Ontario Teachers’ began 2012 with $9.6-billion funding shortfall

[DearSummer]

Ontario Teachers’ began 2012 with $9.6-billion funding shortfall
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/ontario-teachers-began-2012-with-96-billion-funding-shortfall/article2390503/


The Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan had a $9.6-billion funding shortfall at the start of this year, despite recent contribution increases, benefit cuts, and solid investment returns.

The funding gap is symbolic of struggles across the pension sector, as plans grapple with low interest rates and lacklustre markets at the same time as the baby boomers hit retirement.


The Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System, for example, earned 3.17 per cent on its investments, which also pushed its assets to an all-time high (of $55.1-billion). It too saw its funding deficit climb, to $7.3-billion last year from $4.5-billion a year earlier.

Something tells me they didn't include these liabilities in the budget? ;)

Defined benefit plans are unsustainable and absolutely unfair to the private sector. Why should a private sector worker have to pay for a public sector worker's pension no matter what happens in the markets? Why would anybody make such a ridiculous promise to make guaranteed payments 50 years down the line? There is no possible way to account for the true cost of such a system.

[Ojam]

We get it, you don't think the public sector should be paid as much as they are.

DEARSUMMER THREAD

[manmanny]

Ontario Teachers’ began 2012 with $9.6-billion funding shortfall
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/ontario-teachers-began-2012-with-96-billion-funding-shortfall/article2390503/





Something tells me they didn't include these liabilities in the budget? ;)

Defined benefit plans are unsustainable and absolutely unfair to the private sector. Why should a private sector worker have to pay for a public sector worker's pension no matter what happens in the markets? Why would anybody make such a ridiculous promise to make guaranteed payments 50 years down the line? There is no possible way to account for the true cost of such a system.

And you forget about Plant closure fiasco and company suing government.

[flashy_mcflash]

And you forget about Plant closure fiasco and company suing government.

Teachers work in plants? HUR DURR

[manmanny]

Teachers work in plants? HUR DURR

You know you are being ridiculous now. Coming from Man(really?) saying Prophet Mohammad is/was not real.
But you will always derail any thread by OP.

Ad this cost to next budget. It will be settled and we wont know the cost or any details.
Ontario government faces $300-million suit for cancelling Mississauga gas plant (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/toronto/ontario-government-faces-300-million-suit-for-cancelling-mississauga-gas-plant/article2387744/)

[Rainne]

Teachers: We want X

Government: No

Teachers: WILL ANYONE PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN???

[manmanny]

Teachers: We want X

Government: No

Teachers: WILL ANYONE PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN???

Last line should be somewhat like this.

Teachers: Do you want your government to survive then give what we want. And we dont care if government is NDP, Conservative or Liberal.
Teachers: Dont mess with us or we will do what we did it before to other Ontario Governments.

[Phoenix3434]

Unfortunately, b/c of this retardedness, our generation will be left picking up the tab. Politicians need to be held more accountable wrt the messes they create in the system. I am glad that McGuinty won this term. I hope the liberal win next term too. B/c I don't want them to pass on the buck to another government for the messes that they are responsible for. If you screw up, you should fix it. I am glad this **** is coming out while he is still in office.

[flashy_mcflash]

You know you are being ridiculous now. Coming from Man(really?) saying Prophet Mohammad is/was not real.
But you will always derail any thread by OP.

Ad this cost to next budget. It will be settled and we wont know the cost or any details.
Ontario government faces $300-million suit for cancelling Mississauga gas plant (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/toronto/ontario-government-faces-300-million-suit-for-cancelling-mississauga-gas-plant/article2387744/)

You're braying about power plants in a thread about teachers and I'm derailing the thread? Okay buddy! :D

[gilboman]

Unfortunately, b/c of this retardedness, our generation will be left picking up the tab. Politicians need to be held more accountable wrt the messes they create in the system. I am glad that McGuinty won this term. I hope the liberal win next term too. B/c I don't want them to pass on the buck to another government for the messes that they are responsible for. If you screw up, you should fix it. I am glad this **** is coming out while he is still in office.

Actually, we're still fixing Harris' mess and I hate to think of the mess we'll have to fix when Harpo is done. What's more amusing and less alarming is fixing the Rob Ford mess, seems council in Toronto has a brain.

It's too bad the cons in Ontario don't have a leader or anybody with half a braincell, all they got is Hudak the barker. Mcguinty ruff ruff ruff, Liberals ruff ruff ruff. So what's your plan Hudak? ruff ruff ruff lol

[Jon Lai]

Unfortunately, b/c of this retardedness, our generation will be left picking up the tab. Politicians need to be held more accountable wrt the messes they create in the system. I am glad that McGuinty won this term. I hope the liberal win next term too. B/c I don't want them to pass on the buck to another government for the messes that they are responsible for. If you screw up, you should fix it. I am glad this **** is coming out while he is still in office.

So what if instead of cleaning up, they mess up even more...

[manmanny]

"Accordingly, we are working with our sponsors, Ontario Teachers' Federation and the Ontario government, to advise them on the various options for closing this gap at a reasonable cost,''

Does this mean we want Ontario government to pay/contribute for this "Gap"?

[gilboman]

"Accordingly, we are working with our sponsors, Ontario Teachers' Federation and the Ontario government, to advise them on the various options for closing this gap at a reasonable cost,''

Does this mean we want Ontario government to pay/contribute for this "Gap"?

:facepalm:

Are you now saying, the gov't should not be consulted ?? The gov't is on the hook for all pension shortfalls, regardless of private/public. Of course the gov't needs to be consulted, or should be when a huge number of retirees are affected or a big pension fund is underfunded.

Are you a hudak clone and just barks at everything? Do you suggest they do not consult the gov't? and go bankrupt themselves instead?
Are you against accountability and public consultations now?

make up your mind.

[bcbgboy13]

Gem from the article



But the fund's biggest problem is demographics. Teachers are now working on average 26 years and then collecting a pension for 32 years.

[manmanny]

:facepalm:

Are you now saying, the gov't should not be consulted ?? The gov't is on the hook for all pension shortfalls, regardless of private/public. Of course the gov't needs to be consulted, or should be when a huge number of retirees are affected or a big pension fund is underfunded.

Are you a hudak clone and just barks at everything? Do you suggest they do not consult the gov't? and go bankrupt themselves instead?
Are you against accountability and public consultations now?

make up your mind.

:facepalm:
And you dont (Bark)?
So basically you are saying Ontario Governement (Taxpayers) should pay (Consult:facepalm:) for this Gap. Thanks Miller Clones:razz:

[renoldman]

"Accordingly, we are working with our sponsors, Ontario Teachers' Federation and the Ontario government, to advise them on the various options for closing this gap at a reasonable cost,''

Does this mean we want Ontario government to pay/contribute for this "Gap"?

What do you mean want?

Do the Ontario Teachers' produce anything tangible that can be sold?

LOL.

What do you think will be the next thing to bust the economy?

Underfunded Pensions (both Private and Public Sector).

It's been known for a LONG, LONG, LONG Time.

I say the last recession was all planned so that new workers can take lower pay and companies can squeak by. That is if you actually believe the economy is not in a recession anymore.

You can see the economy is pretty bad because governments are finally cutting back. This indicates a LONG road ahead.

The government has given up on a quick recovery, but the media loves to put a positive spin on the economy because doom and gloom doesn't bring in advertising money.

[JAC]

The Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan is under the same rules as a business, where it is required fund pensions against the possibility of a company failure. Even the dimmest summer bulb can that this is an impossibility.

OTPP had $117.1 billion in assets as of December 31, and an 11.2% return rate in 2011. How many private plans did better?

[CDNPatriot]

Ontario Teachers’ began 2012 with $9.6-billion funding shortfall
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/ontario-teachers-began-2012-with-96-billion-funding-shortfall/article2390503/
Something tells me they didn't include these liabilities in the budget? ;)
Defined benefit plans are unsustainable and absolutely unfair to the private sector. Why should a private sector worker have to pay for a public sector worker's pension no matter what happens in the markets? Why would anybody make such a ridiculous promise to make guaranteed payments 50 years down the line? There is no possible way to account for the true cost of such a system.

[B]Here we go again. Another angry rant by Dearsummer.

Why would this be included in the budget?

You say defined benefit plans are unsustainable please explain why?

You say it's unfair to the private sector so why don't you get a job in the public sector than? Public sector makes less than private should we increase their wages instead? I'm talking about like jobs and not just a general average that Cons use.

Why should the Gen Y and X pay for Babyboomer pensions?

Why should we guarantee CPP and not defined pensions?

Please provide links please. Otherwise close the thread.

[CDNPatriot]

:facepalm:
And you dont (Bark)?
So basically you are saying Ontario Governement (Taxpayers) should pay (Consult:facepalm:) for this Gap. Thanks Miller Clones:razz:

manmanny, you have two options:

1. Allow organizatins to have pension plans and cross your fingers that they are self funded.

2. Or take on all pension plans in the country as a government and pay for it on your own.

Which would you rather take?

Option 1 I'm sure.

[DearSummer]

Here we go again. Another angry rant by Dearsummer.

Why would this be included in the budget?

Because it's a liability?


You say defined benefit plans are unsustainable please explain why?

Because the costs are unknown. Look at how underfunded public pension plans are. How do you think the shortfall should be made up?


You say it's unfair to the private sector so why don't you get a job in the public sector than? Public sector makes less than private should we increase their wages instead? I'm talking about like jobs and not just a general average that Cons use.

Because I don't want to be a part of the problem?


Why should the Gen Y and X pay for Babyboomer pensions?

They shouldn't. This is exactly the problem with defined benefit pensions.


Why should we guarantee CPP and not defined pensions?

Neither program should exist.


Please provide links please. Otherwise close the thread.

Links to what? You don't believe pensions are underfunded? :facepalm:

[DearSummer]

manmanny, you have two options:

1. Allow organizatins to have pension plans and cross your fingers that they are self funded.

2. Or take on all pension plans in the country as a government and pay for it on your own.

Which would you rather take?

Option 1 I'm sure.

Option 3: allow people to save for and be responsible for their own retirement. What a novel idea!

[manmanny]

manmanny, you have two options:

1. Allow organizatins to have pension plans and cross your fingers that they are self funded.

2. Or take on all pension plans in the country as a government and pay for it on your own.

Which would you rather take?

Option 1 I'm sure.

I don't like Taxpayers or people from Ontario paying Heavily for shortcoming of few Public sector Employee benefits.
We don't live and pay taxes for you(Public sector employees) to enjoy benefits.


------------------------------
A fully qualified pension pays a public service retiree 70 per cent of their highest average salary. According to the sunshine list there were more than 11,000 provincial employees earning more than $145,000, which will give these lucky pension lottery winners a lifetime pension, including the Canada Pension, starting in excess of $100,000 a year or just short of $2,000 a week. And the pensions are indexed and in 15 years will have risen by another 32 per cent.

Ontario has the second highest paid teachers in the world, (http://ontariocfa.com/2012/04/01/ontario-public-sector-pension-reforms-inadequate/)behind only Luxembourg as ranked by the Organization for Economic Development and Co-operation. We also pay police officers the best in the world, as headlined recently in the Globe and Mail. Our university professors ranked No. 1 in the world as well, as disclosed in a report by the Center for International Higher Education.

------------------------

Pension Riots Brewing in Canada? (http://taxpayer.com/federal/pension-riots-brewing-canada)

Are you saving $14,180 a year for your pension? That is how much you would have needed to save – every year for the last 35 years – to pay yourself a pension equal to that of a federal public servant retiring today. That’s a lot of money and precisely why taxpayers are on the hook for an unfunded federal pension liability of $208 billion, according to a recent C.D. Howe Institute report.

To save taxpayers from this giant and growing future bill, the government needs to make changes to these pension plans.

[aaronl3e7]

We get it, you don't think the public sector should be paid as much as they are.

DEARSUMMER THREAD

I love these kind of threads, the perfect opportunity to get into an argument....

[Agafaba]

Option 3: allow people to save for and be responsible for their own retirement. What a novel idea!

What does the government do with people who didnt/were not able to save for their retirement? Would you allow euthanasia, create a new workforce for cleaning dead bodies up or would you end up paying them through some government funding kind of like it is now.

[DearSummer]

What does the government do with people who didnt/were not able to save for their retirement? Would you allow euthanasia, create a new workforce for cleaning dead bodies up or would you end up paying them through some government funding kind of like it is now.

I believe in a plan that provides welfare for people living below the poverty line. I do not believe the government should have any involvement in retirement planning with the exception of tax incentives to save (i.e. TFSA, RRSP, etc.). However, none of this is relevant to this thread because it's about public sector pension plans, not entitlement programs like CPP, OAS, etc.

[Kris81]

we get it, you don't think the public sector should be paid as much as they are.

dearsummer thread


lol!!!

+1

[Phoenix3434]

lol!!!

+1

You get amused easily don't you..

Here is a green ball. With an arrow facing down..

:arrowd:

[Kris81]

You get amused easily don't you..

Here is a green ball. With an arrow facing down..

:arrowd:

1600+ posts, and not a single one that is memorable.

You must be his Robin.... or do you prefer Gary?

[r1lee]

Actually, we're still fixing Harris' mess and I hate to think of the mess we'll have to fix when Harpo is done. What's more amusing and less alarming is fixing the Rob Ford mess, seems council in Toronto has a brain.


what's this garbage? Harris inherited a disaster from Rae.

the problem with all you damn lefty's is you don't know how to stop spending other people's money. Even Rae admits that he tried to spend his way out of a bad situation which caused more of a problem.

