4 ms·
Because... you want to educate all the children, not just some of them? I mean, call me an out-of-touch plutocrat.
by aetherson 9y ago
Because... you want to educate all the children, not just some of them?
I mean, call me an out-of-touch plutocrat.
- rhizome 9y agoThat's only a problem when society decides teachers aren't worth much more than minimum wage. What's plutocracy's solution for that?
- 1812Overture 9y agoAverage total pay and benefits for a full time teacher at LAUSD is $98k and it's still a disaster.
- rhizome 9y agoI can't find a number that approaches $98K, what's your citation? LAUSD's own numbers for 2016-17 indicate a maximum of $88K, and that's with a doctorate and maximum seniority. http://achieve.lausd.net/cms/lib08/CA01000043/Centricity/Domain/280/Salary%20Tables/Salary%2016-17/T%20Table%20Annual.pdf http://achieve.lausd.net/cms/lib08/CA01000043/Centricity/Dom...
- 1812Overture 9y agoI downloaded the 2016 LAUSD dataset from transparentcalifornia.com and filtered by full time employees with the job title "Teacher". Including the benefits is key, the pension costs are gigantic. *Edit: Actually it was 2015 data. Also note that less than 1/3 of LAUSD's employees are teachers.
- rhizome 9y agoI guess I'm unclear on your point, then.
- 1812Overture 9y agoMy point is that if you consider their total compensation LAUSD teachers make great money and it's still an abysmally bad school district. In other districts where teachers are worse paid there's always people saying that paying teachers more will fix things, when it clearly doesn't.