I know that we don’t have teacher’s unions in Carolina, but still, the negative effects are everywhere.
Today, the N&O reported on the idea of merit pay for teachers. In this case, the merit pay seemed to be limited to the type of school a teacher taught at; not how well that teacher did. But still, it’s a start.
I started my working career as a teacher, it was the first job I had after college. Further, that first year was also a “negotiation” year for the “EA” and the school. I remember the feeling when I saw the results of my elected representation:
No raises for teachers going from 0-1, 1-2 or 2-3 years of experience. However, raises for everyone else.
I knew then that the whole “working for a union thang” wasn’t for me. I left as soon as the year was up.
What I don’t understand is how so many people, with a straight face, claim that paying more money to a better performer is bad. Ffor anything. Really. Never ever understood that. Ya know, while I think that the salaries we pay athletes is gross, at least we have the right incentives in place.
- We agree on a specific number of years in the contract.
- I will pay you according to the market.
- When you are no longer able to perform, you are no longer able to be employed.
Why would it be any different for teachers? Why, WHY, do we want to protect low performing teachers?
I just don’t get it.
I should email you about it.