Miller leaves this City broke ***** .. and McGuinty has done the same to the province. Keep sprewing your BS on why the Left has to fix the Right's problems.

[manmanny]

gilboman always forget How Jean/Paul cut funding for Provinces to Balance the budget. It was in Billions...

What pisses me is its always (Blame) Harris and never (Blame) Dalton.

Paul Martin in Ottawa in 1995. But Blame Harris.
Harper in Ottawa now. And Yes Blame Harper or Conservatives.
Nice going gilboman Post.

[DearSummer]

All this left/right party talk is tiring. Talk about the ISSUES. It's not about who did what. It's about who is going to fix it! Create your own stance and then vote accordingly. Don't pick a side and then just support whatever that party's plan is.

NONE of the parties have a plan to fix the pension crisis in Canada.

[divx]

the guideline for class size is around 22 or 23, now if we were to change that....to...say...50...

[r1lee]

NONE of the parties have a plan to fix the pension crisis in Canada.

Didn't the Harper gov't just pass legislation that all new employee's will now need to work till their 65 before they can collect their pensions? this will trickle down to the provincial and municipal levels...

[DearSummer]

Didn't the Harper gov't just pass legislation that all new employee's will now need to work till their 65 before they can collect their pensions? this will trickle down to the provincial and municipal levels...

That is a patchwork solution. But yes, it's better than the status quo or increasing pensions.

The dollar amounts, age, etc. are irrelevant. The problem is systematic because of the fact that benefits are defined. It makes it impossible to calculate the true cost of the pensions. Hence, any arguments about retirement benefits lack credibility because we don't even know what we are promising these retirees.

[divx]

i have so many solutions to this problem but no politician would have the balls to implement it

[bcbgboy13]

Originally Posted by gilboman
Actually, we're still fixing Harris' mess and I hate to think of the mess we'll have to fix when Harpo is done. What's more amusing and less alarming is fixing the Rob Ford mess, seems council in Toronto has a brain.


what's this garbage? Harris inherited a disaster from Rae.

the problem with all you damn lefty's is you don't know how to stop spending other people's money. Even Rae admits that he tried to spend his way out of a bad situation which caused more of a problem.

Miller leaves this City broke ***** .. and McGuinty has done the same to the province. Keep sprewing your BS on why the Left has to fix the Right's problems.

The "real" numbers for Ontario - Rae, Harris and now "daddy"


Premier BYear Def$M Debt$ Bal.%GDP NetDebt%GDP
DavidP_LIB(m) 86-87 -2,634 31.5 -1.3 15.1
DavidP_LIB 87-88 -2,489 34 -1.1 14.7
DavidP_LIB 88-89 -1,479 35.5 -0.6 13.8
DavidP_LIB 89-90 90 35.4 0 12.7
BobRae_NDP 90-91 -3,029 38.4 -1.1 13.6
BobRae_NDP 91-92 -10,930 49.4 -3.9 17.4
BobRae_NDP 92-93 -12,428 61.8 -4.3 21.6
BobRae_NDP 93-94 -11,202 80.6 -3.8 27.5
BobRae_NDP 94-95 -10,129 90.7 -3.3 29.2
MikeH_PC 95-96 -8,800 101.9 -2.7 30.9
MikeH_PC 96-97 -6,905 108.8 -2 32.2
MikeH_PC 97-98 -3,966 112.7 -1.1 31.4
MikeH_PC 98-99 -2,002 114.7 -0.5 30.4
MikeH_PC 99-00 668 134.4 0.2 32.9
MikeH_PC 00-01 1,902 132.5 0.4 30.1
MikeH_PC 01-02 375 132.1 0.1 29.1
MikeH_PC 02-03 117 132.6 0 27.8
DaltonM_LIB 03-04 -5,483 138.8 -1.1 28.2
DaltonM_LIB 04-05 -1,555 140.9 -0.3 27.3
DaltonM_LIB 05-06 298 149.9 0.1 27.9
DaltonM_LIB 06-07 2,269 150.6 0.4 26.9
DaltonM_LIB 07-08 600 156.6 0.1 26.8
DaltonM_LIB 08-09 -6,409 169.6 -1.1 28.9
DaltonM_LIB 09-10 -19,262 193.6 -3.3 33.3
DaltonM_LIB 10-11 -14,011 214.5 -2.3 35.0
DaltonM_LIB(m) 11-12e -15,994 238.4 -2.5 37.4
DaltonM_LIB(m) 12-13f* -15,200 261.8 -2.3 39.6

[manmanny]

the guideline for class size is around 22 or 23, now if we were to change that....to...say...50...

50 is pretty large imo. But at least 30 for a change.

"Drummond report recommends wage freezes and increased class sizes amid ‘harsh reality’ for Ontario"
• Cancel full-day kindergarten
• Cap elementary classes from 20 to 23; junior school classes from 24.5 to 26 and secondary school classes from 22 to 24

[gomyone]

The major issue with most defined benefit pension fund shortfalls is a) the ultra low level of interest rates which not only increases the present value of their pension liabilities but also effectively and reduces the level of "yield" available from traditionally stable investments like bonds b) the volatility of equity markets in recent years has wreaked havoc on total expected returns and many DB funds are still climbing out of the severe downtown many experienced in 2008 c) as this thread points to - demographics. Bottom line, there is "more taking" than "giving" when it comes down to many DB funds. Clearly one of the best ways to change this situation is to throw away the concept of a defined benefit and like the private sector, introduce a defined contribution (DC) mandate - this will effectively shift the onus to the individual to fund their retirement as they see fit....

[Jon Lai]

The "real" numbers for Ontario - Rae, Harris and now "daddy"


Premier BYear Def$M Debt$ Bal.%GDP NetDebt%GDP
DavidP_LIB(m) 86-87 -2,634 31.5 -1.3 15.1
DavidP_LIB 87-88 -2,489 34 -1.1 14.7
DavidP_LIB 88-89 -1,479 35.5 -0.6 13.8
DavidP_LIB 89-90 90 35.4 0 12.7
BobRae_NDP 90-91 -3,029 38.4 -1.1 13.6
BobRae_NDP 91-92 -10,930 49.4 -3.9 17.4
BobRae_NDP 92-93 -12,428 61.8 -4.3 21.6
BobRae_NDP 93-94 -11,202 80.6 -3.8 27.5
BobRae_NDP 94-95 -10,129 90.7 -3.3 29.2
MikeH_PC 95-96 -8,800 101.9 -2.7 30.9
MikeH_PC 96-97 -6,905 108.8 -2 32.2
MikeH_PC 97-98 -3,966 112.7 -1.1 31.4
MikeH_PC 98-99 -2,002 114.7 -0.5 30.4
MikeH_PC 99-00 668 134.4 0.2 32.9
MikeH_PC 00-01 1,902 132.5 0.4 30.1
MikeH_PC 01-02 375 132.1 0.1 29.1
MikeH_PC 02-03 117 132.6 0 27.8
DaltonM_LIB 03-04 -5,483 138.8 -1.1 28.2
DaltonM_LIB 04-05 -1,555 140.9 -0.3 27.3
DaltonM_LIB 05-06 298 149.9 0.1 27.9
DaltonM_LIB 06-07 2,269 150.6 0.4 26.9
DaltonM_LIB 07-08 600 156.6 0.1 26.8
DaltonM_LIB 08-09 -6,409 169.6 -1.1 28.9
DaltonM_LIB 09-10 -19,262 193.6 -3.3 33.3
DaltonM_LIB 10-11 -14,011 214.5 -2.3 35.0
DaltonM_LIB(m) 11-12e -15,994 238.4 -2.5 37.4
DaltonM_LIB(m) 12-13f* -15,200 261.8 -2.3 39.6


So according to this Harass spent money on top of the deficit just as Rae did. This is why I never understood why people believe that Harass is good - no, Harass' harassing is obviously bad. Privatizing everything is bad.

By now, people should understand that you spend money when times are bad, and save money when times are good. Every politician with foresight knows this. Unfortunately, the ones that do, most do not have the guts to actually implement it, because most of the public don't have foresight or are economically inept and demand the government increase spending when the times are good (why are you hogging all our money?!), hence leading to terrible times when things turn bad.

[r1lee]

So according to this Harass spent money on top of the deficit just as Rae did. This is why I never understood why people believe that Harass is good - no, Harass' harassing is obviously bad. Privatizing everything is bad.

By now, people should understand that you spend money when times are bad, and save money when times are good. Every politician with foresight knows this. Unfortunately, the ones that do, most do not have the guts to actually implement it, because most of the public don't have foresight or are economically inept and demand the government increase spending when the times are good (why are you hogging all our money?!), hence leading to terrible times when things turn bad.

yes Haras (as you so put it) had to spend money on top of the deficit since he couldn't come in and cut everythig across the board. But i guess you didn't know this.

he had to slowly remove all the programs/spending that Rae had put in place. And as you can see throughout his term, he had started paying back part of the deficit even though the dot.com burst had taken place, his programs or cuts in programs managed to eleviate a very small portion of the provincial debt.

And let's not forget that during this same period, Martin had downloaded the cost of some of the federal programs to the provinces.

[manmanny]

yes Haras (as you so put it) had to spend money on top of the deficit since he couldn't come in and cut everythig across the board.

he had to slowly remove all the programs/spending that Rae had put in place. And as you can see throughout his term, he had started paying back part of the deficit even though the dot.com burst had taken place, his programs or cuts in programs managed to eleviate a very small portion of the provincial debt.

And let's not forget that during this same period, Martin had downloaded costs of some of the federal program to the provinces.

I think as soon as Lai read "Harris", HE poked his eyeS and couldn't read the amounts for Rae and Dalton. Just a blind (Partisan) guy or troll attempt.

[manmanny]

The major issue with most defined benefit pension fund shortfalls is a) the ultra low level of interest rates which not only increases the present value of their pension liabilities but also effectively and reduces the level of "yield" available from traditionally stable investments like bonds b) the volatility of equity markets in recent years has wreaked havoc on total expected returns and many DB funds are still climbing out of the severe downtown many experienced in 2008 c) as this thread points to - demographics. Bottom line, there is "more taking" than "giving" when it comes down to many DB funds. Clearly one of the best ways to change this situation is to throw away the concept of a defined benefit and like the private sector, introduce a defined contribution (DC) mandate - this will effectively shift the onus to the individual to fund their retirement as they see fit....

First line in Torstar. "The Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan recorded a solid 11.2 per cent rate of return last year, pushing its net assets to an all-time high of $117.1 billion."

[gomyone]

First line in Torstar. "The Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan recorded a solid 11.2 per cent rate of return last year, pushing its net assets to an all-time high of $117.1 billion."

...I'm not talking about total return, I'm talking about cash on cash yield (ie., the actual cash payout from your investment). This is the cash that is used to actually meet benefit obligations. With the benchmark yields being so low, you have to look at other, more often risky investments.

[CDNPatriot]

Option 3: allow people to save for and be responsible for their own retirement. What a novel idea!

Yeah and when they don't support them through welfare or ODSP. Still government money but only it will be more expensive as it doesn't draw on savings and compounding effects.

I thought everyone was going pay cheque to pay cheque and can't afford to pay their taxes so that decent wages can be paid to the civil service?

[divx]

50 is pretty large imo. But at least 30 for a change.

"Drummond report recommends wage freezes and increased class sizes amid ‘harsh reality’ for Ontario"
• Cancel full-day kindergarten
• Cap elementary classes from 20 to 23; junior school classes from 24.5 to 26 and secondary school classes from 22 to 24

we need to cut costs somehow somewhere, so doesn't matter where we lay down the knife, it matters to the scale of the cut.

[Jon Lai]

I think as soon as Lai read "Harris", HE poked his eyeS and couldn't read the amounts for Rae and Dalton. Just a blind (Partisan) guy or troll attempt.

No. As soon as I read "Harass" I remembered how we got ripped off selling the 407, denied construction of the late to-be Eglinton subway, removed OAC, and crippled the public health sector.

I don't follow political ideologies; there are also left wingers that I hate, and right wingers that I like. I follow good policies; Dalton and Rae didn't have much of that, but Harass definitely was in deficit in that area.

Like I said before, you spend in rough times, and save in good times. After that, it's what to spend and what to save on. But it seems like people can't even understand the first point yet...

[Cerenity]

i dont get what you mean
looking at that table, after Harris took over, the deficit dropped every year until he ran a surplus...
he only ran a deficit in the early years because the budget that got handed to him started with a 10 billion deficit

OTPP is one of the biggest and best managed funds in canada, yet it is still running a shortfall, partly due to LIRP/ZIRP, and partly due to the declining active-to-retired teacher ratio

but intuitively, when you have 1.5 to 1 active-to-retired ratio, roughly 1:1 working years to retired years ratio, either benefits have to be cut, or the contributions have to be significantly raised. defined contribution is one way to do it. another way is to just flat out raise the contribution percentage of salary significantly (probably need closer to 20% instead of current 11%)

[r1lee]

No. As soon as I read "Harass" I remembered how we got ripped off selling the 407, denied construction of the late to-be Eglinton subway, removed OAC, and crippled the public health sector.

I don't follow political ideologies; there are also left wingers that I hate, and right wingers that I like. I follow good policies; Dalton and Rae didn't have much of that, but Harass definitely was in deficit in that area.

Like I said before, you spend in rough times, and save in good times. After that, it's what to spend and what to save on. But it seems like people can't even understand the first point yet...

OAC was not needed and we were the only province to have it.. so I guess that was a horrible idea.

