School Board to Approve Pay Raises for Brizard, Other Executives?

Most jobs that require extensive higher education are much better paying. If you want to attract the best and brightest to the profession of teaching, there needs to be competitive pay. The fact is not only are teachers constantly undergoing professional development, but we also spend hours of our own time prepping, coaching, tutoring & grading. Not to mention much of our own money on supplies and things such as coats for children.  Sure there are complacent, lazy teachers, just like any profession. But most of us aren't teaching to get rich, or collect pensions, or even to have summers off. I don't think it's asking too much to be able to make a living doing what is essentially one of the most important jobs in the world (educating future generations). 

Yesterday I got my head bitten off for saying that the good teachers need to cut bait on the complacent, lazy teachers. I mostly agree with your points (although I think too few teachers acknowledge that the schedule also has a value for many teachers) but to be realistic as long as good teachers shackle themselves to the bad ones, nothing is really going to change.

I agree. However, I just don't think a fair way has been presented to get rid of "bad teachers." How do you authentically judge an educator's merit in the bureaucratic system that we have? Not based on student's test scores, that's for sure. And what about me, an often overlooked art teacher? How do assess how well I am doing my job with 800 kids for 40 mins. a week?  There is definitely a way, but like everything in our education system it is not cost effective so we resort to standardization. But now I am getting into a different topic entirely.

If you annualize $69K (CPS teachers work from early Sept to mid Jun) it comes out to $87K per year.  Just sayin'.

Don't forget they generally spend their scads of time off going to classes they have to pay for.

Doesn't the government forgive all your student loans if you're a teacher for awhile?

After 5 years teaching at a Title 1 school you can get back $17,500 if you teach a core subject such as math, and $5,000 for any other subject. I went 50K in debit getting my Art Education Master's degree. Granted that was totally my choice, but it's misinformation like that that makes people think teacher's have it so easy. Here's the link: https://www.dl.ed.gov/borrower...

NO!!  They consistently change the requirements!  I've been teaching in an underperforming school for almost 8 years and they have changed the rules (it seems) every two years.

They are investing in their own careers. That's a smart thing, and ought to be encouraged, but it is not really a huge sacrifice.

Except that the $69K you reference is paid out over twelve months, and not nine or ten.

Just sayin'.

They have a nice opportunity to supplement that salary over the summer months (as many of them do). Just sayin'.

Nonetheless, they are being paid for only nine or ten months work, that is the important point. In those other two or three months they can do other work and earn more money if they wish and have a means to do so.

Sure, but most people are being paid for only 40 hours work. A six day work week, with 8 hours of sleep a night leaves 56 more hours to work. Slackers. What's the point? I am not with these people who think teachers are getting the shaft all the time, but I also think it is a hell of a job and that we probably compensate about as well as we need to keep people in the job.

Worse yet, I am told that they are forced to take it over 12 months, which is to say they are forced to lose any time value that money may have and essentially donate it to the Board.

I think it takes a pretty long time to get to $69,000 a year. If that is the average, then I would bet the average is being brought up to that level by having a large number of teachers with many years and the system. Young classroom teachers with 5 to 10 years in are making nowhere near that.

Also, the more degrees and certificates you get, the more you make. So teachers that are making that much likely spent a lot of their own money on masters degrees and post grad work to get there. Those degrees make them more qualified, so they should make more.

Averages are funny like that.

That being said, (a) the starting salary is higher than the NBC guy says, and (b) investing in your career is a good idea. This "spent their own money" deal is called life. It's what most of us have done.

School Board President David Vitale said the new salaries are based upon enhanced responsibilities

Like working a longer school day?

He said "less than $40,000." That was obviously inaccurate. You're comment, on the other hand, was irrelevant.

He said "less than $40,000." That was obviously inaccurate. You're comment, on the other hand, was irrelevant

It was inaccurate, which is why I used your figure of $69K to figure out how many teachers salaries just *one* of the school board member's fortune could pay.

I think it's quite relevant that anti-union "billionaires" get raises despite poor performance, deficits, and struggling economies all while denying meager ones to teachers in addition to increasing their workload. Apparently Chuck does too, as well as The Sun Times, and the (awesome) BGA.

I'd like to add that it's also quite relevant that 'A list' actors do pretty well even when their movies bomb, famous writers make out well even when their books flop, baseball players prosper nicely when they don't perform up to expectations.  This 'one set of rules for entertainers, artist, athletes, etc. another for the teachers' is also absolutely untenable!!!!

Certainly *you* think it's relevant. Lots of other people think it represents two separate issues. But, then again, at some point you'd be forced to admit that treating *all* teachers as being the same is bad policy and lets the bad ones slide if we separated the issues. Better to make it an issue of worker rights than performance.

One set of rules for the business people, another for the teachers.  I love how this so absolutely, and crystal clearly illustrates this hypocrisy.  It'll be entertaining to see how many more commenters will try to muddy the waters and deflect this onto the teachers.

Yes. No responsibility for bad teachers. No benefit for good teachers. It's all because of the rich! Burn them! Two sets of rules! Longer work days! Hypocrisy! BLAH!

It just goes on and on. To the extent the good teachers support the union they get what they get. The bad teachers (and they do exist) will always hide behind the union. I had many teachers who bluntly told us that they didn't give a shit. I had many teachers (and knew many teachers) who were incredible, went above and beyond, and are people who positively impacted their students. That they are compensated in lock-step with each other is absurd.

Hmmm...I thought this was about the poor performing CPS board. 

1/2 the post was about "attacking the union." The post was about both. The Board is unquestionably performing poorly, and if they vote this guy a raise they got even worse. The union also has massive problems.

Is this why you always stick to a very simple, predictable narrative? Too confusing otherwise?

Giving ANYONE a raise after the teachers did not get the raise many of them expected is unconscionable. If Brizzard had ANY leadership skills he would very publicly reject the raise. This is not going to end well with that guy.

That being said, the NBC hack job also misses the point and is deceptive. It took no time at all to establish that the starting salary is above $40,000, and the vast majority of teachers are not at that salary. $69,000 is the average. http://www.chicagomag.com/Chic...

It should also be noted that . . . you know, the schools are a dismal failure. Giving an unproven administrator a raise is not the solution to that, but I don't think a lock-step 4% raise for showing up is either.

$69,000 is the average

At that rate Chicago school board member and subprime queen Penny Pritzker could pay the salaries of 24,638 teachers for a year with her personal fortune.

And your point is?  Who cares what Penny Pritzker can pay out of her personal fortune?

$69,000 is a very nice salary for anyone working in this city.  Especially someone who only works 9 months out of the year.

The slave is so very loyal to his master.

Did they teach you to say that when you were captured in Korea and sent to China for programming? Shouldn't you be running for President? Navin, the woods are very deep and I have miles to go before I sleep.