Anti-Teacher Argument #6: It's Our Tax Dollars

Whenever another round of teacher contract negotiations come up, it is inevitable that the taxpaying citizens of Ontario become alarmed.  It is, after all, their money that pays the salaries of teachers.

Here are just a few comments that I have taken from some of the media message boards over the last few weeks:

"We pay you people to sit at home all summer and do nothing"
"I pay your salary!"
"You should make minimum wage because you are on my wallet."
"You people are lazy and whiners.  Tax payers can't afford to pay you."

But the most intriguing quote was naturally from Toronto Sun reporter Michael Coren:

"gave our money to teachers to prevent those same teachers from going on strike and thus giving grief and hardship to the very people — parents — who pay their wages in the first place."

Each of these comments got my mathematical mind to thinking.  Yes, Ontario taxpayers have the right to complain about where their money is going, but do they even know how much of it ends up in the pocket of teachers?

Are teachers salaries so high that the end result is "grief" and "hardship?" for Ontario citizens?

Lets take a look at the math.

Education Budget:  19 billion
Percentage Spent on Teacher Salaries (prior blogs)  47.3%
Citizens of Ontario: 12, 851, 821
% of Citizens of Ontario in the workforce (70%)

So the money that every working taxpayer contributes yearly to teachers salaries (including teachers) is (19 billion x .473) divided by (12,851,821 x 0.7) which equals about $1000 a year.

The amount they contribute overall to education would be 19 billion divided by (12,851,821 x 0.7) = $2,111.

That means that the average working taxpayer (including teachers) of Ontario contributes $2,111 towards our educational system, of which $1000 goes to teachers.

As stand alone numbers, these really have no meaning.

But if we look into daycare costs in Ontario, we discover that the typical rates are anywhere from $400- $900 PER MONTH or around $4800 - $10800 per year.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/daycare/daycarecosts.html

With the introduction of FREE All Day Kindergarten, the amount of Ontario citizens who will require daycare will decrease in number.

This should free up more money to be contributed to the system.  After all, a significant portion of the population will now be saving upwards of $5000 a year.

Some will even save $8000 per year.

More interestingly however, is the actual cost of education per student in Ontario in comparison to the United States and the United Kingdom

According to the government there were 2,061,390 students enrolled in public school in Ontario in 2010.    http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/educationFacts.html

The educational budget from that year was around 17 billion dollars.

Thus, the cost per student was $8246.

According to the Heritage Foundation of America, the cost of a 12 year education for the typical American child is $100,000 or about $8333 per year.

http://www.heritage.org/research/education-notebook/education-notebook-the-cost-of-american-education

The Telegraph Newspaper says the cost for public school in the U.K was $9000 (pounds).

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/3090528/Cheaper-to-educate-a-child-privately-say-headteachers.html

Thus, despite what our taxpayers and media might be proclaiming, Ontario is spending an equivalent amount per pupil as other nations.

So teacher salaries are not a unique burden on the taxpayer.

In fact, the cost of education on the Ontario taxpayer is EXACTLY what it should be.

To Summarize So Far

1) Teachers do not work 9 to 3.  Based on only 6 additional tasks they work at minimum 9 to 5.

2) Teachers "prep time" replaces "break time" instead of adding to it.

3) Teachers do not need to perform extracurriculars as less than 25% of the population volunteers themselves.

4) Teachers do not get vacation pay but receive "sick day" pay instead.

5) Teacher salaries are not eating up the educational budget.  They are the same percentage of the pie as
they were in the Mike Harris era.

6) The media is misleading the public with anti-teacher rhetoric that is factually incorrect

7) Teachers are not allowed to discuss the waste in education as a means to prevent salary freezes and/or reductions

8) Teachers can be suspended without being told of the offense and/or providing an explanation

9) Few educated professionals suffered as a result of the recession, but teachers are expected to give
    back because of it.

10) Teachers have never once raised the notion of a salary increase, but rather, simply want the basic human right to be able to collectively bargain.