Do you honestly think that the 407 would be where it is at today if it was still in gov't hands? yes we probably got short changed, but look at it now, it spans right across the GTA. If it was still in gov't hands, it would be like the Sheppard subway line, that thing took a dozen years to even get started and Sheppard and Yonge was a mess for a very very long time.

Is this how you run your house hold? you spend in rough times and save in good times? Gov't spending is not the answer on trying to jumpstart the economy. Easiest two politicians to exemply this is McGuinty and Rae (which he admits was a mistake), all that created was a bigger gov't. The Gov't should create an environment for growth or ability for business's to invest which leads to growth. For someone who is in the financial subforum alot, i ceases to amaze me that you would think spending in rough times is the answer.

[Jon Lai]

OAC was not needed and we were the only province to have it.. so I guess that was a horrible idea.

Do you honestly think that the 407 would be where it is at today if it was still in gov't hands? yes we probably got short changed, but look at it now, it spans right across the GTA. If it was still in gov't hands, it would be like the Sheppard subway line, that thing took a dozen years to even get started and Sheppard and Yonge was a mess for a very very long time.

Is this how you run your house hold? you spend in rough times and save in good times? Gov't spending is not the answer on trying to jumpstart the economy. Easiest two politicians to exemply this is McGuinty and Rae (which he admits was a mistake), all that created was a bigger gov't. The Gov't should create an environment for growth or ability for business's to invest which leads to growth. For someone who is in the financial subforum alot, i ceases to amaze me that you would think spending in rough times is the answer.

Considering how many students don't know what they want to do in Grade 12, yes, I think OAC would benefit more than those that it doesn't. Plus, fast tracking was popular when OAC was still here. Those who obviously don't need the extra year can graduate ahead of everyone else. Those who need it can stay. However, cutting OAC completely means that students who don't really know what to do yet will be more inclined to just choose something random because "it's the right thing to do to go to university".

Can't really comment whether 407 would be better or worse, because I don't think there are sufficient facts to argue for either side. However, it's more of the shortchanging that I am disappointed about. Harass was desperate, the company saw that, and made a lowball offer. Harass accepted. Also, 407 wasn't supposed to be a toll highway to begin with, but that's for another thread.

Running finances in a household is not exactly analogous as a province, but generally, yes, when things are good, you are supposed to save. Of course, most people don't - they see tons of money, and think they're well off, and buy new TVs, laptops, etc. They take out huge CC loans because they "know" that they will be able to pay it off. When things go bad, they have little savings, but continue to live the same lifestyle (okay, maybe slightly rolled back), pile on CC debt, and complain why the government isn't helping them.

Do you see why it is a better idea to save when you have extra cash, so you can spend it when income suffers?

Government spending is not the only way to jumpstart the economy, I totally agree. However, when you want to jumpstart the economy, you need good policies, and those policies need money to enact upon them. When I say spend, I don't mean hand out cash, lower taxes, etc. - rather, you use your reserves so you can minimize the reduction of lifestyle while keeping the books black. Because to be frank, sometimes there's only so much you can do to jumpstart the economy. After that, it's time, and that requires reserves to sustain government spendings.

[r1lee]

Considering how many students don't know what they want to do in Grade 12, yes, I think OAC would benefit more than those that it doesn't. Plus, fast tracking was popular when OAC was still here. Those who obviously don't need the extra year can graduate ahead of everyone else. Those who need it can stay. However, cutting OAC completely means that students who don't really know what to do yet will be more inclined to just choose something random because "it's the right thing to do to go to university".

Can't really comment whether 407 would be better or worse, because I don't think there are sufficient facts to argue for either side. However, it's more of the shortchanging that I am disappointed about. Harass was desperate, the company saw that, and made a lowball offer. Harass accepted. Also, 407 wasn't supposed to be a toll highway to begin with, but that's for another thread.

Running finances in a household is not exactly analogous as a province, but generally, yes, when things are good, you are supposed to save. Of course, most people don't - they see tons of money, and think they're well off, and buy new TVs, laptops, etc. They take out huge CC loans because they "know" that they will be able to pay it off. When things go bad, they have little savings, but continue to live the same lifestyle (okay, maybe slightly rolled back), pile on CC debt, and complain why the government isn't helping them.

Do you see why it is a better idea to save when you have extra cash, so you can spend it when income suffers?

Government spending is not the only way to jumpstart the economy, I totally agree. However, when you want to jumpstart the economy, you need good policies, and those policies need money to enact upon them. When I say spend, I don't mean hand out cash, lower taxes, etc. - rather, you use your reserves so you can minimize the reduction of lifestyle while keeping the books black. Because to be frank, sometimes there's only so much you can do to jumpstart the economy. After that, it's time, and that requires reserves to sustain government spendings.

Now that's more of answer I'm expecting from you.

I don't see how Ontario benefited from OAC then any other provinces in Canada. Yes I agree that students might not have a clue on what they want to do in life at Grade 12, but these same students or young adults have the same issue even when they are in University and well beyond that. Maybe it's not the curriculum but rather the environment they are in at home/peers etc.

Yes running a province should not be like running a house hold, but it shouldn't be far from it. If a better comparison, would be a large corporation but in either comparison's no Premier of this province aside from Harris has done a better job at it. Harris was put in a very difficult situation by his predecessor, which you seem to totally ignore. He was not only running with a massive debt load and commitments but also the passing of the BUCK at the federal level and the dot.com bubble. He was still able to achieve a surplus.

We don't know if the 407 would be where it is today if it was public, but we also don't know if Harris would have sold/lease the 407 for $3.7b if it wasn't for the massive debt he inherited. Where I live, it took 10 years in discussion on extending the 427 about 800m. There is plan to extend the 427 even further to Major Mackenzie, let's revisit this discussion in 10 years and see where we are.

Saving in good times and sustaining in rough times is a better terminology in my opinion.

[ashs]

Teachers: We want X

Government: No

Teachers: WILL ANYONE PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN???



its actually :


Government: We want you to cut XYZ

Teachers: ok lets negotiate where to reduce

Government: No negotiating, its cut this.



They want to take away our right to bargain, which is anti-Canadian.

[ever1221]

the fact that a teacher making 90k a year just coz of seniority is just rediculous...a university prof barely makes that much...add to that the 3months vacation they get when most profs don't this is stupid, I hope the gov. cuts even more.

[r1lee]

the fact that a teacher making 90k a year just coz of seniority is just rediculous.

this doesn't bother me so much, the one thing that bothers me about the teacher's union is. It seems like all teachers 100% of them, are all good?

When was the last time you heard of a teacher being fired, or no longer teaches because they just suck.
You have some great teachers and really bad ones out there. Even lawyer's are disbarred, so you're telling me that no teacher can be fired?

[manmanny]

its actually :


Government: We want you to cut XYZ

Teachers: ok lets negotiate where to reduce

Government: No negotiating, its cut this.



They want to take away our right to bargain, which is anti-Canadian.

So is the taxpayers, school children, paying passengers, add here as you wish, taken as hostages for wage increase. Nice Bargaining :razz:tactics.

[Jon Lai]

the fact that a teacher making 90k a year just coz of seniority is just rediculous...a university prof barely makes that much...add to that the 3months vacation they get when most profs don't this is stupid, I hope the gov. cuts even more.

Uh, if you've been working long enough and have the seniority to earn 90K as a teacher, you will most definitely be making more than that in university :facepalm: Most professors associate level and up earn over $100K before benefits. It's the lecturers that flirt with the $100K salary, but even then those people have less seniority than those earning $90K as a teacher.

So I don't know what you're smoking. And if you don't believe me, you can find a list of professors in Ontario earning over $100K - it's publicly released information.

[divx]

Considering how many students don't know what they want to do in Grade 12, yes, I think OAC would benefit more than those that it doesn't. Plus, fast tracking was popular when OAC was still here. Those who obviously don't need the extra year can graduate ahead of everyone else. Those who need it can stay. However, cutting OAC completely means that students who don't really know what to do yet will be more inclined to just choose something random because "it's the right thing to do to go to university".


Are you just saying Ontario students are incompetent? While the rest of the country and the rest of the world can do with just grade 12 Ontario students needs the extra year LOL

[manmanny]

No. As soon as I read "Harass" I remembered how we got ripped off selling the 407, denied construction of the late to-be Eglinton subway, removed OAC, and crippled the public health sector.

I don't follow political ideologies; there are also left wingers that I hate, and right wingers that I like. I follow good policies; Dalton and Rae didn't have much of that, but Harass definitely was in deficit in that area.

Like I said before, you spend in rough times, and save in good times. After that, it's what to spend and what to save on. But it seems like people can't even understand the first point yet...

Lai you talk BS. We had that discussion in TTC thread about about late to-be Eglinton subway and Harris.
But wait that must be and you sound like that name calling Manuel. And Thanks for telling us you are not partisan:razz:. Yeah we get it.
Its time you read your next post about 407 and spend when you in recession and save while in surplus.
Nice advice to give it to Dalton or Miller or new Mayor Adam/Shelly.

[ever1221]

Uh, if you've been working long enough and have the seniority to earn 90K as a teacher, you will most definitely be making more than that in university :facepalm: Most professors associate level and up earn over $100K before benefits. It's the lecturers that flirt with the $100K salary, but even then those people have less seniority than those earning $90K as a teacher.

So I don't know what you're smoking. And if you don't believe me, you can find a list of professors in Ontario earning over $100K - it's publicly released information.

that fact that you are comparing a teacher to a prof tells me that your education level is probably at grade 6 max.

there is no prof that makes more than 125k a year, trust me I know exactly how much they make...also you don't see profs having 3 months paid vacation, almost all of them are doing research. Actually, most profs have to have 2-3 researches done every year.

What do teachers do? Same lecture notes every single year, mark some papers, take 3 months paid vacation! On top of that you got benefits AND make 90k a year (after just 8 years in the job).

[Jon Lai]

Now that's more of answer I'm expecting from you.

I don't see how Ontario benefited from OAC then any other provinces in Canada. Yes I agree that students might not have a clue on what they want to do in life at Grade 12, but these same students or young adults have the same issue even when they are in University and well beyond that. Maybe it's not the curriculum but rather the environment they are in at home/peers etc.

Yes running a province should not be like running a house hold, but it shouldn't be far from it. If a better comparison, would be a large corporation but in either comparison's no Premier of this province aside from Harris has done a better job at it. Harris was put in a very difficult situation by his predecessor, which you seem to totally ignore. He was not only running with a massive debt load and commitments but also the passing of the BUCK at the federal level and the dot.com bubble. He was still able to achieve a surplus.

We don't know if the 407 would be where it is today if it was public, but we also don't know if Harris would have sold/lease the 407 for $3.7b if it wasn't for the massive debt he inherited. Where I live, it took 10 years in discussion on extending the 427 about 800m. There is plan to extend the 427 even further to Major Mackenzie, let's revisit this discussion in 10 years and see where we are.

Saving in good times and sustaining in rough times is a better terminology in my opinion.

The way I see it is, there are things that can be cut and don't affect public much, and there are things that do. OAC is most definitely one of the things that should have been kept. If there's anything you need to sustain a worsening economy, it's to guarantee that your future generations aren't inept. Sure, keeping OAC might not be the most effective solution to that, but it's not like the Cons did anything else to replicate that. Nope - they just used it as a cut.

Even comparing it to a corporation is cutting it. It's more like running a non-profit organization. Technically, a government does not need to have a surplus - it's nice, but unlike a corporation, it's unnecessary. It doesn't matter if he has a massive debt loaded onto him from Rae, because in my mind, he cut and sold too many things to justify. Of course, he's a right wing extremist that was rumoured to have slept with Preston Manning back in the days, so I fully understand why he did what he did, but I don't agree with it. You know, it's not that hard to run a surplus when you just keep cutting everything and selling everything you have. Anyone can do the same. The trick is to do so while not crippling the social net that Ontarians value so much. And in my mind, he has failed in that regard.

Regarding the 407 and construction in general, don't forget that in the 70-80's construction of a highway network was very rapid. I think it's more about how current government and politicians are working rather than who's in power that is controlling how fast things are going right now. For example, we have too many public assessments in place before construction begins that simply cripples the speed at which things are being done. Either way, I am fully disgusted that we undersold the 407 for a lot less than what it was worth at the time, and that is definitely Harass's fault.

[epiczz]

Uh, if you've been working long enough and have the seniority to earn 90K as a teacher,

If you earn 90k because you are good, then all is fine ... nobody complains
but if you earn 90k JUST because you've been there for a long time while you are actually a very bad teacher - that's the problem right there.

Some people still cant comprehend such a simple logic.

[Cerenity]

this doesn't bother me so much, the one thing that bothers me about the teacher's union is. It seems like all teachers 100% of them, are all good?

When was the last time you heard of a teacher being fired, or no longer teaches because they just suck.
You have some great teachers and really bad ones out there. Even lawyer's are disbarred, so you're telling me that no teacher can be fired?

totally agree with this and actually many of my younger teacher friends hate it too.

[ever1221]

Some people still cant comprehend such a simple logic.

those people had a bad grade 6 teacher that used to teach them about how good unions are. That's why they lost all the logic there.

[Jon Lai]

that fact that you are comparing a teacher to a prof tells me that your education level is probably at grade 6 max.

there is no prof that makes more than 125k a year, trust me I know exactly how much they make...also you don't see profs having 3 months paid vacation, almost all of them are doing research. Actually, most profs have to have 2-3 researches done every year.

What do teachers do? Same lecture notes every single year, mark some papers, take 3 months paid vacation! On top of that you got benefits AND make 90k a year (after just 8 years in the job).

