2018 Property Tax

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

doubt it would happen.

what's happening that I see is the working weeks getting shorter. (in the fields I'm involved with, anyway)

instead of hiring a full time continuing staff, there is more of a transition to casual staff who do the same jobs but are not eligible for the benefits.
plus by giving them less hours, they don't hit their casual hour totals to get bumped up for compensation and added benefits.

to make up for less total overall hours being worked, they just add to the workload of those who are there. I've lost track of the people who retired and the position was just eliminated, or those who had their jobs "displaced" and the work just handed to others.

Calgary could probably just do the same sort of thing, even if they have to hasten it by offering a buyout to get some expensive older people out the door. rewrite the job descriptions, lower the salary expectations and benefits.

seems places more often value low paid employees over knowledgeable, productive employees.

Interesting. What trade are you in?

[IliketoPuck]

Originally Posted by Sliver

(don't get me started on teachers working 3/4 of a day, 2/3 of a year for full-time pay) where they work less and less and get paid more than their private-sector counterparts. All while thinking they have it rough and are giving up something to be 'civil servants'. Let's cut these salaries and benefits, and get back to eight hours per day, five days per week. If you're going to have an easy government job with low expectations of productivity, the pay should be commensurate with that.

Mmmm.

Let's kick it off, shall we? (Teacher debate)

Here's a handy refresher on my position:

https://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpo...&postcount=335

We haven't had a good ol' fashioned teachers work "really" hard throw down for a little bit, and I'm itching for some debate. Especially with report card season in full swing, massively growing class sizes and reduced classroom supports.

Also, what the hell is with all these teacher salary increases? It is truly getting out of control. One increase of *gasp* 2% in the last seven years....

Alberta CPI moved from 127.1 (2012) to 140.6 (2018). An aggregate increase of 10.62% in the cost of living in the province over the same time frame.

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1...pid=1810000501

Alberta student population grew from 638.7K (2012) to 715.3K (2018), an aggregate increase of 12% over the same time frame.

https://open.alberta.ca/dataset/8ff9...03-28-2018.pdf


So, to recap:
1. Class sizes are growing.
2. Inflation continues unabated.
3. Teacher salaries lag behind even basic adjustment for cost of living.

I'm curious what argument can be made with a straight face that Alberta teachers don't deserve a massive pay raise?

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by IliketoPuck

-snip-

I'm curious what argument can be made with a straight face that Alberta teachers don't deserve a massive pay raise?

We can't afford it.


(closest smiley I could find with a straight face.)

[Ducay]

I think the argument was less specifically about the increases/lack thereof in their pay, but that they as a whole are overpaid for the number of hours on the job they do (including grading/report cards). With seniority you can clear $100k easily as a public teacher and only have to work 2/3 of the year with a handsome pension to boot. .

And yes, lots of us work unpaid overtime, so the grading/report card excuse isn't that relevant.

[IliketoPuck]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

We can't afford it.


(closest smiley I could find with a straight face.)

Can't afford what, exactly?

If you don't pay people what they are worth, in any profession, they leave. That leaves you with those that are willing to stay (typically the under performers and inexperienced).

Sounds like a good way to ensure our children are ready to take on the challenges ahead of them.

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by IliketoPuck

Mmmm.

Let's kick it off, shall we? (Teacher debate)

Here's a handy refresher on my position:

https://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpo...&postcount=335

We haven't had a good ol' fashioned teachers work "really" hard throw down for a little bit, and I'm itching for some debate. Especially with report card season in full swing, massively growing class sizes and reduced classroom supports.

Also, what the hell is with all these teacher salary increases? It is truly getting out of control. One increase of *gasp* 2% in the last seven years....

Alberta CPI moved from 127.1 (2012) to 140.6 (2018). An aggregate increase of 10.62% in the cost of living in the province over the same time frame.