Anti-Teacher Argument #5 The Recession

So who really was negatively impacted by the recent recession?  Media outlets would have you believe that there was massive "carnage" throughout the private sector, and teachers, having escaped unharmed, need to stop "whining" and "give back."

But are these claims true?

Lets take a look at a few pieces of evidence from Statistics Canada:

The above chart reveals that most of the job losses during the "recession" were in low paying private sector jobs.  There was little job loss in typical professions. Moreover, most of the individuals who made less than $10.00 per hour were in the age range of 15-24, that is, people just starting their careers, not people who were in them.

But there is more:

      http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75-001-x/2009112/tables-tableaux/11048/tbl003-eng.htm

So not only was most of the job loss incurred by those who were 15-24 in age and just getting started in their careers, but those who were 15-24 in age and lacking a University Degree (7.2% vs 0.6% in men and 2.7% vs 1.2% in women).

Since most professionals between the ages of 25-65 did not suffer as we have been led to believe, taking away a teachers right to collectively bargain because of the "massive carnage" is not a factual argument.

Nor is the argument that individuals were forced to take wage cuts, and thus, teachers should as well.  As the statistics show there was  actually an increase in jobs paying $40 or more per hour during this period (12.9%).

The Burden of Being a Teacher

The following note was passed to me from a friend.  This note was placed in his mailbox at school because the note-writer thought he was me.

Here is what it says:

"I am writing to ask your opinion on the following teacher related topic.  Maybe you will share your insights on your very informative and entertaining blog.

Recently a colleague of mine was sent home from school because of an allegation.  This colleague was not told of the nature of the allegation, nor has this person been asked to defend any words or actions.  This colleague is not allowed near TDSB property.  The teacher is being tried by multiple agencies and will not be afforded the opportunity to speak in defence of their "actions."

I ask, in what other profession is one punished without the ability to defend and without knowledge of their own crime?

Keep up the excellent work."

To this point, this blog has tried to make conclusions based upon facts.  To be the antithesis to the current media.

However, in this instance, it is impossible to research facts that support the "note-writers" claims.  There is no published information about the number of people who have experienced similar situations.

Yet, there are conversations.  Conversations that suggest that such is a regular occurrence.

I know it has happened before.

All it takes is an allegation from a student or parent and this can happen.

One student who is upset that a teacher gave them a bad grade.  One parent who didn't like the report card.

This kind of goes against what was written yesterday in the Toronto Sun:

Teachers control their marks and anyone who has been through the education system knows a teacher who is out to get a student can make their lives miserable.

http://www.torontosun.com/2012/09/21/teachers-arent-protesting-for-the-kids


Clearly this writer has no idea what currently goes on in education.  Even if a teacher makes a student's life miserable for a moment, he/she may be sent home as part of an unknown investigation.

As the secret note-writer asks, in what other profession does this occur?

More Media Lies

Our Union should target newspapers that print articles where there are blatant exaggerations of "facts" and/or a total disregard for investigative journalism. 

The Toronto Sun is one such paper.  Again and again, anti-teacher rhetoric is spewed forth, without so much as a widespread retort from ETFO.

Take for example these quotes in the Editorial Column from the Saturday September 22nd, 2012 edition of the Toronto Sun:

"Despite that, you would think teachers, who work 10 months a year with two weeks off at Christmas and one at March break, and who earn north of $90,000 annually at the top of their experience and salary grids, would realize how good they have it.

Especially compared to the ongoing carnage in the private sector since the 2008 global recession, where most workers consider themselves lucky to have a job."

I wonder what statistical analysis promoted the writer to suggest that there is "ongoing carnage" in the private sector, considering that a Statistics Canada report concluded the following:

"The recent recession was not as bad, employment-wise, in Canada as previous economic downturns have been.

Not only was the total job loss not as large, but the job market also rebounded more quickly, the agency found.

Canadian employment peaked in October 2008. Over the next 12 months, more than 400,000 jobs were lost. But those figures began to rebound quickly from late 2009 onward.