You said a university professor barely makes $90K. I was just saying you're wrong. How is that right?

Since you're too lazy digging up the disclosure report, I've googled it for you. Here are the numbers for 2010:
http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/publications/salarydisclosure/2011/univer11.pdf

"No prof makes more than 125K a year" eh? Just "trust you" and the numbers that you pull out of your rear end?

And for the record, not everyone in the list are associate/professors. A lot of them are pure lecturers too - they don't have to do research. And they still get paid a good 6 figure amount!

Also, $90K is almost the max cap that a teacher in Ontario can make. After that, unless they upgrade themselves to being a vice/principal, they have nowhere else to go and $90K is all that they will make. They also work longer hours during the year marking papers, unless you're a kindergarden teacher, so it more or less offsets the 2 month "vacation", as you put it.

By the way, I'm not saying $90K for teachers aren't too high, I'm just saying you're wrong about how little professors make :P

[Jon Lai]

If you earn 90k because you are good, then all is fine ... nobody complains
but if you earn 90k JUST because you've been there for a long time while you are actually a very bad teacher - that's the problem right there.

Some people still cant comprehend such a simple logic.

I dislike salary based on seniority too. I don't know what you're smoking. People who are inept for their job should get fired.

[Jon Lai]

those people had a bad grade 6 teacher that used to teach them about how good unions are. That's why they lost all the logic there.

What? Anyone who reads my posts in Off-Topic should know that I am 101% against unions.

[Agafaba]

What? Anyone who reads my posts in Off-Topic should know that I am 101% against unions.

Blindly hating teachers and anyone who argues in their favor over any point is easier than having to think about the issue and discuss it.

[Jon Lai]

Are you just saying Ontario students are incompetent? While the rest of the country and the rest of the world can do with just grade 12 Ontario students needs the extra year LOL

Could possibly be. I have no idea how the curriculum is like in other parts of the country, but I know from my experience that by the end of Grade 12, if you are coming from an average school, you will likely have a tough time coping with the level of difficulty that universities bring forth to you. This is why after OAC was no more, universities (at least in Ontario) have had to dumb down their first year material slightly in order to bridge the gap. That can't be good.

Perhaps the Ontario elementary/secondary school curriculum should be improved so that you can fit everything into 12 years. Perhaps in other provinces the quality of the curriculum is higher - I don't know. All I know is that from my experience, a lot of people I know would have benefited from an extra year in high school before entering university.

Heck, in the current curriculum you don't multiply until you're in grade 3 and divide until you're in grade 4-5. What is this?

[Tornado F2]

So what if instead of cleaning up, they mess up even more...

We're all planning to leave now anyway. Last one out, turn off the lights.

Anyway, what I'd like to know is how the teachers' union controls the weather? Great weather any time they're off. Lousy weather as soon as they return to the classroom. Never fails.

[r1lee]

The way I see it is, there are things that can be cut and don't affect public much, and there are things that do. OAC is most definitely one of the things that should have been kept. If there's anything you need to sustain a worsening economy, it's to guarantee that your future generations aren't inept. Sure, keeping OAC might not be the most effective solution to that, but it's not like the Cons did anything else to replicate that. Nope - they just used it as a cut.

Even comparing it to a corporation is cutting it. It's more like running a non-profit organization. Technically, a government does not need to have a surplus - it's nice, but unlike a corporation, it's unnecessary. It doesn't matter if he has a massive debt loaded onto him from Rae, because in my mind, he cut and sold too many things to justify. Of course, he's a right wing extremist that was rumoured to have slept with Preston Manning back in the days, so I fully understand why he did what he did, but I don't agree with it. You know, it's not that hard to run a surplus when you just keep cutting everything and selling everything you have. Anyone can do the same. The trick is to do so while not crippling the social net that Ontarians value so much. And in my mind, he has failed in that regard.

Regarding the 407 and construction in general, don't forget that in the 70-80's construction of a highway network was very rapid. I think it's more about how current government and politicians are working rather than who's in power that is controlling how fast things are going right now. For example, we have too many public assessments in place before construction begins that simply cripples the speed at which things are being done. Either way, I am fully disgusted that we undersold the 407 for a lot less than what it was worth at the time, and that is definitely Harass's fault.

Again why is Ontario any special then any other provinces in Canada, heck any other country?. So I guess the rest of the world is going to be inept compared to Ontarians? Give me a break, that's just fear mongering.

So in your mind, Harris cut things that you prefer that we pay for while digging ourselves in debt as a province? LIke his predecessor and his successor is currently doing. Man, I feel for your parents, if they ever had to tell you that they couldn't afford to buy something you wanted since they didn't have the means to. That hatred/resentment must run deep. Even though you cease to realize that running a debt in any form of business/household/non-profit/govt is not practical, but i guesss we live in a time when people feel that handouts are a necessity.

So what you are trying to say is, that due to redtape our highways/construction are not implemented at a speedier pace. So does that mean that if gov't were in control of the 407, would it be where it is today? Look i don't disagree that the 407 was leased out alot less then what I would like. But was 3.7b the best offer that was on the table? If you could no longer afford the monthly mortgage payment, would you sell your TV to atleast cover some of the burden until you got back on your feet? You state save when the times are good, but now you state that gov't do not need to run a surplus? So what pays the debt?

You seem to bad mouth Harris from the get go, but i see no comments on Rae or McGuinty. But i guess they never really took anything away, just spent money we didn't have.

[Jon Lai]

Again why is Ontario any special then any other provinces in Canada, heck any other country?. So I guess the rest of the world is going to be inept compared to Ontarians? Give me a break, that's just fear mongering.

So in your mind, Harris cut things that you prefer that we pay for while digging ourselves in debt as a province? LIke his predecessor and his successor is currently doing. Man, I feel for your parents, if they ever had to tell you that they couldn't afford to buy something you wanted since they didn't have the means to. That hatred/resentment must run deep. Even though you cease to realize that running a debt in any form of business/household/non-profit/govt is not practical, but i guesss we live in a time when people feel that handouts are a necessity.

So what you are trying to say is, that due to redtape our highways/construction are not implemented at a speedier pace. So does that mean that if gov't were in control of the 407, would it be where it is today? Look i don't disagree that the 407 was leased out alot less then what I would like. But was 3.7b the best offer that was on the table? If you could no longer afford the monthly mortgage payment, would you sell your TV to atleast cover some of the burden until you got back on your feet? You state save when the times are good, but now you state that gov't do not need to run a surplus? So what pays the debt?

You seem to bad mouth Harris from the get go, but i see no comments on Rae or McGuinty. But i guess they never really took anything away, just spent money we didn't have.

No, like I suggested earlier, perhaps our elementary/secondary curriculum is inadequate to teach all knowledge within the same amount of time. It is pretty clear that North America is probably the easiest in terms of education among the rest of the first world countries. If our curriculum was more like any country in Asia's then we wouldn't have a problem.

Harass ended up with a big surplus. Are you telling me you can't spend a bit more or do a bit less cost saving instead of raking up that huge surplus? Of course, it's in his political ideology to sit on that pile of cash, but I feel like there are certain things that he cut that shouldn't have been cut otherwise. Look, if I only had money for one of three things, I would choose to buy the one that benefited me the most. I feel like Harass decided to buy none of the three things and instead pocketed the money. In a household or corporation that's fine. But the purpose of the government is to provide a social net for the public, and with that thought, I feel like he could have spent a bit more and not cut on some of the things that he cut on.

No, I don't feel handouts are a necessity. In fact, I feel like people should earn what they deserve. However, I also believe in a well padded social net. This is why you always see me arguing for both sides - I've never been able to put myself on either end of the political spectrum.

I wasn't interested in politics back when Rae was premier, so I can't really say anything I didn't just read off of Google. However, I'm not a fan of McGuinty either. I don't mind paying more taxes if it meant the money goes to a better social net that serves the right places, but McGuinty fails at that. All the corruption and scandals don't really help his case either. But I'd take him over Hudak anyday.

The 407 was built from 403 to Markham road by the gov't before the lease. All the company did so far was extend it to QEW and to Brock Road. You seem to think that's a big plus to our social well being, but in fact it's not. The tolls are so expensive that I would almost never use it, and the land acquired for the extension from 403 to QEW was intended to be for future extension of the 403 to Hamilton. Instead, the land was given to extend the 407. If anything, I am in disgust of "what the company has done to the 407" in that regard, because instead of the possibility of having two free routes to Hamilton in the future, we're only guaranteed one.

As an RFDer, I save money. I would never see myself in bad enough times that I couldn't afford to pay my mortgage - if it was to be, I would sell my house, not sell the TV, and rent. (This really isn't a very good analogy.)

[manmanny]

Again why is Ontario any special then any other provinces in Canada, heck any other country?. So I guess the rest of the world is going to be inept compared to Ontarians? Give me a break, that's just fear mongering.

So in your mind, Harris cut things that you prefer that we pay for while digging ourselves in debt as a province? LIke his predecessor and his successor is currently doing. Man, I feel for your parents, if they ever had to tell you that they couldn't afford to buy something you wanted since they didn't have the means to. That hatred/resentment must run deep. Even though you cease to realize that running a debt in any form of business/household/non-profit/govt is not practical, but i guesss we live in a time when people feel that handouts are a necessity.

So what you are trying to say is, that due to redtape our highways/construction are not implemented at a speedier pace. So does that mean that if gov't were in control of the 407, would it be where it is today? Look i don't disagree that the 407 was leased out alot less then what I would like. But was 3.7b the best offer that was on the table? If you could no longer afford the monthly mortgage payment, would you sell your TV to atleast cover some of the burden until you got back on your feet? You state save when the times are good, but now you state that gov't do not need to run a surplus? So what pays the debt?

You seem to bad mouth Harris from the get go, but i see no comments on Rae or McGuinty. But i guess they never really took anything away, just spent money we didn't have.

No surprise there. but you can see same with at least two other users. Same rhetoric...name calling...

[inntents]

What do teachers do? (Oh, do tell) Same lecture (ignorant of ever-evolving pedagogy, based on extensive research) notes every single year (ignorant of facts, ever-changing pedagogy and curriculum)), mark some papers (ignorant of workload), take 3 months paid vacation (ignorant of contract)! On top of that you got benefits AND make 90k a year (after just 8 years in the job (ignorant of facts AND contract)).

Fixed.
You're welcome!
;)

[-=phelan=-]

The most striking point in the article from the star i found was that the level of contribution a teacher's pay goes into the fund (11% and rising to 15%)

I don't know about you but I know some private sector DBP (yes the few that are remaning) that are at 5-6% rate!

Does anyone know what the rate is for regular municipal workers? like OMERS (or something?)?

[Tornado F2]

No, like I suggested earlier, perhaps our elementary/secondary curriculum is inadequate to teach all knowledge within the same amount of time. It is pretty clear that North America is probably the easiest in terms of education among the rest of the first world countries. If our curriculum was more like any country in Asia's then we wouldn't have a problem.

Or Europe. Here in Ontario there are far too many wasted "free periods" between classes. And schooldays are perhaps a bit too short too. Smart students finishing Grade 12 should still be at the old Grade 13 level, if classes were scheduled better. Possibly our system is setup so they can get by with fewer classrooms or teachers. The system can definitely be improved, and costs could be controlled by eliminating the inept, incompetent teachers earning inflated salaries merely because their union protected them long enough to gain seniority. Let the good teachers teach. Let the useless ones flip burgers.

[r1lee]

No, like I suggested earlier, perhaps our elementary/secondary curriculum is inadequate to teach all knowledge within the same amount of time. It is pretty clear that North America is probably the easiest in terms of education among the rest of the first world countries. If our curriculum was more like any country in Asia's then we wouldn't have a problem.

Harass ended up with a big surplus. Are you telling me you can't spend a bit more or do a bit less cost saving instead of raking up that huge surplus? Of course, it's in his political ideology to sit on that pile of cash, but I feel like there are certain things that he cut that shouldn't have been cut otherwise. Look, if I only had money for one of three things, I would choose to buy the one that benefited me the most. I feel like Harass decided to buy none of the three things and instead pocketed the money. In a household or corporation that's fine. But the purpose of the government is to provide a social net for the public, and with that thought, I feel like he could have spent a bit more and not cut on some of the things that he cut on. Yes, two different scenario's but neither were given the chance.

No, I don't feel handouts are a necessity. In fact, I feel like people should earn what they deserve. However, I also believe in a well padded social net. This is why you always see me arguing for both sides - I've never been able to put myself on either end of the political spectrum.

I wasn't interested in politics back when Rae was premier, so I can't really say anything I didn't just read off of Google. However, I'm not a fan of McGuinty either. I don't mind paying more taxes if it meant the money goes to a better social net that serves the right places, but McGuinty fails at that. All the corruption and scandals don't really help his case either. But I'd take him over Hudak anyday.

The 407 was built from 403 to Markham road by the gov't before the lease. All the company did so far was extend it to QEW and to Brock Road. You seem to think that's a big plus to our social well being, but in fact it's not. The tolls are so expensive that I would almost never use it, and the land acquired for the extension from 403 to QEW was intended to be for future extension of the 403 to Hamilton. Instead, the land was given to extend the 407. If anything, I am in disgust of "what the company has done to the 407" in that regard, because instead of the possibility of having two free routes to Hamilton in the future, we're only guaranteed one.

As an RFDer, I save money. I would never see myself in bad enough times that I couldn't afford to pay my mortgage - if it was to be, I would sell my house, not sell the TV, and rent. (This really isn't a very good analogy.)