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1...pid=1810000501

Alberta student population grew from 638.7K (2012) to 715.3K (2018), an aggregate increase of 12% over the same time frame.

https://open.alberta.ca/dataset/8ff9...03-28-2018.pdf


So, to recap:
1. Class sizes are growing.
2. Inflation continues unabated.
3. Teacher salaries lag behind even basic adjustment for cost of living.

I'm curious what argument can be made with a straight face that Alberta teachers don't deserve a massive pay raise?

How are Alberta teachers compensated in comparison to other Canadian provinces? How is that compensation in those other provinces relative to each regions' Cost of Living?

[Oling_Roachinen]

Teachers are one of the most widely known professions by students. I mean you literally can't be a student without one. It's not some secret society that people don't know about. So for the complainers, why didn't you become a teacher if they have it so easy?

Pretty much whenever I hear people complaining about teachers I hear "I was too stupid to make a career out of it and now I'm jealous."

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by IliketoPuck

Can't afford what, exactly?

If you don't pay people what they are worth, in any profession, they leave. That leaves you with those that are willing to stay (typically the under performers and inexperienced).

Sounds like a good way to ensure our children are ready to take on the challenges ahead of them.

Well, your 2nd and 3rd point applies to everyone, and many in the private sector have taken big pay cuts and haven't seen increases in wages either. This is more a society problem than a teachers problem.

Your first point relates to under-staffing, which could be addressed better by reducing pay to all teachers so more could be hired, thus decreasing the load and stress on current teachers who would be more willing to work in a better environment for less pay. Paying teachers more doesn't fix the issues, it just rewards them for having to deal with the suckage.

[IliketoPuck]

Originally Posted by Ducay

I think the argument was less specifically about the increases/lack thereof in their pay, but that they as a whole are overpaid for the number of hours on the job they do (including grading/report cards). With seniority you can clear $100k easily as a public teacher and only have to work 2/3 of the year with a handsome pension to boot. .

And yes, lots of us work unpaid overtime, so the grading/report card excuse isn't that relevant.

Hours on the job?

40 hour work week, annually, is 2,080 hours. Assuming 52 weeks worked.

Most people are eligible for between 3 and 4 weeks vacation per year (subtract 120-160 hours), leaves you with 1,960 to 1,920 hours worked. For you old bastards that get 5-6 weeks per year.....congrats.

For the specific teacher I know (before unpaid overtime), ten years experience (likely eligible for 4-5 weeks vacation in private sector):

7:30-4:30 (9hrs) x 5 = 45 hrs / week. 45*52 = 2,340
Less: Christmas (2 week break) = 90 hrs.
Less: March Break (1 week break) = 45 hrs.
Less: Summer Break (8 week break) = 360 hrs.

2340 - 495 = 1,845 hours worked annually.

So.....what are we actually arguing about? A difference of 75 hours worked (1.7 weeks) annually? And that's before adding in the unpaid overtime that would end up smashing through weekly hours worked for pretty much anyone not in the legal profession.

Ducay - do you get an annual bonus to compensate for overtime?

Just trying to put things into an apples to apples debate here.

Some people are fine with working hard and contributing just to the "greater good." I'd argue most people find that their marginal utility for extra effort is governed closely by how it is tied to income.

If you want the best results from any profession, then pay for it. If you don't, don't complain about the results.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by IliketoPuck

Mmmm.

Let's kick it off, shall we? (Teacher debate)

<checks the calendar>

Yup, it's about that time!

[IliketoPuck]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Well, your 2nd and 3rd point applies to everyone, and many in the private sector have taken big pay cuts and haven't seen increases in wages either. This is more a society problem than a teachers problem.

Exactly. So we have a public sector spending problem, on the aggregate. Front line teachers, in my opinion, are not a major source of that issue in Alberta.

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Your first point relates to under-staffing, which could be addressed better by reducing pay to all teachers so more could be hired, thus decreasing the load and stress on current teachers who would be more willing to work in a better environment for less pay. Paying teachers more doesn't fix the issues, it just rewards them for having to deal with the suckage.

