3 ms·
> You questioned my 45% assertion. I provided some data. You say it's not representative. I invited you to provide different data that contradicts my point. Aga
by mlyle 4y ago
> You questioned my 45% assertion. I provided some data. You say it's not representative. I invited you to provide different data that contradicts my point. Again, I invite you to change my mind by showing me some more representative data.
> I checked another district in California (Morgan Hill). Looking at all 2021 employees whose job title includes the word 'teacher', the median additional compensation is 21% of base salary.
Oddly enough, this is where I live. Random chance or stalking? luls. This is still a relatively well-compensated district compared to most other states or many other parts of California.
And ... even so.. 45% is not the same as 21%.
I have not checked your numbers to see whether 21% is correct.
Also, if you're including pay for additional duty (e.g. working over summer) in that 21%... that's not so great, given that you've accounted for that separately in your calculation.
> so I don't know whether those numbers include the present value of unfunded pension liabilities.
From the site you chose to link: "Total benefits" consists of the employer-paid cost of health, dental and vision medical insurance and retirement contributions only. The cost of benefits do not reflect monetary payments received by the employee but, instead, reflect the cost incurred by taxpayers associated with employer-provided health and retirement benefits.
> If so, the actual number is higher.
??? The actual number is higher because what we're comparing against includes NPV of benefits?
> When we talk about some profession being underpaid or overpaid, we have to compare pay to other occupations that those currently employed could actually get.
Yes, but using the SAT scores or other measures of academic performance as a proxy to determine career options is a faulty methodology. And even if it were a powerful determinant of career options, it would still be faulty, because willingness of people to engage in the work for the pay matters (e.g. you have to pay garbagemen more).
> They compare teachers' salaries not to median salaries in the country, but to salaries for people with bachelors degrees, or masters degrees.
Which would seem to be a reasonable measure. You haven't demonstrated teachers have lower SAT scores (you made a faulty indirect argument about this, too), they still have completed those degrees. Comparing them to a cohort that includes workers at McJobs is not fair.
- rahimnathwani 4y agoI have to get back to parenting, so this will my last comment on this thread. I appreciate you taking the time :) I just want to clarify two things: 1. I didn't state clearly my point about the NPV of unfunded pension liabilities. AIUI, SFUSD contributes to teachers' pensions in two ways. The first is a contribution at the same time the teacher is paid their salary (which would show up on the 'total benefits' numbers we've been looking at). The second is contributions made after teachers are retired, when the contributions made beforehand aren't enough to pay for the defined benefits. When you look at teachers compensation today, it may account for the former, but probably not the latter, even though that has real value, it's paid by the employer, and it has real value for the teacher. 2. When you say 'workers at McJobs', I presume you mean those performing low-skill service jobs. AIUI[0], very few recent college graduates enter those jobs, so they're probably not a useful reference group. [0] https://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/2016/01/working-as-a-barista-after-college-is-not-as-common-as-you-might-think/#.VpVBY8ArLBi https://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/2016/01/workin...
- mlyle 4y ago> 2. When you say 'workers at McJobs', I presume you mean those performing low-skill service jobs. AIUI[0], very few recent college graduates enter those jobs, so they're probably not a useful reference group. You are appearing to argue that comparing teacher salaries against all jobs is better justified than comparing against those requiring bachelor's degrees. Therefore, you are the one arguing for the inclusion of McJobs. "And teachers' unions explicitly accept this. They compare teachers' salaries not to median salaries in the country, but to salaries for people with bachelors degrees, or masters degrees." At the same time, we've shown on a metric you value (that I don't for this purpose-- SAT scores) that teachers likely outperform median college graduates. If we're going to compare comp, why should they not be compared to equivalently educated people?