By January, the figure had fully recovered — 27 months after its initial trough."

(http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2011/02/23/recession-jobs-employment.html)

Moreover, Statistics Canada concluded that:

"Canada's economic recession ended in the third quarter of 2009 and was not only shorter and milder than in other G7 countries."

http://ca.reuters.com/article/idCAN1522142520100415

So the carnage doesn't exist.  Unless it is needed to convince the public that taking away teachers basic human right to collectively bargain is acceptable.

Up next:  who really lost their jobs during the recession?

Waste

An article in todays "tabloids" really got me thinking.  The article was about the Afrocentric School in Toronto having only 6 children and 3 teachers.  The article claims that the cost of running this program so far is $75,000 (Toronto Sun).

So what would be the yearly cost?  Since all teachers make "$90,000" a year the cost to run the program would be $270,000 in teacher salaries alone.  Then considering that teachers take up 47.3 percent of the education budget we can conclude that the actual cost of this program would be:

47.3 % of (unknown costs) = 270,000

Therefore the actual cost of running this program is  $570824.52 or about $95137 per kid.

Putting aside any anti-teacher arguments for a moment, suppose you are an accountant for a private company.

One day, the boss calls a staff meeting and informs his employees (and you) that there will be a significant reduction in wages, benefits and pensions,  plus he is going to force you to work three days a year for free.

He pleads with all of you to make these sacrifices for the "good of the company" which is in a serious financial crisis.

But you as the accountant know that the company has been frivolously spending an amount greater than the aforementioned cuts on expenses that are not required for the well-being of the company.

So you go and seek out your boss.

You tell him that you have ways to reduce company waste while at the same time maintaining the status quo in terms of wages and benefits.  No increases.  Just the status quo.

The response from your boss is to refuse to even hear your proposal, and legislate that you can no longer discuss issues of employee wages and benefits for the next 4 years.

Would you not be angry?

We know from the current NHL lockout that even individuals who make upwards of eight million a year still complain about cutbacks.  They say that if the league reduced the waste (Phoenix Coyotes, Florida Panthers etc.) then there would be no need to "cut back."

But teachers are somehow different?

They are not supposed to complain?

In this situation, yes we should always complain when management takes away from employees because of their "wasteful" practices.

So the question becomes, what evidence exists in Ontario Education of waste?

Can we come up with a total that is greater than what is being cut from teachers?

Why don't my viewers get us started..  let the comments roll.

Proof in Point

As a follow up to my last argument, take a look at this comment that was posted in response to my blog on vacation pay:

Teacher work on average 154 days per year. This is part time work, and part time is part time. Doesn't matter if you are delivering pizza, cutting hair or working at Sears in the cosmetic section. These are all peer jobs to the common teacher. Part time is part time. Now for the salary and benefits. Teachers in South Dakota make $34,040 per year, and have 15 weeks holiday. Same job as our Canadian teachers, so why the huge difference in pay? Teachers are not professionals, the use of this term is insulting to us Professionals. You will not find one single Professional in Canada that only works 154 days per year, and shutting down at 3:30. Please refrain from using this term, we have worked very hard to attain our designations and teachers are demeaning it. We are educated with real degrees, not a bird BA (Burger All) and some bird courses written by the union to get a teaching certificate. And, that is all that it is, a certificate. Not like a true Professional Designation like a CA, or LLP, etc.


These are precisely the people that we will never convince and should not spend a single amount of time on (beyond this blog).

She has ignored every single blog post, the real facts, and made erroneous conclusions that are not based on reality.

Despite teachers being officially called "professionals" by government agencies, universities, and other councils, she has decided that based on generic and untrue comparisons that she is entitled to determine that we are not.

Despite proving that teachers work from 9 to 5 before calculating extracurriculars she claims the job ends at 3:30.

She believes that teachers in South Dakota, and their living expenses, are similar to Toronto based on the fact that she believes this to be true.

She believes that a 5 year University degree, plus at least 2 additional university level courses qualifies as a certificate.

I thank her for proving our argument.