Agreed here as well (edit: with the exception of the reduction in pay part). I think the biggest issue with the public sector (education specific) is that there is far too much administrative bloat, combined with the inefficiency of having the process overseen by elected trustees with dubious (at best) executive level experience. It results in lost money and inefficient deployment of resources.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by IliketoPuck

-snip-

7:30-4:30 (9hrs) x 5 = 45 hrs / week. 45*52 = 2,340
Less: Christmas (2 week break) = 90 hrs.
Less: March Break (1 week break) = 45 hrs.
Less: Summer Break (8 week break) = 360 hrs.

https://publicholidays.net/school-ho...-of-education/


You missed a few breaks.


I don't really have a problem with the hours worked, they do get screwed by having to pay more for vacations, and not being able to travel in off-busy seasons.

[Ironhorse]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Most private sector folks making more than minimum wage haven't had a salary increase since 2014. The public sector seems disconnected from reality when you have a 13% increase in salary over the same time frame.

They are totally disconnected.

Like a lot of private sector workers, I got a 10% salary cut in 2015, and zero increases since with none on the horizon.

[Fuzz]

https://www.cbe.ab.ca/registration/c...l-Calendar.pdf


This is a much better schedule, summary at the bottom. 199 operational days. Which is 1791 working hours, if you calculate them as 9 hours work(do they get a lunch break?). So about 16 days less than private sector.

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by Ironhorse

They are totally disconnected.

Like a lot of private sector workers, I got a 10% salary cut in 2015, and zero increases since with none on the horizon.

What was your compensation like 2012-2014, especially when compared with the public sector?

[CaptainCrunch]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1138138553555116032

[Locke]

Originally Posted by IliketoPuck

Mmmm.

Let's kick it off, shall we? (Teacher debate)


Also, what the hell is with all these teacher salary increases? It is truly getting out of control. One increase of *gasp* 2% in the last seven years....

I dont want to get into this all over again, but I'll address this.

They're the highest paid Teachers in the Country, some might even argue an even broader scale.

So why do they need an increase to accommodate for cost of living if their wages are already so high?

Its a correction. Its the next best thing to *GASP* ....pay cuts.

For a group that largely dont subscribe to the Economic Principle of Constant Growth I find the expectation of constant pay increases rather amusing.

[Handsome B. Wonderful]

Originally Posted by IliketoPuck

Hours on the job?

40 hour work week, annually, is 2,080 hours. Assuming 52 weeks worked.

Most people are eligible for between 3 and 4 weeks vacation per year (subtract 120-160 hours), leaves you with 1,960 to 1,920 hours worked. For you old bastards that get 5-6 weeks per year.....congrats.

For the specific teacher I know (before unpaid overtime), ten years experience (likely eligible for 4-5 weeks vacation in private sector):

7:30-4:30 (9hrs) x 5 = 45 hrs / week. 45*52 = 2,340
Less: Christmas (2 week break) = 90 hrs.
Less: March Break (1 week break) = 45 hrs.
Less: Summer Break (8 week break) = 360 hrs.

2340 - 495 = 1,845 hours worked annually.

So.....what are we actually arguing about? A difference of 75 hours worked

In order to make your math work, you're artificially limiting non-teachers to 40 hours per week, while claiming lunch as work for teachers, pretending they don't usually have shorter schedules on Fridays, and skipping over a whole lot of non-teaching days. Nice try.

[Ironhorse]

Originally Posted by Regorium

What was your compensation like 2012-2014, especially when compared with the public sector?

Pretty much comparable to public sector, except they worked less hours for it.

[IliketoPuck]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

https://www.cbe.ab.ca/registration/c...l-Calendar.pdf


This is a much better schedule, summary at the bottom. 199 operational days. Which is 1791 working hours, if you calculate them as 9 hours work(do they get a lunch break?). So about 16 days less than private sector.

That's what I used, but didn't put in the one minor break, as I felt that is a break pretty well everyone gets. That would account for the extra few hours difference in our calculations.