anyone who denigrates the job of teaching, which is difficult and important. What people resent is the concessions teachers have achieved through unions (and ultimately the threat of striking), concessions that often come at the expense of students, parents, and taxpayers. When unions help underpaid working-class people achieve a middle-class livelihood, they tend to get public sympathy. When they help already middle-class people achieve a lifestyle much better than most other middle-class taxpayers, they inspire resentment.

Originally Posted by AltaGuy

Still wondering why we're really so concerned with teachers when family doctors appear to do almost nothing and are paid three times the amount.

Given the private medical system in the U.S., we have a market comparable. In recent memory, doctors have left Canada for the American system, which suggests doctors are not overpaid.

How many teachers leave the public system to go teach in private schools? Precious few. Given that, along with the fact there are far more people graduating with teaching degrees than there are teaching jobs, suggests teachers are paid above what an open market would value them at.

Originally Posted by WinnipegFan

Here you are simply incorrect. The pension that an average teacher gets will never come close to the true value of what they put into it. I recommend all teachers pull their pensions when they can and invest it for themselves. The return on the money the teacher has put in 30 years down the line is only 4% however any regular investor can achieve at least 6% return. This also allows the capital to remain in your hands and become an inheritable asset. If you simply collect the pension you would have to live a minimum 20 years just to get the capital back you have put into the fund not accounting for the compound growth now for 50 years. This is why teacher pensions plans get astronomically large, the teachers actually don't get back what they put into it and the capital these funds have grows exponentially.

That may have been true in the past, but I have a hard time believing it's true today. Lifespans are going up, and given they tend to be healthier (and more female) than the population at large, the life expectancy of teachers is going up dramatically. A teacher entering the profession today is projected to have a life expectancy of over 90. And that teacher probably expects to retire at 56. The guy in charge of managing the Ontario Teachers Pension fund has raised alarm bells over the issue, saying a system where teachers earn a pension for longer than they work is not viable.

And of course, teachers' pensions are part of collective bargaining, and in a sense protected by the government. Shortfalls? Bring it up on the next negotiations and the public purse will come to the rescue.