Just because there's a big surplus doesn't mean we need to spend it. Paying down the debt and putting some in the provinces reserve funds help manage the interest we pay on our ballooning debt. What you seem to forget is, we have to pay interest on our debt. If we took that surplus and paid it down, the interest saved could be used for the programs that you are suggesting.

Now, it's pretty ignorant that you would choose McGuinty over Hudak. Considering that McGuinty wasted a $1B on eHealth, ~$730m in ORNGE and has taken this province from a Have to Have not status ($138b in debt to $~262b). I'm glad that Hudak didn't win, considering the major cuts he would need to put into place to stop the bleeding. He would be villainfied by the Left. You are quick to dismiss Hudak, but not to dismiss the progress of the 407 if it was still in government hands.

John, just wait. Ontario's future is in a downward spiral. Our Debt will probably be downgraded, therefore interest costs will go up. McGuinty will have no option but to start cutting programs and you'll soon find out if we had it good with Harris. Personally I think McGuinty wants out of office, he's hoping for the defeat of his budget so he doesnt' have to worry about dealing with the mess he created.

Ontario does not have a revenue issue. Stop with the "wanting to pay a little more in taxes" People are taxed to death in this province and are barely scraping by, every turn the government wants a little out of our pockets. If we pay a little more in taxes, we spend a little less in everything else (consumption). Think about that, if everyone paid 5% more in taxes, I would assume they would consume 5% less, a 5% reduction in retail will have great impact on jobs. It's not as simple as that, but that's the jist of it. Ontario has a spending problem, we are spending way more then we collect.

[bullionaire]

This is what happens when you want to work for only 26 years but get paid for the rest of your life.

Will the teachers union play the "for our children" card again to have the government bail their sorry butt out?

[Jon Lai]

Just because there's a big surplus doesn't mean we need to spend it. Paying down the debt and putting some in the provinces reserve funds help manage the interest we pay on our ballooning debt. What you seem to forget is, we have to pay interest on our debt. If we took that surplus and paid it down, the interest saved could be used for the programs that you are suggesting.

Now, it's pretty ignorant that you would choose McGuinty over Hudak. Considering that McGuinty wasted a $1B on eHealth, ~$730m in ORNGE and has taken this province from a Have to Have not status ($138b in debt to $~262b). I'm glad that Hudak didn't win, considering the major cuts he would need to put into place to stop the bleeding. He would be villainfied by the Left. You are quick to dismiss Hudak, but not to dismiss the progress of the 407 if it was still in government hands.

John, just wait. Ontario's future is in a downward spiral. Our Debt will probably be downgraded, therefore interest costs will go up. McGuinty will have no option but to start cutting programs and you'll soon find out if we had it good with Harris. Personally I think McGuinty wants out of office, he's hoping for the defeat of his budget so he doesnt' have to worry about dealing with the mess he created.

Ontario does not have a revenue issue. Stop with the "wanting to pay a little more in taxes" People are taxed to death in this province and are barely scraping by, every turn the government wants a little out of our pockets. If we pay a little more in taxes, we spend a little less in everything else (consumption). Think about that, if everyone paid 5% more in taxes, I would assume they would consume 5% less, a 5% reduction in retail will have great impact on jobs. It's not as simple as that, but that's the jist of it. Ontario has a spending problem, we are spending way more then we collect.

I said it before and I'll say it again - it's not hard to run a surplus if you just cut every damn thing.

McGuinty screwed us hard, but comparing him with Hudak, who is a Blue Tory, a Harass cabinet remnant, and aligned to the Alliance party roots aka Harper... I don't know. Plus, I think it's a good balance to not have all levels of government ruled by the same political party (and the same faction of the party too!) The last thing I want is Blue Tories to run Canada, because we'll just be "US's brother" and lose our independent appeal. To be honest, McGuinty having won a minority last year is probably the best and most balanced result that could've happened at the election. I definitely think it's time for McGuinty to retire, though.

I don't think Ontario has a revenue issue either - I'm saying I generally don't mind paying more taxes if they are justified. Taxes aren't always the best option (it rarely is), but they're an integral part of how government works. However, I'm against blindly cutting taxes just because it's a right wing ideology.

[Cerenity]

I said it before and I'll say it again - it's not hard to run a surplus if you just cut every damn thing.

McGuinty screwed us hard, but comparing him with Hudak, who is a Blue Tory, a Harass cabinet remnant, and aligned to the Alliance party roots aka Harper... I don't know. Plus, I think it's a good balance to not have all levels of government ruled by the same political party (and the same faction of the party too!) The last thing I want is Blue Tories to run Canada, because we'll just be "US's brother" and lose our independent appeal. To be honest, McGuinty having won a minority last year is probably the best and most balanced result that could've happened at the election. I definitely think it's time for McGuinty to retire, though.

I don't think Ontario has a revenue issue either - I'm saying I generally don't mind paying more taxes if they are justified. Taxes aren't always the best option (it rarely is), but they're an integral part of how government works. However, I'm against blindly cutting taxes just because it's a right wing ideology.


in the end the entire political spectrum is essentially a measure of how much government involvement you want in your life.

for people that want less government involvement, they tend to usually support conservatives because those wants match up well with conservative ideals of smaller government, smaller taxes.

for people that want government to take care of everything, they'll drift to the left because thats what socialism is, big government, high taxes, take care of everything. believe it or not, some people actually do want this. one of my friends would rather we have an euro style system where avg income taxation is in the 40-50% range (instead of the low 30s in canada), so the governments can provide all the services they get over there.

most people agree there are basic things the government should be tasked to handle, which are paid thru taxes. what differs in ideology is the optional stuff above basic which some people think are not needed and some think are needed.

i fully respect people who understand the law of math and if someone wants more services and are happy to pay more taxes for it. what pisses me off the most are people who complain about taxes, then complain the government is cutting services.

in general i dont think left wing people understand how much taxation is required on the average citizen to support the services they demand. they seem to think they can bring in additional revenue from businesses or investments, but they dont understand the two simple concepts that one, business do not pay taxes, EVER. every single cent of business tax is transferred to the end consumer as a cost of product sold. and two, taxation of investments actually impacts the middle class the most, because thats where people actually rely on their investments for retirement.

[r1lee]

I said it before and I'll say it again - it's not hard to run a surplus if you just cut every damn thing.

McGuinty screwed us hard, but comparing him with Hudak, who is a Blue Tory, a Harass cabinet remnant, and aligned to the Alliance party roots aka Harper... I don't know. Plus, I think it's a good balance to not have all levels of government ruled by the same political party (and the same faction of the party too!) The last thing I want is Blue Tories to run Canada, because we'll just be "US's brother" and lose our independent appeal. To be honest, McGuinty having won a minority last year is probably the best and most balanced result that could've happened at the election. I definitely think it's time for McGuinty to retire, though.

I don't think Ontario has a revenue issue either - I'm saying I generally don't mind paying more taxes if they are justified. Taxes aren't always the best option (it rarely is), but they're an integral part of how government works. However, I'm against blindly cutting taxes just because it's a right wing ideology.

are you sure its not hard to run a surplus? I bet you its much harder to run a surplus then it is to run a deficit. You can spend till your -$262b hearts content. Take a look at our youth, they don't know how to save, an in reality are in debt (CC's loans etc). So i would think its much harder to run a surplus and spending wisely then it is to run a deficit. Again you seem to dismiss anything that Harris did, which is funny considering you're bi-partisan (i think you stated that).

I agree, people don't mind paying more in taxes if there is somethign to show for it. Like a subway system that the public wants (not trying to start another debate, just stating what the public wants and wouldn't mind paying for). I mention nothing of cutting taxes, but if cutting taxes creates an environment for capital to be invested by corporations (creating jobs) then i'm all for it. But to blindly cut taxes is also not the answer.

[Rainne]

It's basically impossible to get fired as a teacher in Ontario, unless you have relationships with a student or something.

Even so..

[Jon Lai]

are you sure its not hard to run a surplus? I bet you its much harder to run a surplus then it is to run a deficit. You can spend till your -$262b hearts content. Take a look at our youth, they don't know how to save, an in reality are in debt (CC's loans etc). So i would think its much harder to run a surplus and spending wisely then it is to run a deficit. Again you seem to dismiss anything that Harris did, which is funny considering you're bi-partisan (i think you stated that).

I agree, people don't mind paying more in taxes if there is somethign to show for it. Like a subway system that the public wants (not trying to start another debate, just stating what the public wants and wouldn't mind paying for). I mention nothing of cutting taxes, but if cutting taxes creates an environment for capital to be invested by corporations (creating jobs) then i'm all for it. But to blindly cut taxes is also not the answer.

I said it's not hard to run a surplus if you just cut every damn thing. Free health care? Nope, that's gone now :P

Actually, a lot of people I know want more services for less taxes. They expect the government to sh1t money or something.

[CDNPatriot]

I said it before and I'll say it again - it's not hard to run a surplus if you just cut every damn thing.

but comparing him with Hudak, who is a Blue Tory, a Harass cabinet remnant, and aligned to the Alliance party roots aka Harper... I don't know. Plus, I think it's a good balance to not have all levels of government ruled by the same political party (and the same faction of the party too!) The last thing I want is Blue Tories to run Canada, because we'll just be "US's brother" and lose our independent appeal. To be honest, McGuinty having won a minority last year is probably the best and most balanced result that could've happened at the election. I definitely think it's time for McGuinty to retire, though.

I don't think Ontario has a revenue issue either - I'm saying I generally don't mind paying more taxes if they are justified. Taxes aren't always the best option (it rarely is), but they're an integral part of how government works. However, I'm against blindly cutting taxes just because it's a right wing ideology.

+1 very well said.

[CDNPatriot]

Yes, it's rather unfortunate for them. It's too bad that we can't fire everyone very easy Rainne like you, your loved ones, your friends so that will lead into instability in life and also greater strain on EI and social assistance. What a great society we will be if we can fire teachers very easy. Once they are fired from the Board I guess they will apply as a privatized garbage worker.


It's basically impossible to get fired as a teacher in Ontario, unless you have relationships with a student or something.

Even so..

[r1lee]

I said it's not hard to run a surplus if you just cut every damn thing. Free health care? Nope, that's gone now :P

Actually, a lot of people I know want more services for less taxes. They expect the government to sh1t money or something.

Help me out, explain to me what Harris did to our health care that we have to pay? Or are you just making a blanket statement that it's easy to create a surplus so therefore cut everything. Honestly that's just a deflection of the topic at hand.

[hondanation09]

the fact that a teacher making 90k a year just coz of seniority is just rediculous...a university prof barely makes that much...add to that the 3months vacation they get when most profs don't this is stupid, I hope the gov. cuts even more.

Get your facts straight ...teachers do not get 3 months vacation...actually they get 0. They are only paid for time in the classroom...they do not get paid for any other time they are not working.

Many places of employment offer paid vacation days...teaching is not one of them

[DearSummer]

Get your facts straight ...teachers do not get 3 months vacation...actually they get 0. They are only paid for time in the classroom...they do not get paid for any other time they are not working.

Many places of employment offer paid vacation days...teaching is not one of them

LOL. This is a simple argument of semantics. The reality is they get paid $x per year and have 3 months off, plus a generous sick day policy. Arguing whether they get paid on days off or not is just another hilariously bad example of people trying to defend the compensation.

[CDNPatriot]

LOL. This is a simple argument of semantics. The reality is they get paid $x per year and have 3 months off, plus a generous sick day policy. Arguing whether they get paid on days off or not is just another hilariously bad example of people trying to defend the compensation.

Yeah preparing a lesson plan for each day just happens spontaneously.

Marking 120 report cards just happens by itself. Marking papers too.

I guess they all can squeeze the marking at recess.... oh wait that's their break. Shame on them for taking breaks and lunches.

PS Dearsummer it must have been a slow day at the importing shop. What happened? Customs blocked all your business lol.

[hondanation09]

that fact that you are comparing a teacher to a prof tells me that your education level is probably at grade 6 max.

there is no prof that makes more than 125k a year, trust me I know exactly how much they make...also you don't see profs having 3 months paid vacation, almost all of them are doing research. Actually, most profs have to have 2-3 researches done every year.

What do teachers do? Same lecture notes every single year, mark some papers, take 3 months paid vacation! On top of that you got benefits AND make 90k a year (after just 8 years in the job).

Once again an incorrect statement on several fronts.

1. To reach the top of the pay scale as a teacher you must be in year 11 or 12 not 8. This can only be reached by getting more then a 3 year BA + B Ed. + additional qualification courses to be considered at the top of the pay grid (A1, A2, A3, A4). For some teachers it can take 2-5 years to get to the top of the pay scale or A4.
2. Teachers do not get paid for their vacation. This has to be the single most misunderstood aspect of teaching by the general public and probably why most people hate teachers. They envision them sitting by the pool in the summer while their cheques roll in. Or them skiing during Xmas while their cheques roll in. This does not happen. Teachers only paid for time served in the classroom...no overtime...nothing.
3. I think they are well paid but remember to get to the top of the pay scale it ends of equating to 11-12 years of service plus minimum 4-5 years of University schooling...there are factory jobs that will pay more then teaching for the first 6-8 years of the profession until you make it up the pay grid. There are trades jobs that pay more.
4. I have meet people in the teaching profession that came from other careers....marketing, trades, computer programmers, technicians, lawyers, nurses and I am not saying it is the toughest profession, but most of the time people who cross over from another profession CANNOT BELIEVE the amount of work teachers do on a daily basis. Is it physical work, no, but it is definitely demanding. Something the general public rarely concedes.

[CDNPatriot]

When the general public focuses on a particular profession, the general public always thinks they are under worked and over paid.


Once again an incorrect statement on several fronts.

1. To reach the top of the pay scale as a teacher you must be in year 11 or 12 not 8. This can only be reached by getting more then a 3 year BA + B Ed. + additional qualification courses to be considered at the top of the pay grid (A1, A2, A3, A4). For some teachers it can take 2-5 years to get to the top of the pay scale or A4.
2. Teachers do not get paid for their vacation. This has to be the single most misunderstood aspect of teaching by the general public and probably why most people hate teachers. They envision them sitting by the pool in the summer while their cheques roll in. Or them skiing during Xmas while their cheques roll in. This does not happen. Teachers only paid for time served in the classroom...no overtime...nothing.
3. I think they are well paid but remember to get to the top of the pay scale it ends of equating to 11-12 years of service plus minimum 4-5 years of University schooling...there are factory jobs that will pay more then teaching for the first 6-8 years of the profession until you make it up the pay grid. There are trades jobs that pay more.
4. I have meet people in the teaching profession that came from other careers....marketing, trades, computer programmers, technicians, lawyers, nurses and I am not saying it is the toughest profession, but most of the time people who cross over from another profession CANNOT BELIEVE the amount of work teachers do on a daily basis. Is it physical work, no, but it is definitely demanding. Something the general public rarely concedes.

[hondanation09]

LOL. This is a simple argument of semantics. The reality is they get paid $x per year and have 3 months off, plus a generous sick day policy. Arguing whether they get paid on days off or not is just another hilariously bad example of people trying to defend the compensation.

I know workers at Dofasco that get 12 weeks vacation...I do not see anyone complaining about them and they make VERY good money vs the schooling they have.

[DearSummer]

I know workers at Dofasco that get 12 weeks vacation...I do not see anyone complaining about them and they make VERY good money vs the schooling they have.

Why would I care how much somebody in the private sector makes if it is determined by the free market?

[CDNPatriot]

Why would I care how much somebody in the private sector makes if it is determined by the free market?

Read your other thread, there is no free market!

[gomyone]

I know workers at Dofasco that get 12 weeks vacation...I do not see anyone complaining about them and they make VERY good money vs the schooling they have.

..and look where that got Dofasco? Steel manufacturing has literally seen hundreds and thousands of layoffs over the past decade because the industry is not competitive mainly because of comparatively high unit labour costs.

[hondanation09]

Why would I care how much somebody in the private sector makes if it is determined by the free market?

Because i do not believe the general public would have a problem with teachers salaries if they worked 12 months instead of 9. They seem to be fixated on the vacation aspect of the job. I am not looking to change your mind that would be impossible. Just trying to get the facts straight.

[hondanation09]

..and look where that got Dofasco? Steel manufacturing has literally seen hundreds and thousands of layoffs over the past decade because the industry is not competitive mainly because of comparatively high unit labour costs.

unless they paid their workers $8 hr they would always lose out to steel made in developing world. non issue

[DearSummer]

Because i do not believe the general public would have a problem with teachers salaries if they worked 12 months instead of 9. They seem to be fixated on the vacation aspect of the job. I am not looking to change your mind that would be impossible. Just trying to get the facts straight.

I think it's the combination of ironclad job security, pension, benefits, salary, and vacation/sick days that have most people upset. It's not sustainable and takes away valuable resources we could be directing to our children's education.

[CDNPatriot]

Coming from someone that makes a living as an importer of made in China knick knacks. What is unsustainable is the one way trade to China thanks to scalpers like you.


I think it's the combination of ironclad job security, pension, benefits, salary, and vacation/sick days that have most people upset. It's not sustainable and takes away valuable resources we could be directing to our children's education.

[Tornado F2]

Once again an incorrect statement on several fronts.

2. Teachers do not get paid for their vacation. This has to be the single most misunderstood aspect of teaching by the general public and probably why most people hate teachers. They envision them sitting by the pool in the summer while their cheques roll in. Or them skiing during Xmas while their cheques roll in. This does not happen. Teachers only paid for time served in the classroom...no overtime...nothing.

Regardless of what it is per week/hour/whatever, it's the annual total that counts. If they are in some cases earning $90,000 for 9 months' work, that's extremely well paid however you look at it. Had I known, I should have become a teacher. Plenty of incentive to attract quality educators to replace the lousy ones. Do that and maybe those high salaries will finally start to pay off with better-educated and motivated students.

If they're unpaid for those 3 months, presumably they can earn even more income with a summer job. Or do they collect EI?

[hondanation09]

Regardless of what it is per week/hour/whatever, it's the annual total that counts. If they are in some cases earning $90,000 for 9 months' work, that's extremely well paid however you look at it. Had I known, I should have become a teacher. Plenty of incentive to attract quality educators to replace the lousy ones. Do that and maybe those high salaries will finally start to pay off with better-educated and motivated students.

If they're unpaid for those 3 months, presumably they can earn even more income with a summer job. Or do they collect EI?

No EI allowed. Summer school if they wish. Not saying they r not well paid. Just saying they are unfairly criticized. Ever check what a garbage man earns? City plow operator? How bout bus driver? What about a dentist? Doctor? Lawyer? Mail person? There are many who are paid well...teachers seem to also take the brunt of the criticism...unfairly IMHO.

[Agafaba]

Why would I care how much somebody in the private sector makes if it is determined by the free market?

Because in a free market its the customers responsibility to be properly informed that way they can decide if they should or should not support a corporation.

[Agafaba]

Regardless of what it is per week/hour/whatever, it's the annual total that counts. If they are in some cases earning $90,000 for 9 months' work, that's extremely well paid however you look at it. Had I known, I should have become a teacher. Plenty of incentive to attract quality educators to replace the lousy ones. Do that and maybe those high salaries will finally start to pay off with better-educated and motivated students.

If they're unpaid for those 3 months, presumably they can earn even more income with a summer job. Or do they collect EI?

Actually if you count weekends and the paid holiday that nearly everyone received teachers get less than 2 months more time off than someone working the full year.

[DearSummer]

No EI allowed. Summer school if they wish. Not saying they r not well paid. Just saying they are unfairly criticized. Ever check what a garbage man earns? City plow operator? How bout bus driver? What about a dentist? Doctor? Lawyer? Mail person? There are many who are paid well...teachers seem to also take the brunt of the criticism...unfairly IMHO.

Almost every profession in the public sector is criticized for their excessive cost. Nobody cares what people in the private sector are paid because they are not paying their salary.

[DearSummer]

Because in a free market its the customers responsibility to be properly informed that way they can decide if they should or should not support a corporation.

Some people identify more with nationalism than I do and prefer that products are manufactured domestically and are willing to pay a premium for that. Personally, the country of orgiin or what the employees are paid doesn't really factor into my decision (providing they are in fact employees and not slaves). Based on the consumption habits of Canadians, I would say the same is true for most people here.

[CDNPatriot]

Coming from a Made In China Importer Dearsummer....

The problem with you is your arguments fly in the face of practical realities. You offer no evidence to back your claims.

Say again about trade with China? How can you be so wrong so often Dearsummer? You clearly lack self awareness of your ignorance.

http://english.cri.cn/6826/2012/04/05/191s691280.htm


Some people identify more with nationalism than I do and prefer that products are manufactured domestically and are willing to pay a premium for that. Personally, the country of orgiin or what the employees are paid doesn't really factor into my decision (providing they are in fact employees and not slaves). Based on the consumption habits of Canadians, I would say the same is true for most people here.

[Jon Lai]

I think it's the combination of ironclad job security, pension, benefits, salary, and vacation/sick days that have most people upset. It's not sustainable and takes away valuable resources we could be directing to our children's education.

Reduce the wages and the top educators will leave for the private sector. Your kids will be left with incompetent teachers who can't teach. So what's better again?

Everything is about balance.

[manmanny]

OP
Asking you again and again about "importing goods from China" makes you less credible or the poster more credible?

[DearSummer]

Reduce the wages and the top educators will leave for the private sector. Your kids will be left with incompetent teachers who can't teach. So what's better again?

Everything is about balance.

I agree 100%. I actually think the best teachers should be paid MORE than they are paid now. The problem is that the union has created an environment that makes it impossible for the best teachers to be rewarded and for the worst to be fired. Also, the pension scheme is unsustainable (as all defined-benefit plans are) and the benefits (i.e. sick day payout) are excessive. I think base salaries should be lower with an opportunity to make much more with quality performance. For example, teachers that participate in extracurricular activities like coaching sports should be compensated for doing so. Teachers who excel in the classroom should be compensated more than average teachers. This is just basic, common sense stuff that has been around in the private sector for decades.

Ideally, I think we should shift away from a government monopoly on school. I think some of the experiments done with charter schools in the U.S. show a lot of potential. Ideally you want to unleash the power of freedom of choice. Allow parents/students to pick the best school for them which fosters innovation and continual improvement through competition.

[CDNPatriot]

Sigh.... the union did not create this environment alone. It's equally the fault if not more of the Conservative governments who focussed the fight on wages rather than an ability to assess and pay for by performance.


I agree 100%. I actually think the best teachers should be paid MORE than they are paid now. The problem is that the union has created an environment that makes it impossible for the best teachers to be rewarded and for the worst to be fired. Also, the pension scheme is unsustainable (as all defined-benefit plans are) and the benefits (i.e. sick day payout) are excessive. I think base salaries should be lower with an opportunity to make much more with quality performance. For example, teachers that participate in extracurricular activities like coaching sports should be compensated for doing so. Teachers who excel in the classroom should be compensated more than average teachers. This is just basic, common sense stuff that has been around in the private sector for decades.

Ideally, I think we should shift away from a government monopoly on school. I think some of the experiments done with charter schools in the U.S. show a lot of potential. Ideally you want to unleash the power of freedom of choice. Allow parents/students to pick the best school for them which fosters innovation and continual improvement through competition.

[hondanation09]

I agree 100%. I actually think the best teachers should be paid MORE than they are paid now. The problem is that the union has created an environment that makes it impossible for the best teachers to be rewarded and for the worst to be fired. Also, the pension scheme is unsustainable (as all defined-benefit plans are) and the benefits (i.e. sick day payout) are excessive. I think base salaries should be lower with an opportunity to make much more with quality performance. For example, teachers that participate in extracurricular activities like coaching sports should be compensated for doing so. Teachers who excel in the classroom should be compensated more than average teachers. This is just basic, common sense stuff that has been around in the private sector for decades.

Ideally, I think we should shift away from a government monopoly on school. I think some of the experiments done with charter schools in the U.S. show a lot of potential. Ideally you want to unleash the power of freedom of choice. Allow parents/students to pick the best school for them which fosters innovation and continual improvement through competition.

I am pretty sure that sick day payout was stopped as of 1999. So all teachers hired from then on DO NOT receive sick payouts. They accumulate sicks days up to a max of 300 and when they retire they disappear. Those hired before 1999 have it grandfathered so they do receive the payout. At least that is what is done in the board I am talking about.

And there are bad people in all professions with unions and really good workers. Unions are both good and bad...yes they do promote laziness in some cases, BUT overall I would rather have them then not. They do serve a purpose for the worker. You cannot run a school like you would a business environment and compensate those who do more outside the classroom otherwise work inside the classroom may suffer. I work WAY more then I probably should...7am-7pm 3-5 days a week, coach multiple sports, offer extra help BUT that is my choice and do not expect monetary compensation. However it becomes offensive to assume that someone with 5+ years of university with 3 degrees is being overpaid at $90000 a year because we happen to be off on XMAS, March Break and the summer. I do not know about you but the roads, malls, resorts seem very busy during those same time periods and I doubt teachers are the only ones off.

[vero95]

I agree 100%. I actually think the best teachers should be paid MORE than they are paid now. The problem is that the union has created an environment that makes it impossible for the best teachers to be rewarded and for the worst to be fired. Also, the pension scheme is unsustainable (as all defined-benefit plans are) and the benefits (i.e. sick day payout) are excessive. I think base salaries should be lower with an opportunity to make much more with quality performance. For example, teachers that participate in extracurricular activities like coaching sports should be compensated for doing so. Teachers who excel in the classroom should be compensated more than average teachers. This is just basic, common sense stuff that has been around in the private sector for decades.

Ideally, I think we should shift away from a government monopoly on school. I think some of the experiments done with charter schools in the U.S. show a lot of potential. Ideally you want to unleash the power of freedom of choice. Allow parents/students to pick the best school for them which fosters innovation and continual improvement through competition.

evaluation of teachers is very tricky and also may lead to abuse. although it sounds good I do not know how it could be implemented

[Phoenix3434]

evaluation of teachers is very tricky and also may lead to abuse. although it sounds good I do not know how it could be implemented

Generally speaking, how is the evaluation of teachers different from the evaluation of employees in the private sector? Why are teachers special in that some people think it's like some magical task to evaluate them properly?

Yes yes, different schools have different students and different neighbourhoods have different expectations. Not different from the private sector. Within a particular industry, different companies have different expectations. And within each company, you might have departments that have different expectations. All employees need to be evaluated in a contextual manner. Not different from what's required to evaluate teachers.

[hondanation09]

I agree 100%. I actually think the best teachers should be paid MORE than they are paid now. The problem is that the union has created an environment that makes it impossible for the best teachers to be rewarded and for the worst to be fired. Also, the pension scheme is unsustainable (as all defined-benefit plans are) and the benefits (i.e. sick day payout) are excessive. I think base salaries should be lower with an opportunity to make much more with quality performance. For example, teachers that participate in extracurricular activities like coaching sports should be compensated for doing so. Teachers who excel in the classroom should be compensated more than average teachers. This is just basic, common sense stuff that has been around in the private sector for decades.

Ideally, I think we should shift away from a government monopoly on school. I think some of the experiments done with charter schools in the U.S. show a lot of potential. Ideally you want to unleash the power of freedom of choice. Allow parents/students to pick the best school for them which fosters innovation and continual improvement through competition.

Parents can enrol their kids in any school they wish...elementary or high school.

[Tornado F2]

No EI allowed. Summer school if they wish. Not saying they r not well paid. Just saying they are unfairly criticized. Ever check what a garbage man earns? City plow operator? How bout bus driver? What about a dentist? Doctor? Lawyer? Mail person? There are many who are paid well...teachers seem to also take the brunt of the criticism...unfairly IMHO.

Apples and oranges. Those professions require more advanced education. As for the overpaid unionised jobs with governments, automakers, etc, their greed means their days are numbered. Which is a shame really, as there's a place for organised labour standing up for workers' rights, but the curent lot have become far too greedy and concerned only for their aging near-retirement membership.

What really amazes me is how comparatively underpaid our engineers and scientists are. Especially when you consider the demand for those productive and creative professions in the U.S. If we had EU-style freedom of movement I'm sure a lot of tech talent would move south in no time.


Actually if you count weekends and the paid holiday that nearly everyone received teachers get less than 2 months more time off than someone working the full year.

That's still 2 extra months to do with as you wish, on top of an attractive annual salary. As a kid I never imagined teachers were so well paid, though I knew they got long vacations.


Reduce the wages and the top educators will leave for the private sector. Your kids will be left with incompetent teachers who can't teach. So what's better again?

Everything is about balance.

For me it's less an issue of reducing teachers' generous wages than removing the job protection afforded to poor teachers. They really need to be weeded out so better teachers can get in. There are lots of underemployed intelligent people in this country today, including graduate teachers.

[hondanation09]

Generally speaking, how is the evaluation of teachers different from the evaluation of employees in the private sector? Why are teachers special in that some people think it's like some magical task to evaluate them properly?

Yes yes, different schools have different students and different neighbourhoods have different expectations. Not different from the private sector. Within a particular industry, different companies have different expectations. And within each company, you might have departments that have different expectations. All employees need to be evaluated in a contextual manner. Not different from what's required to evaluate teachers.

Teachers are evaluated by their principals, vice principals every 3/4 years. It is called a teacher performance appraisal. If an appraisal is not satisfactory, then they are evaluated more often. In there first few years they are always evaluated. I knew of a teacher that had a principal sit in on his class every day until they got it right. A teacher performance appraisal is the equivalent of a complete rectal exam. They are also evaluated in another way by students and their parents on a daily basis. Believe me, if parents are not happen they report teachers immediately, even if it is unwarranted. Teachers are governed by the Ontario College of Teachers and evaluated more then the general public realize.

[DearSummer]

[/U]

Parents can enrol their kids in any school they wish...elementary or high school.

Any school funded by the government...

I believe private schools should be allowed to compete by providing students/parents with education vouchers that may be used to enroll in private schools (or public schools). Subsidize the consumer (student) rather than the producer (school).

[hondanation09]

Apples and oranges. Those professions require more advanced education. As for the overpaid unionised jobs with governments, automakers, etc, their greed means their days are numbered. Which is a shame really, as there's a place for organised labour standing up for workers' rights, but the curent lot have become far too greedy and concerned only for their aging near-retirement membership.

What really amazes me is how comparatively underpaid our engineers and scientists are. Especially when you consider the demand for those productive and creative professions in the U.S. If we had EU-style freedom of movement I'm sure a lot of tech talent would move south in no time.



That's still 2 extra months to do with as you wish, on top of an attractive annual salary. As a kid I never imagined teachers were so well paid, though I knew they got long vacations.



For me it's less an issue of reducing teachers' generous wages than removing the job protection afforded to poor teachers. They really need to be weeded out so better teachers can get in. There are lots of underemployed intelligent people in this country today, including graduate teachers.

Agreed...BUT that would also include weeding out poor doctors, dentists, nurses...who never seem to get the same attention.

[Phoenix3434]

Teachers are evaluated by their principals, vice principals every 3/4 years. It is called a teacher performance appraisal. If an appraisal is not satisfactory, then they are evaluated more often. In there first few years they are always evaluated. I knew of a teacher that had a principal sit in on his class every day until they got it right. A teacher performance appraisal is the equivalent of a complete rectal exam. They are also evaluated in another way by students and their parents on a daily basis. Believe me, if parents are not happen they report teachers immediately, even if it is unwarranted. Teachers are governed by the Ontario College of Teachers and evaluated more then the general public realize.

Yeah, so what's wrong with this mechanism? Every evaluation scheme has flaws - the private sector isn't any different. If my boss doesn't like me, my only hope is that he does something ******** when he fires me. If he's careful and actually files my mistakes (which everyone makes), then I am screwed. This is just a reality of the work place. I would say that the teachers evaluation scheme has many protections built in. So many people evaluate you - principle, kids (through their marks), parents... If someone is not being reasonable there are others that can vouch for the teacher. If you fail in all 3 categories.. Well... Maybe you should not be a teacher.

[Tornado F2]

[/U]

Agreed...BUT that would also include weeding out poor doctors, dentists, nurses...who never seem to get the same attention.

I wish they would. There are definitely far too many bad ones out there. Sadly those professions limit the number of spaces in med school, etc, limiting supply and making it more difficult to find qualified replacements.

[damnos]

I actually think the best teachers should be paid MORE than they are paid now. The problem is that the union has created an environment that makes it impossible for the best teachers to be rewarded and for the worst to be fired.



For me it's less an issue of reducing teachers' generous wages than removing the job protection afforded to poor teachers. They really need to be weeded out so better teachers can get in. There are lots of underemployed intelligent people in this country today, including graduate teachers.

These over and over again to every union.
One of the main reasons why unions are backward and promote poor performance. If everybody paid equally what's the incentive to do well or work harder than the laziest person on the group?



Also, the pension scheme is unsustainable (as all defined-benefit plans are) and the benefits (i.e. sick day payout) are excessive.

And just another pyramid scheme basically.
If your money is invested in the financial market that has 6% return, as well as possibility of ups and downs in the market, how does it make sense to GUARANTEE a 10% return to the investor? (numbers are made up for illustration) That's literally just a pyramid scheme. If you want a guaranteed return on the pension, then guarantee 1-2% or whatever the GIC rate is.


Sigh.... the union did not create this environment alone. It's equally the fault if not more of the Conservative governments who focussed the fight on wages rather than an ability to assess and pay for by performance.

And equally to the labour-friendly government who gave unwarranted, undeserved salaries and benefits to their union friends leaving the province / country / city or whatever in a deep hole without having any decent result that come with the cost of having these unions.

If government provide crappy pay, people will want to leave their jobs and go to private sector, in return, government need to increase their pay and benefits to hire the good people and stop them from leaving for private sector. Supply and Demand - until it reaches equilibrium. Economics 101.


evaluation of teachers is very tricky and also may lead to abuse. although it sounds good I do not know how it could be implemented

Excuses. Why cant teachers be evaluated like every other profession? (and yes it has subjective component to it just like any evaluation)


Teachers are governed by the Ontario College of Teachers and evaluated more then the general public realize.

But the evaluations don't mean anything it seems if everybody still in the same pay grade and negotiate collectively.
Why cant we reward the good performing ones higher salary, higher raises and higher bonus while at the same time fire off the baddies?



Agreed...BUT that would also include weeding out poor doctors, dentists, nurses...who never seem to get the same attention.

Never? the problems above are broadly on every unionized environment or anything that bargain collectively and put everybody (goods and bads) on the same bracket.
As well as extent to most if not all public sector employees that have no grasp of merit-based rewards.

[kenchau66]

unions are strongly analogous to communism; no matter how hard you work, you get paid the same thing as the next run off the mill joe

[kenchau66]

I'm super glad that teacher's colleges in Ontario are accepting candidates on a massive scale.

It's very amusing to watch a group of people who thought they could do 1 year of "grad school" and then make $90k in a few years working 9-4 with all the trimmings be out of work for many years. Welcome to the real world.

[hondanation09]

I'm super glad that teacher's colleges in Ontario are accepting candidates on a massive scale.

It's very amusing to watch a group of people who thought they could do 1 year of "grad school" and then make $90k in a few years working 9-4 with all the trimmings be out of work for many years. Welcome to the real world.

I wish I worked 9-4 that would be great! Reality, as a teacher most days 730-5:30pm during coaching and extracurricular 7-7pm.

[hondanation09]

I'm super glad that teacher's colleges in Ontario are accepting candidates on a massive scale.

It's very amusing to watch a group of people who thought they could do 1 year of "grad school" and then make $90k in a few years working 9-4 with all the trimmings be out of work for many years. Welcome to the real world.

Starting teachers salary is $45709. You do not get to $90000 after a few years...try 11-12 and only then if at A4 of pay scale which is only given to those with extended schooling.

[kenchau66]

I wish I worked 9-4 that would be great! Reality, as a teacher most days 730-5:30pm during coaching and extracurricular 7-7pm.

"coaching and extracurriculars" aka overtime daycare, must be hard work.

[hondanation09]

"coaching and extracurriculars" aka overtime daycare, must be hard work.

not here to argue, just state facts...may I ask what is so demanding about your job for you to deem coaching as day care? I mean coaches in the US get paid $3-$25000 per sport for coaching or as you call it "day care"

[vero95]

Excuses. Why cant teachers be evaluated like every other profession? (and yes it has subjective component to it just like any evaluation)


give an example. in any large company, people are usually evaluated based on years of experience and are not paid because they do the job better
the salary usually depends on the experience and position

[Phoenix3434]

give an example. in any large company, people are usually evaluated based on years of experience and are not paid because they do the job better
the salary usually depends on the experience and position

WTF? What world do you live in. In private "non-union" industry, it's most about performance. There's someone always evaluating you. NOT based on experience and position.

Salary can be based on experience and position. But there are also very specific expectations associated with this "salary" and "position". At the end of the day, you are judged based on your performance "related" to the position you hold and the salary that you make. Essentially, it's all about performance - on a base curve for your position/salary.

[DearSummer]

give an example. in any large company, people are usually evaluated based on years of experience and are not paid because they do the job better
the salary usually depends on the experience and position

LOL....:facepalm:

[Jon Lai]

WTF? What world do you live in. In private "non-union" industry, it's most about performance. There's someone always evaluating you. NOT based on experience and position.

Salary can be based on experience and position. But there are also very specific expectations associated with this "salary" and "position". At the end of the day, you are judged based on your performance "related" to the position you hold and the salary that you make. Essentially, it's all about performance - on a base curve for your position/salary.

Yes, but performance can mean a lot of things. It could be your performance on the job, or your performance in shining your bosses' shoes.

[DearSummer]

Yes, but performance can mean a lot of things. It could be your performance on the job, or your performance in shining your bosses' shoes.

That's why one person rarely determines compensation in most private sector companies. A lot of companies have moved to a system that essentially requires managers to argue all of their employees' cases for compensation to other managers as well as executives. This is one of the most transparent and effective ways to determine compensation in my opinion.

[Demonoid]

That's why one person rarely determines compensation in most private sector companies. A lot of companies have moved to a system that essentially requires managers to argue all of their employees' cases for compensation to other managers as well as executives. This is one of the most transparent and effective ways to determine compensation in my opinion.

Performance=value. In the private sector, employees are ought to be compensated based on the value that they bring to the company, but unfortunately that's not always the case. You can work for 20 years and still make more or less the same amount.

The public sector(aka "the government") tries to be more lax about salary increases, but in general, seniority=higher salary. You could be doing the same thing for 20 years, yet, you will make a little more each year. Unions are mostly responsible for yearly increases (inflation adjusted pay), because they negotiate each year.

[damnos]

give an example. in any large company, people are usually evaluated based on years of experience and are not paid because they do the job better
the salary usually depends on the experience and position

Tell me, do you really think when you work in a company and walk in to a meeting for your annual review it goes like:

supervisor: Hi, you've worked here for 10 years - so here's what you gonna make now, and this is your position now.
you: thank you

do you really think that's how the meeting goes?



Performance=value. In the private sector, employees are ought to be compensated based on the value that they bring to the company, but unfortunately that's not always the case. You can work for 20 years and still make more or less the same amount.

The public sector(aka "the government") tries to be more lax about salary increases, but in general, seniority=higher salary. You could be doing the same thing for 20 years, yet, you will make a little more each year. Unions are mostly responsible for yearly increases (inflation adjusted pay), because they negotiate each year.

That's just stating the fact of how things are - what we are arguing here is how does such system makes sense? Such system where somebody paid based on "how long have you been here" as opposed to a system that reward you based on "what you've accomplished"

Yes you can work for 20 years and still make the same amount if you are that incompetent - and may be you deserved to not get raises if you are really that incapable. On the flip side, I can work for 1 year and get raises that pushes me higher than somebody who's been there for years because I accomplished more.

[r1lee]

give an example. in any large company, people are usually evaluated based on years of experience and are not paid because they do the job better
the salary usually depends on the experience and position

Lol :facepalm: yes you get fired for not performing, something that teachers have never done up until today. Even so, the teachers that are being laid off are probably just the newest members, while the crap teachers are still hanging around.

[hondanation09]

Tell me, do you really think when you work in a company and walk in to a meeting for your annual review it goes like:

supervisor: Hi, you've worked here for 10 years - so here's what you gonna make now, and this is your position now.
you: thank you

do you really think that's how the meeting goes?




That's just stating the fact of how things are - what we are arguing here is how does such system makes sense? Such system where somebody paid based on "how long have you been here" as opposed to a system that reward you based on "what you've accomplished"

Yes you can work for 20 years and still make the same amount if you are that incompetent - and may be you deserved to not get raises if you are really that incapable. On the flip side, I can work for 1 year and get raises that pushes me higher than somebody who's been there for years because I accomplished more.

I agree with what you are saying completely...if that is how it was done I would be making a lot more money. However, it really is not that simple. Running the education system like a business is not black and white. Look at the world of health care. How do you pay a doctor or nurse based on performance? Do you base performance on patient reviews? Successful outcomes? Does a teachers performance get based on student grades? Parent reviews? Number of extra curricular + Average marks? What you are saying makes sense on paper...pay them according to how good they are at their job. But their job encompasses so many different aspects. In the business world you boss may say, hey Joe this is your quota for this quarter. You strive to achieve that and get bonuses if you go over. Failure to meet you quota on successive quarters may mean termination. That simply is not something that can be done in health care of education. Evaluation can be done and is done, but not in the same way as in the business world. Union or no union, evaluation cannot be done the same way and pay allocation cannot be done the same way.

[r1lee]

I agree with what you are saying completely...if that is how it was done I would be making a lot more money. However, it really is not that simple. Running the education system like a business is not black and white. Look at the world of health care. How do you pay a doctor or nurse based on performance? Do you base performance on patient reviews? Successful outcomes? Does a teachers performance get based on student grades? Parent reviews? Number of extra curricular + Average marks? What you are saying makes sense on paper...pay them according to how good they are at their job. But their job encompasses so many different aspects. In the business world you boss may say, hey Joe this is your quota for this quarter. You strive to achieve that and get bonuses if you go over. Failure to meet you quota on successive quarters may mean termination. That simply is not something that can be done in health care of education. Evaluation can be done and is done, but not in the same way as in the business world. Union or no union, evaluation cannot be done the same way and pay allocation cannot be done the same way.

Even though I might agree with you on merit of pay, there has to be a middle ground. In the private sector, not all jobs are based on goals and seniority does factor in. But basing a entire profession and pay on just length of time served and seniority is not the way any profession should be handled.

There are ways to gauge performance even if it's not goal based. Just like how parents know which teachers are good and which are not, you're telling me the school system is not able to do the same?

[hondanation09]

Even though I might agree with you on merit of pay, there has to be a middle ground. In the private sector, not all jobs are based on goals and seniority does factor in. But basing a entire profession and pay on just length of time served and seniority is not the way any profession should be handled.

There are ways to gauge performance even if it's not goal based. Just like how parents know which teachers are good and which are not, you're telling me the school system is not able to do the same?

Can the health care system do the same?

[damnos]

I agree with what you are saying completely...if that is how it was done I would be making a lot more money. However, it really is not that simple. Running the education system like a business is not black and white. Look at the world of health care. How do you pay a doctor or nurse based on performance? Do you base performance on patient reviews? Successful outcomes? Does a teachers performance get based on student grades? Parent reviews? Number of extra curricular + Average marks? What you are saying makes sense on paper...pay them according to how good they are at their job. But their job encompasses so many different aspects. In the business world you boss may say, hey Joe this is your quota for this quarter. You strive to achieve that and get bonuses if you go over. Failure to meet you quota on successive quarters may mean termination. That simply is not something that can be done in health care of education. Evaluation can be done and is done, but not in the same way as in the business world. Union or no union, evaluation cannot be done the same way and pay allocation cannot be done the same way.

Understood, the parameters on how to assess performance are of course would be different and might not as easy as "You need to hit $100k sales this month" kind of thing. But certainly, there are ways to define what goals and performance standards are.

Again, my main problem is how someone is rewarded based on "how long you are there" and how we don't weed out the bad ones.
People respond to incentives, and pay is one of the bigger incentives you get from your job - and seniority rule removes the incentive for people to work hard and do well on their job.

As I said before: If I get paid the same as the laziest person on the job, why don't I just be as lazy?

[DearSummer]

Can the health care system do the same?

They already do to a degree. I thought surgeons and specialists were paid per procedure?

Privatizing health care would make it much easier to reward the best health care practioners. Same goes for education.

[patpond]

These threads are getting tiresome.

:facepalm:

[bcbgboy13]

These threads are getting tiresome.

:facepalm:

Why tiresome - it is surprising what "austerity" means for the public sectors>

From the latest Stats Canada employment reports - http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/120405/dq120405a-eng.htm



Following four months of little change, employment increased by 82,000 in March, mostly in full-time work.

Employment gains in March were spread across several industries, including health care and social assistance; information, culture and recreation; and public administration.

Following three months of small declines, employment in health care and social assistance increased by 32,000 in March

Employment rose by 15,000 in public administration in March.

Following four months of little change, Ontario posted employment gains of 46,000, all in full-time work.

And surprise, surprise for us in Ontario

Feb.2012 - 380,300 in "public administration"
Mar.2012 - 390,900 in "public administration" - CANSIM table 282-0011

And then we are all asked to share the pain.

[bcbgboy13]

Starting teachers salary is $45709. You do not get to $90000 after a few years...try 11-12 and only then if at A4 of pay scale which is only given to those with extended schooling.

You (and any public servant for that matter) conveniently forgot the 10-11-12-13% pension matching contribution by the employer (aka Joe the taxpayer at large). Not sure if it is reflected on your personal T4 but this place any new teacher in the 50k+ salary.

And BTW 18.1 million of the 24.5 million tax returns for 2009 are with total income of under $50k.

[r1lee]

Can the health care system do the same?


They already do to a degree. I thought surgeons and specialists were paid per procedure?

Privatizing health care would make it much easier to reward the best health care practioners. Same goes for education.

yeah, i already thought it did to a certain degree also. The best doctor's or specialists in their field are known and have patients waiting for them.

But there is also a shortages of doctors in general. So that might answer the question where bad doctors will still practice.

Can that be said for the teaching profession? I don't think so.

[Rainne]

Yes, it's rather unfortunate for them. It's too bad that we can't fire everyone very easy Rainne like you, your loved ones, your friends so that will lead into instability in life and also greater strain on EI and social assistance. What a great society we will be if we can fire teachers very easy. Once they are fired from the Board I guess they will apply as a privatized garbage worker.

Eh, doesn't really bother me tbh. I just feel bad for the thousands of aspiring recent grads from teachers college (and more churning out), unable to secure full-time employment.

[damnos]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/british-columbia/bc-politics/bc-teachers-union-calls-for-mediator-to-be-sent-packing/article2393173/

similar issue with teachers union in BC, and I mentioned before in some other thread about unions impeding the implementation of technology that makes things better and more efficient just because their job cannot be eliminated due to technology advancement even though what they are doing are practically useless compared to new technologies


That report included a recommendation that government ensure education funds are being “efficiently spent” and that “new administrative processes, enabled by the advent of information technologies and software-enabled management systems, are not being avoided simply for the sake of maintaining traditional ways of managing the public school system.”

I think it was about Local 416 or 79 or something that thestar posted they have a job provisioned that say their job cannot be eliminated due to outsourcing AND technological advancement - Which really doesnt require much thought to see how dumb it is to not able to improve process and reduce cost by implementation of technologies

[Tharnax]

that fact that you are comparing a teacher to a prof tells me that your education level is probably at grade 6 max.

there is no prof that makes more than 125k a year, trust me I know exactly how much they make...also you don't see profs having 3 months paid vacation, almost all of them are doing research. Actually, most profs have to have 2-3 researches done every year.

What do teachers do? Same lecture notes every single year, mark some papers, take 3 months paid vacation! On top of that you got benefits AND make 90k a year (after just 8 years in the job).


You said a university professor barely makes $90K. I was just saying you're wrong. How is that right?

Since you're too lazy digging up the disclosure report, I've googled it for you. Here are the numbers for 2010:
http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/publications/salarydisclosure/2011/univer11.pdf

"No prof makes more than 125K a year" eh? Just "trust you" and the numbers that you pull out of your rear end?

And for the record, not everyone in the list are associate/professors. A lot of them are pure lecturers too - they don't have to do research. And they still get paid a good 6 figure amount!

Also, $90K is almost the max cap that a teacher in Ontario can make. After that, unless they upgrade themselves to being a vice/principal, they have nowhere else to go and $90K is all that they will make. They also work longer hours during the year marking papers, unless you're a kindergarden teacher, so it more or less offsets the 2 month "vacation", as you put it.

By the way, I'm not saying $90K for teachers aren't too high, I'm just saying you're wrong about how little professors make :P

+1 Awesome response! Loved the PDF as well, thanks for posting it! I always wondered what some of my professors were making for the "hours" of work they were putting in. Most half left, likely retired, but there were still a couple there.

Based on this PDF it looked like the starting salary was $100,000 since I saw one as low as $100,078 (if you call that low) but there are certainly some neat items in that report maybe they only have to make it public if the salary is over $100,000, who knows.

[Tharnax]

I agree with what you are saying completely...if that is how it was done I would be making a lot more money. However, it really is not that simple. Running the education system like a business is not black and white. Look at the world of health care. How do you pay a doctor or nurse based on performance? Do you base performance on patient reviews? Successful outcomes? Does a teachers performance get based on student grades? Parent reviews? Number of extra curricular + Average marks? What you are saying makes sense on paper...pay them according to how good they are at their job. But their job encompasses so many different aspects. In the business world you boss may say, hey Joe this is your quota for this quarter. You strive to achieve that and get bonuses if you go over. Failure to meet you quota on successive quarters may mean termination. That simply is not something that can be done in health care of education. Evaluation can be done and is done, but not in the same way as in the business world. Union or no union, evaluation cannot be done the same way and pay allocation cannot be done the same way.

Private schools have obviously figured out how to evaluate teachers and hire quality and fire poor quality. I doubt they'd be raking in the money that they are if the quality of the education was poor. Considering they aren't publicly funded they had better provide a quality eduction that warrants a family paying $30000+ per year on top of the portion of their income tax that goes to pay for public education they aren't using.

[Tharnax]

I am pretty sure that sick day payout was stopped as of 1999. So all teachers hired from then on DO NOT receive sick payouts. They accumulate sicks days up to a max of 300 and when they retire they disappear. Those hired before 1999 have it grandfathered so they do receive the payout. At least that is what is done in the board I am talking about.


Just to clarify this is not necessarily the case for all school boards across Ontario as they each have their own collect bargaining agreements. For TDSB it's a max of 200 sick days that can be accumulated and can only be "cash out" at a current average value of $45000 if the teacher has worked for the TDSB as a teacher for 20 years.

[Tharnax]

I wish I worked 9-4 that would be great! Reality, as a teacher most days 730-5:30pm during coaching and extracurricular 7-7pm.

I'm glad you don't and good for you for putting in the extra time. Unfortunately, my "guess" is by the time you are in your late 40s, early 50s you won't be putting in that same time. You'll be starting you're days by 8:30 and leaving shortly after 3:30 everyday. That, unfortunately, becomes the norm. Motivated, young, energetic teachers run the extra-curricular activities, need more time to prepare lessons, spend more time marking and are just more involved. Everyone gets tired of doing the same thing over and over again it's life, I have no doubt you'll get there as well.

Sorry Hondanation, not picking on you specifically, although it may seem like it. It is pretty obvious your a teacher, my guess is, a teacher who has been in the teaching profession for 7 years or less and became a teacher directly out of university. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

[hondanation09]

I'm glad you don't and good for you for putting in the extra time. Unfortunately, my "guess" is by the time you are in your late 40s, early 50s you won't be putting in that same time. You'll be starting you're days by 8:30 and leaving shortly after 3:30 everyday. That, unfortunately, becomes the norm. Motivated, young, energetic teachers run the extra-curricular activities, need more time to prepare lessons, spend more time marking and are just more involved. Everyone gets tired of doing the same thing over and over again it's life, I have no doubt you'll get there as well.

Sorry Hondanation, not picking on you specifically, although it may seem like it. It is pretty obvious your a teacher, my guess is, a teacher who has been in the teaching profession for 7 years or less and became a teacher directly out of university. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

wrong 12 years and no have not stopped coaching 1 bit...even more so actually...love it too much!

[hondanation09]

Private schools have obviously figured out how to evaluate teachers and hire quality and fire poor quality. I doubt they'd be raking in the money that they are if the quality of the education was poor. Considering they aren't publicly funded they had better provide a quality eduction that warrants a family paying $30000+ per year on top of the portion of their income tax that goes to pay for public education they aren't using.

Private school making money has nothing to do with the quality of education. Some are better then others. Money they make generally comes from wealthy alumni donations who donate whether the education is good or not. Not criticizing private schools, I may send my kids there, but just because people are willing to spend $30,000 a year does not warrant a better education then public system.

[Jon Lai]

+1 Awesome response! Loved the PDF as well, thanks for posting it! I always wondered what some of my professors were making for the "hours" of work they were putting in. Most half left, likely retired, but there were still a couple there.

Based on this PDF it looked like the starting salary was $100,000 since I saw one as low as $100,078 (if you call that low) but there are certainly some neat items in that report maybe they only have to make it public if the salary is over $100,000, who knows.

I like how ever1221 stopped responding to the thread. I still saw him reading the thread after I made that post :lol: