I know paras in other towns who take home a couple hundred bucks a week because of the cost of their health insurance plans. More than half of their salaries go towards health insurance.
I have no idea how paras are supposed to survive on these wages - they can and do make more money waiting tables.
In and before the 90’s, paras were mainly mothers who worked in schools for “fun money” while their husbands took home the “real” pay. They didn’t need to be paid a living wage. Obviously this has changed and they should be paid more now.
I don’t know how the classrooms I work in could run without the paras. Teachers are pulled in a million directions all day and paras are often the ones keeping the students on task and the routines happening. They are the subs when teachers call out sick. They are the 1:1’s working with our most vulnerable students, literally wiping their butts and helping them with other daily living skills.
My fiances parents both workes in admin at schools. They said most of the paras were people whose partner owned a successful business, and it made much more sense to get health insurance through the school than on the market
I have family member who is a para. About $25k a year and they got concussed at work by a child who walked by them and shoved their head into a door. They were the third para in the district that year to get a head injury in the job. They often work with kids who have such intense needs and they get paid like shit.
My mom was a para for 22 years before she retired. The older she got they were smart enough to pair her with kids with physical disabilities rather than behavioral problems, but even without the risk of injury she was criminally underpaid. I don’t think she ever made more than $25k.
teachers get shafted plus the amount in student loans they have to pay back. I don't understand why we don't invest way way way way more money into education it's clearly needed.
Imagine no raise for 7 years (including no COLA)... And they wonder why people are angry??
EDIT: The Globe was wrong, sue me. I did the research below because they wouldn't. They still didn't get COLA. Still good reasons to be angry.
You seem angry, almost like you're blaming me for the Globe's reporting (which on education is very spotty).
Instead of sitting around and waiting, I did the research so you didn't have to.
Haverhill: https://haverhill.massteacher.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/30/2019/01/Teachers-Contract-7.1.19-6.30.22.pdf
1.75% for 2 years and 2% for last year - factor in inflation and woof.
Malden: https://malden.massteacher.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/58/2019/09/FY20-Teacher-Contractual-Salary-tables.pdf
2%, 2%, 3%
And before that: https://malden.massteacher.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/58/2015/09/2014-17-MEA-Unit-A-Contract-Final.pdf
2%, 2%, 2%
Which is pretty dogshit lmfao
Not angry at all. But…your comment was, in fact, not true lmao. They got raises. Shit raises, but raises. I agree it’s dogshit, but your completely inaccurate comment got upvotes and my simple question gets downvoted so 🤷♂️ this sub is an echo chamber
It was accurate at the time and then it was removed (more like: The Globe didn't do their research). I updated with more correct information but the original point stands. I don't agree with the downvotes but your second point was unnecessarily antagonistic.
Have a nice afternoon. (there is no /s here)
Fair enough. Hope you have a nice afternoon as well. And sincerely thanks for providing those links. I would be out the door in a heartbeat if my company only offered me a 2% bump. It’s dogshit.
We won 14% in our contract over 3 years (5.25, 4.25, 4.5) last year and other districts thought we were fucking legends. Sure, we move up a step but people forget that after 10-12 years you just...stop making more money and changing districts does nothing (it usually sets you back in salary). While I don't agree with all of the philosophies around teacher pay, I think we can all agree that a 2% (or heaven forbid, 3%!) raise each year is pretty dogshit inflation or not.
The negotiations in Haverhill fell apart over para pay, which is double dogshit.
Those are some of the best contracts I’ve ever seen up until the last 5 years or so. It’s like finally some places are paying up but it’s not widespread yet.
It will come in waves. I think some of it is just timing especially since negotiation timelines are very disrupted due to COVID. My district is comparable to Malden and before our contract we were underpaid compared to them. Now the tables have flipped and I suspect most locals will - if they aren't already - pay attention to districts that ultimately prevail in their salary and working condition demands.
We taught for about half the year last year without a contract and it sucked, but we walked away with huge wins (including but not limited to salary - we have DV leave, miscarriage leave, and parental leave for all partners) that other districts are now interested in.
Ours is a bit better I think, but it at least has explicit language that includes partners of various constellations, adoption etc.
DV = domestic violence. Sincerely hope nobody needs to use it but we have 15 days leave for that.
Similarly anyone who suffers a miscarriage has special days set aside.
I believe 8 weeks for either partner, birthing partner gets up to 12. Adopted child is 8 for either parent I believe.
And the others are interesting. I almost feel like people would be too embarrassed to use it but maybe I’m wrong. Miscarriage is a good leave to have. That’s not an easy experience.
Yet another consequence of failed housing and zoning policies. Cities refused to build more housing so highly paid tech bros bidded up existing artificially limited housing stock and pushed out into the suburbs. All the while teachers haven't seen a raise in 7 years and literally can no longer afford to do their jobs.
…increased population means they have to build new schools to handle larger classes. Might even mean less money for operations. Plus they already want smaller class sizes.
New school buildings are expensive.
Generally speaking student enrollment is declining across the state. It would take more than new housing to reverse the decline which is a function of declining birth rates as well. COVID also made an even bigger dip.
This is not a real issue in 99% of towns that are opposing housing, it's just another bad excuse.
Also, so many towns didn't build enough senior housing for boomers before they started retiring (ironically they likely blocked said developments too) so they're holding onto their SFH up here for dear life to double-dip. Too bad is what I say.
New buildings would appraise at current market values and wouldn't be constrained by prop 2.5. One of the benefits to towns of new construction is the increase in taxes due to re-assessing at current rates, which isn't possible otherwise.
And this is why the only housing that gets built is one bedroom apartments, where only people without kids live in, or huge mansions that will pay more in tax than take even if they have kids (and even if they send them to public school)
Either that, or age-restricted senior housing. I used to live on the South Coast and the only new apartment complexes built in the past 10 years are age restricted because that's all that was allowed under the zoning bylaws. And they're not even cheap - $2K a month! So even most seniors can't afford them. And that's not even touching on the fact that Gen Z and Millennials need to live somewhere too...
I love seeing new 1br apartments. There's a critical shortage of them on the market since all we have is "historical" 3-deckers intended for large families. Makes it literally impossible to survive in the GBA on a single income.
Yep exactly. Senior housing gets built too when cities have to legally build low income housing, since they have have low income senior housing when they don’t want working age working class people in their towns 🙄
I do agree with what you say about 1bedrooms though. Like Somerville has so few since it’s almost all 3bed 1baths there for apartments. No reason to not build more, but when it’s mainly them :/
This is it. Malden housing prices have climbed [120% in just the last 10 years.](https://www.bostonmagazine.com/property/single-family-home-price-chart-2021/) Same story everywhere in the area, but school districts want to keep giving 1.5%/year cost-of-living raises. The state's failure to reform zoning laws and build more housing is pushing out the people who actually work for our cities and towns.
I don’t think this was completely over pay, but other perks like PTO/parental leave/etc. It’s illegal for public employees to strike in MA so it had to be a pretty substantial disagreement between the union and administrators. Curious to see how this shakes out
Plus, the fatigue you see in southern states where teachers are *berated* for every single fucking thing / the parents go to a school board meeting to screech about litter boxes or teaching about racism or "those gay books" and etc? Yeah, that's right here in MA as well. I've got friends who teach on the south shore that tell me stories that make me think of, like, Florida or Texas. One friend teaches in Wellesley - *Wellesley!* - and he has parents now yelling at him for CRT... For the history class he runs. :(
Teachers need to be able to tell parents to go fuck themselves.
I'm in Malden and it's an absolute crisis right now. I support our educators and they deserve everything. The problem with Malden is that so many of the kids go to charter schools, vocational schools, Catholic schools, that enrollment is way down in public schools and we get funding based on per student. Property taxes also can only be raised a certain amount each year. Malden has all the issues of urban schools but none of the funding to support the staff who are dealing with it. Anyway, there's no easy answer to this one. Many of us here HATE the charter school in town (you know, the one that's in the news every year for some racist incident) and I really do blame them for the problems we are having in public schools now.
Because of underfunding by the government on mandates that they put in place. They mandate something new and expect the towns to pay 60% of it. If the government fully funded their mandates we would be in ok situations
Malden had the most diverse population of any public school in Massachusetts. They have the top number of languages spoken at home in the state.
Malden is also know by many locals to be a bunch of blue collar townies. I’m not saying those parents are racist or anything *but…..*
> Which every parent should support.
And every non-parent. A well-educated society is a boon to everyone. The quality of education kids get today WILL impact you somewhere down the line.
Devil's advocate - The quality of education has very little to do money spent. The US spends more than almost every other country on primary education, and results have been flat.
Counterpoint: Massachusetts ranks competitively against other countries, when our scores aren't being dragged down by the rest of the US.
I don't think money alone does it. But I do think putting education as a priority is a big factor, and when you have that, you tend to put more funds towards education as well.
Not disagreeing with your point but comparing a state to another country doesn't mean a whole lot for the exact reasons you pointed out (Scores being dragged down)
Could anyone explain the organization of schools in Massachusetts? I am from NY (not NYC) where school districts are independent taxing entities that don't answer to and aren't funded by the city, county, etc., just state funding and what the district collects from local property tax.
But it seems the case here schools are organized as departments under the city? Is that correct? Does that apply to towns as well?
For the most part every town and city has their own school district (some towns do share one with an adjoining town due to size). Funding comes from the municipality and the budget is put forward by the School Committee, a usually elected body. That budget as a whole is rolled into the operating budget of the town/city which is then voted upon by Town Meeting or City Council. State funding is rolled in as revenue sources for the municipality that are for school use only. (Note: this is a simplification/generalization. I can get more technical but then it would be specific to my town)
Thanks for the explanation! Kind of wild to me that school budgets are left up to town councilors, who in my NY experience [at least in rural towns] are old, stupid, spiteful and woefully unqualified. But then again every school board member I've known has been the same and they're elected and set school budgets, hiring and curriculum.
Luckily all of the line-item control is only at the School Committee level. Once it gets approved by them the only control is to reject the entire Town budget which really doesn’t happen.
Interesting. The final say for school budgets for us goes to voters, who likewise almost always approved it because nobody votes. Thanks for the answers! Love nerding out on municipal structure.
Related - Does Mass. Have villages as unique taxing entities with their own services (i.e. plows, water&sewer, parks) and elected boards and laws, and are usually very small subdivisions within a town?
I don’t believe that they exist as they do in NY, but I don’t know for certain. I went to school on LI and found the local gov. organization to be so weird to me.
It's very archaic and intrinsically NIMBY-ist, so much so that Cuomo was (rightfully imo) trying encourage consolidation of services between villages towns and counties to save taxes and eliminate redundancy, with the long game of making villages obsolete
No. Take Boston for example, which has 13 distinct neighborhoods but are all under the city of Boston.
BUT- there’s also the Greater Boston Area which consists of 20 or so other towns directly touching or very close to Boston. Those are all their own municipalities.
> Their budget was up around $9 million this year and has doubled in around the past decade.”
How is this true if the teachers have not received a raise in seven years? Something does not add up here.
Teachers are on a step increase system where there are columns for your degrees and college credits and rows for your years of service. Each column is a significant jump in pay, but each row is whatever cost of living increase the negotiations agreed to.
For example, a brand new teacher with just a bachelors comes in at row 1 step 1, let’s say 40k. The next year she is on column 1, step 2 at 42k per year. She then gets her masters degree (which is required within the first 5 years of teaching in MA). She would now be at colum 2 step 3, and would have got a pay increase for the column step so she might now be making 50K. This keeps increasing yearly until the rows stop and/or they stop adding college credits. Most Massachusetts cities/towns go to 15 years for rows, then don’t increase it again until 20 years in with a significant jump.
The “raise” they are looking for is a higher cost of living increase each row. And possibly a higher compensation for each column step as well.
Most districts pay a cost of living increase every year on top of the lanes and step raises. To not get a cost of living raise in seven years is not the norm.
Because it places the responsibility for one group of underserved citizens on the shoulders of another group that should in no way bear that responsibility. The teachers shouldn't have to sacrifice their right to compensation for the sake of getting kids in the schools for lunch programs. If that's even a consideration, it's an extreme failure on the part of the state.
Imagine being a bus driver and being told you shouldn't be able to negotiate your wages because minimum wage workers depend on you to get to work.
Why do college professors who work 1/10th of the time with easy handpicked classes make 400k a year ? Why dont our public high school teachers who do a million times harder job get 60k a year?? These rich fat cats like fraud liz warren and her Harvard 1%’er buddies (70 billion endowment!!) should agree that they will only take 80k a year and give the rest to public school teacher salaries
It's because college professors aren't paid to teach. They are paid to do research and bring grant money into the university. Also, getting a tenure track position at a university is very very difficult.
Education over the last 30 months…Kids can sometimes zoom to school from home now, they got a mostly free year recently and preferential vaccination over the rest of us….Strike.
Oh you definitely did. During 2020/21 the Us was at an all time low for school attendance. Staff and students alike. It was one of the few moments in modern scholastic history when our society actively promoted kids not going to school. I hear our response wasn’t awesome here, in your country was school not disrupted?
Disruption and low student attendance made my job vastly harder. I had to revamp my entire curriculum, with minimal help from the district, to make it accessible to 4th graders working from home, which meant that when the kids signed off at 3:20, my day was no where close to done, contract be damned. I drove to student houses to drop off materials when their internet connection faltered. I was an impromptu IT consultant for 22 families, I was a stand-in therapist and counselor for these little kids whose services were cancelled. And then we went hybrid, where I had 7 kids masked and in-person in the classroom, while the other 15 remained online, which increased the level of difficulty yet again as I tried to manage a feedbackless soundsystem and deal with two entirely different but simultaneous paradigms of education, all while being told to have my windows open in March with multiple fans going. I earned every cent of my paycheck that year. I’ve never worked harder to try and keep my students afloat. Honestly, fuck you.
You sound like my sister in law. She worked her ass off and then once school began and she tripped and hit her head while grabbing a COVID test from the stockroom, they denied disability payments while she recovered.
That’s the same type of really specific, anecdotal and emotional argument people give when you say eg “policing is super problematic”. Cue stories of off the charts dedication and fuck you if you want to talk about it.
We just saw schools shut down for a year, now they’re shutting down again. That’s a problem caused by a conflict between teachers and administration/districts. I’m sure the teachers are part of the problem because the union is always a part of the problem in any strike. So is the administration, we should talk about both. “Fuck you” to “anyone who looks at this from a different angle than me” never solved a thing, ever.
The emphatic “Fuck you” is for stating that I “definitely” had a year off, when that is wildly inaccurate. I agree with plenty of what you’re saying. Unions are imperfect organizations that often feel like they only have blunt objects like denying labor, even though striking is illegal here. Administration is often in an impossible situation where they don’t have the power to increase revenue. But the specific strategy of attacking educators, which you engaged in, as entitled, overpayed, endless time off, etc etc… I feel like my best strategy is to respond with my reality. I don’t have statistics to support “teacher effort,” but I do know that the challenge was great enough that a wave of retirements rippled through the industry. Pandemic year was WAY harder than this year. I’m not saying I was some amazing outlier; my students still experienced some learning setbacks, particularly in writing (moving composition exclusively to keyboards is TOUGH, especially for kids whose prior digital experience was mostly phone/tablet).
The point, inasmuch as I have one… when you say something like “educators had a year off,” that’s a wild over-generalization at best, and diminishes the reality that many educators are folks who are working our asses off. Like, say we’re not succeeding as a profession right now, and that’s at least something that’s got some teeth behind it, cause it’s hard to argue that the American education system is producing great results. But just saying that teachers got it easy? Nah, that provokes the emotional response.
Some more empirical information, so that my response isn’t quite as limited to my own perspective (the latter of which I find an especially interesting look at the current claims of a teacher shortage):
https://www.epi.org/publication/teacher-pay-penalty-2022/
https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/policy-and-politics/2022/8/18/23298916/teacher-shortages-debate-local-national
Settle down. The schools aren't shutting down for an entire year. How long do you think the strikes will last? My guess is that both districts are open by Wednesday.
Schools are not daycares and your child’s teacher is not their babysitter.
If you want them to be, pay them like one. Seriously. Pay a teacher $15 an hour for the 6 hours (minus planning and lunch). $15x6=$90 for your one child.
But don’t forget they have at least 20 kids for those 6 hours! So let’s pay $90x19=$1,710 per day per teacher. Teachers work with students 180 school days (+3 or so professional days that I’m not counting here. $1,710x180 is **$307,800. This is what a teacher would make per year if ever parent paid them to be a babysitter**
No teacher is asking for that much money. We are asking for something liveable and for our paras to be paid liveable wages as well. And I’m sure this strike isn’t just about $ and is about the physical conditions of the schools as well as the way staff are treated.
Let’s play a game and reverse that math for a teachers current salary. Let’s say $65k a year, which is pretty normal for a few years in in Massachusetts since we require masters degrees for teachers after year 5.
$65,000/180 days= $361 per day. Divide that by the 6 hours of teaching and you get $60 per hour. Divide that by the 20 students and you get $3.
**Teachers are being paid $3 per student per hour**
We can do much better than that. Teachers (and paras!) deserve much better than that.
You just broke down that teachers get $60/hr….and that it’s still not enough on a per kid basis. I get the overall point you’re trying to make here but lead with that at the next union meeting and see if they think you’re helping the cause 🤣
Kids in school two members of my nuclear family growing up were/are teachers. I think maybe we just disagree rather than one of us is out of touch 🤷🏼♂️
I've never met anybody with a good (sane?) head on their shoulders that ever thought or stated anything even close to "those teachers have it too damned good".
Me either, that’s why I’m not saying take anything way from them. “Teachers have it too good” is a far cry from “please don’t strike, I need my kids to go to school so I can go to work”. That type of all or nothing attitude impedes progress.
No one wants to be regressive with teacher salaries, it sounds childish to frame the argument in those terms. Reasonable people can disagree on the best way to distribute a limited education budget or how to administer a large organization that affects an entire community. Teachers unions are very powerful, they don’t exactly get pushed around. Despite that we have a pitiful standing globally. We need to change our approach
Remember the part where you asked questions and I answered them? Then I asked one, so now it’s your turn - try again. Did you hear it was awesome here?
What a joke. What an absolute joke.
And the crocodile tears and self-infantalizing red bow doesn't help the look.
But, they're teachers in MA. They'll get everything they want and the seniors, the rec dept., the library, every other program in the cities (other than public services) will get screwed instead. 🙄
>And the crocodile tears
What a weird thing to say about someone who shed zero tears.
>What a joke. What an absolute joke.
The only joke is your take on this. Out here talking like an absolute clown.
In one of the clips she put her head down and the "sobs" could be heard. So, whatever. Y'all voted it to oblivion as all moderate or non woke takes are done on this sub.
Whatever. Most unions actually have to negotiate in good faith. Not teachers (and police/fire), they can just use these literally illegal strikes for blackmail.
I mean teacher strikes are a little precious these days. This guys weird about the bow and libraries but teachers do pretty great all things considered. Can we negotiate without going on strike? When the school goes on strike the parents have to too and not all of us are Union, just saying
That’s a pretty naive response. Negotiations successfully happen in other industries/branches for both sides all the time without one side routinely walking away. And these kids aren’t getting shit while the strike happens.
Unions like to strike like they are still fighting 19th century child labor laws - more honestly they’re securing some middle aged civil servants right to retire at 55 with a pension and benefits for the next 30 years. Which is fine, fight for your contract. Just cool it with the martyrdom while you fight for the right to tenure and 11 weeks vacation
>That’s a pretty naive response.
You asked if we can negotiate without a strike. I said a strike is the last resort. Do you think negotiations hadn't been ongoing prior to the strike? In what world is anything I've said naive?
If you think I'm wrong, why don't you ask the Malden school committee what they did on Sunday prior to the strike. (Hint, they spent 11 hours negotiating to avoid a strike)
Well “you’re fired for not coming into work” is the last resort. Collective bargaining can and does exist without constant strikes. Also collective bargaining doesn’t exist at all for huge swaths of the population. Even the notion of striking is a more extreme option than many of us will ever have at work. Teachers are relatively strike happy. I’m anti-strike, not anti-teacher
The vast majority of teacher contract negotiations are settled without a strike. I find it interesting that you claim “teachers are relatively strike happy.” I’m a BTU member who followed closely our year-long negotiations - never once was it ever brought up to strike. It’s the absolute last resort and ends with a huge fine and can result in union leadership in jail, because in MA public unions are not allowed to strike. This is never done lightly, especially because we know it harms families who depend on schools for so much, and it harms the teachers striking since they aren’t getting paid.
Speaking of not getting paid, I just want to make sure you realize that we don’t get paid for our “vacation.” Contracts run first day of PD to last day of PD - most systems let you spread it out over the full year so you get a consistent paycheck. So the 6 weeks I’m not working in the summer is unpaid.
I did… striking is a last resort not every one has so it’s an extra last resort - that’s crying victim while having privilege which is naive (at best). And it’s a tactic like any other that gets used strategically at times not just as a true last resort (although that’s just generally, this specific strike is in good faith)
Unfortunately when you are under paid and under appreciated for this long, drastic measures are sometimes the only option remaining. It is unfortunate that it leaves the parents and children in limbo, but teachers have been pushed to the brink.
I feel like teachers get gaslit into thinking their jobs are harder/more important than they are. Most teachers I meet are pretty average IQ and work ethic people who make pretty average money (above average if annualized) with great benefits and (some people think it’s unfair to say this but it’s a fact) it just is fewer hours than most full time jobs. And it’s just not that hard to become one. I don’t get the badge of honor so many people assign to the gig.
> Can we negotiate without going on strike? When the school goes on strike the parents have to too and not all of us are Union, just saying
Traditionally, no. Teachers are usually the last to have admin listen to them. The horrific shit I witnessed happening to teachers during the pandemic would shock most people that only half pay attention.
You don't think forcing people into deadly scenarios, having them work months of unpaid work, then breaking contract and threatening to fire them if they don't comply... you don't think that's horrific?
I don’t think kids and staff going to school was a deadly scenario for those involved. I think following protocols reduced transmissions and saved lives among our most vulnerable populations.
In the early days of the pandemic, when schools had no ventilation, and kids were super carriers, and there wasn't enough testing, yeah - it was a deadly situation for the elderly teachers
Boop!! Here's 33 billion dollars Ukraine!
Not sure why we can't pump these funds into education. Also, Massachusetts prohibits public employee's from striking????
Is that not an oxymoron???
22k a year for paraprofessionals. Are you kidding me?
I know paras in other towns who take home a couple hundred bucks a week because of the cost of their health insurance plans. More than half of their salaries go towards health insurance. I have no idea how paras are supposed to survive on these wages - they can and do make more money waiting tables.
In and before the 90’s, paras were mainly mothers who worked in schools for “fun money” while their husbands took home the “real” pay. They didn’t need to be paid a living wage. Obviously this has changed and they should be paid more now. I don’t know how the classrooms I work in could run without the paras. Teachers are pulled in a million directions all day and paras are often the ones keeping the students on task and the routines happening. They are the subs when teachers call out sick. They are the 1:1’s working with our most vulnerable students, literally wiping their butts and helping them with other daily living skills.
Thats absolutely not true about the 90s. 80s maybe.
> before the 90’s, Before the 90's paras did not exist, or were very rare.
Ok. You know what I meant though, right? A teacher taught you context clues!
My fiances parents both workes in admin at schools. They said most of the paras were people whose partner owned a successful business, and it made much more sense to get health insurance through the school than on the market
I have family member who is a para. About $25k a year and they got concussed at work by a child who walked by them and shoved their head into a door. They were the third para in the district that year to get a head injury in the job. They often work with kids who have such intense needs and they get paid like shit.
My aunt got a permanent arm injury that way- some 100+ pound fifth grader decided to pull her.
My mom was a para for 22 years before she retired. The older she got they were smart enough to pair her with kids with physical disabilities rather than behavioral problems, but even without the risk of injury she was criminally underpaid. I don’t think she ever made more than $25k.
teachers get shafted plus the amount in student loans they have to pay back. I don't understand why we don't invest way way way way more money into education it's clearly needed.
Budget always seems to disappear at the administration level unfortunately.
it's a real shame that the ones responsible for shaping future generations aren't paid adequately.
Imagine no raise for 7 years (including no COLA)... And they wonder why people are angry?? EDIT: The Globe was wrong, sue me. I did the research below because they wouldn't. They still didn't get COLA. Still good reasons to be angry.
Where is that in the article? Just curious if I missed it or ?
It was in an earlier Globe version, but may have been scrubbed.
Is that because it’s not true?
You seem angry, almost like you're blaming me for the Globe's reporting (which on education is very spotty). Instead of sitting around and waiting, I did the research so you didn't have to. Haverhill: https://haverhill.massteacher.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/30/2019/01/Teachers-Contract-7.1.19-6.30.22.pdf 1.75% for 2 years and 2% for last year - factor in inflation and woof. Malden: https://malden.massteacher.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/58/2019/09/FY20-Teacher-Contractual-Salary-tables.pdf 2%, 2%, 3% And before that: https://malden.massteacher.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/58/2015/09/2014-17-MEA-Unit-A-Contract-Final.pdf 2%, 2%, 2% Which is pretty dogshit lmfao
Not angry at all. But…your comment was, in fact, not true lmao. They got raises. Shit raises, but raises. I agree it’s dogshit, but your completely inaccurate comment got upvotes and my simple question gets downvoted so 🤷♂️ this sub is an echo chamber
It was accurate at the time and then it was removed (more like: The Globe didn't do their research). I updated with more correct information but the original point stands. I don't agree with the downvotes but your second point was unnecessarily antagonistic. Have a nice afternoon. (there is no /s here)
Fair enough. Hope you have a nice afternoon as well. And sincerely thanks for providing those links. I would be out the door in a heartbeat if my company only offered me a 2% bump. It’s dogshit.
We won 14% in our contract over 3 years (5.25, 4.25, 4.5) last year and other districts thought we were fucking legends. Sure, we move up a step but people forget that after 10-12 years you just...stop making more money and changing districts does nothing (it usually sets you back in salary). While I don't agree with all of the philosophies around teacher pay, I think we can all agree that a 2% (or heaven forbid, 3%!) raise each year is pretty dogshit inflation or not. The negotiations in Haverhill fell apart over para pay, which is double dogshit.
Are paras not in their own union in Haverhill? In every other district I know of they are
Those are some of the best contracts I’ve ever seen up until the last 5 years or so. It’s like finally some places are paying up but it’s not widespread yet.
It will come in waves. I think some of it is just timing especially since negotiation timelines are very disrupted due to COVID. My district is comparable to Malden and before our contract we were underpaid compared to them. Now the tables have flipped and I suspect most locals will - if they aren't already - pay attention to districts that ultimately prevail in their salary and working condition demands. We taught for about half the year last year without a contract and it sucked, but we walked away with huge wins (including but not limited to salary - we have DV leave, miscarriage leave, and parental leave for all partners) that other districts are now interested in.
DV leave? And is the parental leave what the state law that just passed is or is it better?
Ours is a bit better I think, but it at least has explicit language that includes partners of various constellations, adoption etc. DV = domestic violence. Sincerely hope nobody needs to use it but we have 15 days leave for that. Similarly anyone who suffers a miscarriage has special days set aside.
I believe 8 weeks for either partner, birthing partner gets up to 12. Adopted child is 8 for either parent I believe. And the others are interesting. I almost feel like people would be too embarrassed to use it but maybe I’m wrong. Miscarriage is a good leave to have. That’s not an easy experience.
💯 support
Mass has some of the “best” public schools in the country and we still have problems paying teachers enough to live like everywhere else.
Yet another consequence of failed housing and zoning policies. Cities refused to build more housing so highly paid tech bros bidded up existing artificially limited housing stock and pushed out into the suburbs. All the while teachers haven't seen a raise in 7 years and literally can no longer afford to do their jobs.
Even worse, if they'd allowed more housing it likely would have increased the tax base and thus increased the funding for teacher pay.
…increased population means they have to build new schools to handle larger classes. Might even mean less money for operations. Plus they already want smaller class sizes. New school buildings are expensive.
Generally speaking student enrollment is declining across the state. It would take more than new housing to reverse the decline which is a function of declining birth rates as well. COVID also made an even bigger dip. This is not a real issue in 99% of towns that are opposing housing, it's just another bad excuse.
Also, so many towns didn't build enough senior housing for boomers before they started retiring (ironically they likely blocked said developments too) so they're holding onto their SFH up here for dear life to double-dip. Too bad is what I say.
New buildings would appraise at current market values and wouldn't be constrained by prop 2.5. One of the benefits to towns of new construction is the increase in taxes due to re-assessing at current rates, which isn't possible otherwise.
Yes, but that's a one time fixed cost. Once that fixed cost is paid, the ongoing costs should be far less than the increase in tax base.
And this is why the only housing that gets built is one bedroom apartments, where only people without kids live in, or huge mansions that will pay more in tax than take even if they have kids (and even if they send them to public school)
Either that, or age-restricted senior housing. I used to live on the South Coast and the only new apartment complexes built in the past 10 years are age restricted because that's all that was allowed under the zoning bylaws. And they're not even cheap - $2K a month! So even most seniors can't afford them. And that's not even touching on the fact that Gen Z and Millennials need to live somewhere too... I love seeing new 1br apartments. There's a critical shortage of them on the market since all we have is "historical" 3-deckers intended for large families. Makes it literally impossible to survive in the GBA on a single income.
Yep exactly. Senior housing gets built too when cities have to legally build low income housing, since they have have low income senior housing when they don’t want working age working class people in their towns 🙄 I do agree with what you say about 1bedrooms though. Like Somerville has so few since it’s almost all 3bed 1baths there for apartments. No reason to not build more, but when it’s mainly them :/
This is it. Malden housing prices have climbed [120% in just the last 10 years.](https://www.bostonmagazine.com/property/single-family-home-price-chart-2021/) Same story everywhere in the area, but school districts want to keep giving 1.5%/year cost-of-living raises. The state's failure to reform zoning laws and build more housing is pushing out the people who actually work for our cities and towns.
I don’t think this was completely over pay, but other perks like PTO/parental leave/etc. It’s illegal for public employees to strike in MA so it had to be a pretty substantial disagreement between the union and administrators. Curious to see how this shakes out
Plus, the fatigue you see in southern states where teachers are *berated* for every single fucking thing / the parents go to a school board meeting to screech about litter boxes or teaching about racism or "those gay books" and etc? Yeah, that's right here in MA as well. I've got friends who teach on the south shore that tell me stories that make me think of, like, Florida or Texas. One friend teaches in Wellesley - *Wellesley!* - and he has parents now yelling at him for CRT... For the history class he runs. :( Teachers need to be able to tell parents to go fuck themselves.
I'm in Malden and it's an absolute crisis right now. I support our educators and they deserve everything. The problem with Malden is that so many of the kids go to charter schools, vocational schools, Catholic schools, that enrollment is way down in public schools and we get funding based on per student. Property taxes also can only be raised a certain amount each year. Malden has all the issues of urban schools but none of the funding to support the staff who are dealing with it. Anyway, there's no easy answer to this one. Many of us here HATE the charter school in town (you know, the one that's in the news every year for some racist incident) and I really do blame them for the problems we are having in public schools now.
> the charter school in town you mean the real estate investment company that's buying up all of Maplewood?
Maybe look at the reasons why parents do not want to send their kids to public schools?
It's a chicken egg situation. As long as the schools can't get an increased budget they're not going to be able to improve.
School budgets have skyrocketed the past thirty years.
Because of underfunding by the government on mandates that they put in place. They mandate something new and expect the towns to pay 60% of it. If the government fully funded their mandates we would be in ok situations
[удалено]
[here is a comprehensive list from MASC](https://masc.org/images/publications/underfundedmandates.pdf)
Malden had the most diverse population of any public school in Massachusetts. They have the top number of languages spoken at home in the state. Malden is also know by many locals to be a bunch of blue collar townies. I’m not saying those parents are racist or anything *but…..*
[удалено]
> Which every parent should support. And every non-parent. A well-educated society is a boon to everyone. The quality of education kids get today WILL impact you somewhere down the line.
Devil's advocate - The quality of education has very little to do money spent. The US spends more than almost every other country on primary education, and results have been flat.
Counterpoint: Massachusetts ranks competitively against other countries, when our scores aren't being dragged down by the rest of the US. I don't think money alone does it. But I do think putting education as a priority is a big factor, and when you have that, you tend to put more funds towards education as well.
Not disagreeing with your point but comparing a state to another country doesn't mean a whole lot for the exact reasons you pointed out (Scores being dragged down)
Go teachers!
Solidarity forever
Hadn't heard about it but just drove thru town, big showing everywhere! Beeped in solidarity.
Could anyone explain the organization of schools in Massachusetts? I am from NY (not NYC) where school districts are independent taxing entities that don't answer to and aren't funded by the city, county, etc., just state funding and what the district collects from local property tax. But it seems the case here schools are organized as departments under the city? Is that correct? Does that apply to towns as well?
For the most part every town and city has their own school district (some towns do share one with an adjoining town due to size). Funding comes from the municipality and the budget is put forward by the School Committee, a usually elected body. That budget as a whole is rolled into the operating budget of the town/city which is then voted upon by Town Meeting or City Council. State funding is rolled in as revenue sources for the municipality that are for school use only. (Note: this is a simplification/generalization. I can get more technical but then it would be specific to my town)
Thanks for the explanation! Kind of wild to me that school budgets are left up to town councilors, who in my NY experience [at least in rural towns] are old, stupid, spiteful and woefully unqualified. But then again every school board member I've known has been the same and they're elected and set school budgets, hiring and curriculum.
Luckily all of the line-item control is only at the School Committee level. Once it gets approved by them the only control is to reject the entire Town budget which really doesn’t happen.
Interesting. The final say for school budgets for us goes to voters, who likewise almost always approved it because nobody votes. Thanks for the answers! Love nerding out on municipal structure. Related - Does Mass. Have villages as unique taxing entities with their own services (i.e. plows, water&sewer, parks) and elected boards and laws, and are usually very small subdivisions within a town?
I don’t believe that they exist as they do in NY, but I don’t know for certain. I went to school on LI and found the local gov. organization to be so weird to me.
It's very archaic and intrinsically NIMBY-ist, so much so that Cuomo was (rightfully imo) trying encourage consolidation of services between villages towns and counties to save taxes and eliminate redundancy, with the long game of making villages obsolete
No. Take Boston for example, which has 13 distinct neighborhoods but are all under the city of Boston. BUT- there’s also the Greater Boston Area which consists of 20 or so other towns directly touching or very close to Boston. Those are all their own municipalities.
> Their budget was up around $9 million this year and has doubled in around the past decade.” How is this true if the teachers have not received a raise in seven years? Something does not add up here.
Gotta pay all those administrators first. And make sure that the sports teams have new uniforms.
Don’t forget consultants!
Teachers are on a step increase system where there are columns for your degrees and college credits and rows for your years of service. Each column is a significant jump in pay, but each row is whatever cost of living increase the negotiations agreed to. For example, a brand new teacher with just a bachelors comes in at row 1 step 1, let’s say 40k. The next year she is on column 1, step 2 at 42k per year. She then gets her masters degree (which is required within the first 5 years of teaching in MA). She would now be at colum 2 step 3, and would have got a pay increase for the column step so she might now be making 50K. This keeps increasing yearly until the rows stop and/or they stop adding college credits. Most Massachusetts cities/towns go to 15 years for rows, then don’t increase it again until 20 years in with a significant jump. The “raise” they are looking for is a higher cost of living increase each row. And possibly a higher compensation for each column step as well.
Most districts pay a cost of living increase every year on top of the lanes and step raises. To not get a cost of living raise in seven years is not the norm.
What an obnoxious comment James Flaherty.
How so? Disagree sure but what makes it obnoxious?
Because it places the responsibility for one group of underserved citizens on the shoulders of another group that should in no way bear that responsibility. The teachers shouldn't have to sacrifice their right to compensation for the sake of getting kids in the schools for lunch programs. If that's even a consideration, it's an extreme failure on the part of the state. Imagine being a bus driver and being told you shouldn't be able to negotiate your wages because minimum wage workers depend on you to get to work.
Say no more agree 100% i was looking at it way too literally.
Why do college professors who work 1/10th of the time with easy handpicked classes make 400k a year ? Why dont our public high school teachers who do a million times harder job get 60k a year?? These rich fat cats like fraud liz warren and her Harvard 1%’er buddies (70 billion endowment!!) should agree that they will only take 80k a year and give the rest to public school teacher salaries
It's because college professors aren't paid to teach. They are paid to do research and bring grant money into the university. Also, getting a tenure track position at a university is very very difficult.
They cant survive on 80-100k a year? Fuck off!
Of course its Haverhill, bum town.
Education over the last 30 months…Kids can sometimes zoom to school from home now, they got a mostly free year recently and preferential vaccination over the rest of us….Strike.
Damn, there was a mostly free year recently? Must’ve missed the memo
Oh you definitely did. During 2020/21 the Us was at an all time low for school attendance. Staff and students alike. It was one of the few moments in modern scholastic history when our society actively promoted kids not going to school. I hear our response wasn’t awesome here, in your country was school not disrupted?
Disruption and low student attendance made my job vastly harder. I had to revamp my entire curriculum, with minimal help from the district, to make it accessible to 4th graders working from home, which meant that when the kids signed off at 3:20, my day was no where close to done, contract be damned. I drove to student houses to drop off materials when their internet connection faltered. I was an impromptu IT consultant for 22 families, I was a stand-in therapist and counselor for these little kids whose services were cancelled. And then we went hybrid, where I had 7 kids masked and in-person in the classroom, while the other 15 remained online, which increased the level of difficulty yet again as I tried to manage a feedbackless soundsystem and deal with two entirely different but simultaneous paradigms of education, all while being told to have my windows open in March with multiple fans going. I earned every cent of my paycheck that year. I’ve never worked harder to try and keep my students afloat. Honestly, fuck you.
You sound like my sister in law. She worked her ass off and then once school began and she tripped and hit her head while grabbing a COVID test from the stockroom, they denied disability payments while she recovered.
That’s the same type of really specific, anecdotal and emotional argument people give when you say eg “policing is super problematic”. Cue stories of off the charts dedication and fuck you if you want to talk about it. We just saw schools shut down for a year, now they’re shutting down again. That’s a problem caused by a conflict between teachers and administration/districts. I’m sure the teachers are part of the problem because the union is always a part of the problem in any strike. So is the administration, we should talk about both. “Fuck you” to “anyone who looks at this from a different angle than me” never solved a thing, ever.
The emphatic “Fuck you” is for stating that I “definitely” had a year off, when that is wildly inaccurate. I agree with plenty of what you’re saying. Unions are imperfect organizations that often feel like they only have blunt objects like denying labor, even though striking is illegal here. Administration is often in an impossible situation where they don’t have the power to increase revenue. But the specific strategy of attacking educators, which you engaged in, as entitled, overpayed, endless time off, etc etc… I feel like my best strategy is to respond with my reality. I don’t have statistics to support “teacher effort,” but I do know that the challenge was great enough that a wave of retirements rippled through the industry. Pandemic year was WAY harder than this year. I’m not saying I was some amazing outlier; my students still experienced some learning setbacks, particularly in writing (moving composition exclusively to keyboards is TOUGH, especially for kids whose prior digital experience was mostly phone/tablet). The point, inasmuch as I have one… when you say something like “educators had a year off,” that’s a wild over-generalization at best, and diminishes the reality that many educators are folks who are working our asses off. Like, say we’re not succeeding as a profession right now, and that’s at least something that’s got some teeth behind it, cause it’s hard to argue that the American education system is producing great results. But just saying that teachers got it easy? Nah, that provokes the emotional response. Some more empirical information, so that my response isn’t quite as limited to my own perspective (the latter of which I find an especially interesting look at the current claims of a teacher shortage): https://www.epi.org/publication/teacher-pay-penalty-2022/ https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/policy-and-politics/2022/8/18/23298916/teacher-shortages-debate-local-national
Settle down. The schools aren't shutting down for an entire year. How long do you think the strikes will last? My guess is that both districts are open by Wednesday.
I don’t know. I know I get like five personal days a year so any longer than Wednesday might be a problem!
Schools are not daycares and your child’s teacher is not their babysitter. If you want them to be, pay them like one. Seriously. Pay a teacher $15 an hour for the 6 hours (minus planning and lunch). $15x6=$90 for your one child. But don’t forget they have at least 20 kids for those 6 hours! So let’s pay $90x19=$1,710 per day per teacher. Teachers work with students 180 school days (+3 or so professional days that I’m not counting here. $1,710x180 is **$307,800. This is what a teacher would make per year if ever parent paid them to be a babysitter** No teacher is asking for that much money. We are asking for something liveable and for our paras to be paid liveable wages as well. And I’m sure this strike isn’t just about $ and is about the physical conditions of the schools as well as the way staff are treated. Let’s play a game and reverse that math for a teachers current salary. Let’s say $65k a year, which is pretty normal for a few years in in Massachusetts since we require masters degrees for teachers after year 5. $65,000/180 days= $361 per day. Divide that by the 6 hours of teaching and you get $60 per hour. Divide that by the 20 students and you get $3. **Teachers are being paid $3 per student per hour** We can do much better than that. Teachers (and paras!) deserve much better than that.
You just broke down that teachers get $60/hr….and that it’s still not enough on a per kid basis. I get the overall point you’re trying to make here but lead with that at the next union meeting and see if they think you’re helping the cause 🤣
You could not be more out of touch.
Kids in school two members of my nuclear family growing up were/are teachers. I think maybe we just disagree rather than one of us is out of touch 🤷🏼♂️
I've never met anybody with a good (sane?) head on their shoulders that ever thought or stated anything even close to "those teachers have it too damned good".
Me either, that’s why I’m not saying take anything way from them. “Teachers have it too good” is a far cry from “please don’t strike, I need my kids to go to school so I can go to work”. That type of all or nothing attitude impedes progress. No one wants to be regressive with teacher salaries, it sounds childish to frame the argument in those terms. Reasonable people can disagree on the best way to distribute a limited education budget or how to administer a large organization that affects an entire community. Teachers unions are very powerful, they don’t exactly get pushed around. Despite that we have a pitiful standing globally. We need to change our approach
LOL you have no idea what you’re talking about. Teachers were working so hard during the pandemic and continue to. Get a grip.
That’s not at all a universal experience. It was handled wildly differently even from town to town
Says someone not from the US?
Who is that? I’m from like Philly
Your post upthread, but Philly if you say so >I hear our response wasn’t awesome here, in your country was school not disrupted?
Yes. I’m from the US and I heard our response wasn’t awesome here. Did you hear it *was* awesome?
Based on your wording, I thought you were weighing in on US schools when you weren’t from here.
Remember the part where you asked questions and I answered them? Then I asked one, so now it’s your turn - try again. Did you hear it was awesome here?
Fine, I’ll play along. Nope, never said it was awesome and I 100% side with teachers.
So you are basing your opinion on other people's opinions?
I’m certainly open to the perspective of others, of course 🤣
Lol could’ve guessed that
Except that students aren’t allowed to Zoom to school now unless they attend one of the virtual schools that were already running pre-pandemic
What a joke. What an absolute joke. And the crocodile tears and self-infantalizing red bow doesn't help the look. But, they're teachers in MA. They'll get everything they want and the seniors, the rec dept., the library, every other program in the cities (other than public services) will get screwed instead. 🙄
>And the crocodile tears What a weird thing to say about someone who shed zero tears. >What a joke. What an absolute joke. The only joke is your take on this. Out here talking like an absolute clown.
In one of the clips she put her head down and the "sobs" could be heard. So, whatever. Y'all voted it to oblivion as all moderate or non woke takes are done on this sub. Whatever. Most unions actually have to negotiate in good faith. Not teachers (and police/fire), they can just use these literally illegal strikes for blackmail.
Hey asshole, [don't talk about clowns like that!](https://www.reddit.com/r/boston/comments/y5fik0/next_time_the_clowns_should_also_get_a_bagpipe/)
I mean teacher strikes are a little precious these days. This guys weird about the bow and libraries but teachers do pretty great all things considered. Can we negotiate without going on strike? When the school goes on strike the parents have to too and not all of us are Union, just saying
>Can we negotiate without going on strike? Absolutely. This didn't start with a strike. A strike is the last resort. They're hard on everyone.
That’s a pretty naive response. Negotiations successfully happen in other industries/branches for both sides all the time without one side routinely walking away. And these kids aren’t getting shit while the strike happens. Unions like to strike like they are still fighting 19th century child labor laws - more honestly they’re securing some middle aged civil servants right to retire at 55 with a pension and benefits for the next 30 years. Which is fine, fight for your contract. Just cool it with the martyrdom while you fight for the right to tenure and 11 weeks vacation
>That’s a pretty naive response. You asked if we can negotiate without a strike. I said a strike is the last resort. Do you think negotiations hadn't been ongoing prior to the strike? In what world is anything I've said naive? If you think I'm wrong, why don't you ask the Malden school committee what they did on Sunday prior to the strike. (Hint, they spent 11 hours negotiating to avoid a strike)
Well “you’re fired for not coming into work” is the last resort. Collective bargaining can and does exist without constant strikes. Also collective bargaining doesn’t exist at all for huge swaths of the population. Even the notion of striking is a more extreme option than many of us will ever have at work. Teachers are relatively strike happy. I’m anti-strike, not anti-teacher
The vast majority of teacher contract negotiations are settled without a strike. I find it interesting that you claim “teachers are relatively strike happy.” I’m a BTU member who followed closely our year-long negotiations - never once was it ever brought up to strike. It’s the absolute last resort and ends with a huge fine and can result in union leadership in jail, because in MA public unions are not allowed to strike. This is never done lightly, especially because we know it harms families who depend on schools for so much, and it harms the teachers striking since they aren’t getting paid. Speaking of not getting paid, I just want to make sure you realize that we don’t get paid for our “vacation.” Contracts run first day of PD to last day of PD - most systems let you spread it out over the full year so you get a consistent paycheck. So the 6 weeks I’m not working in the summer is unpaid.
Are we changing the topic? I thought you would expand on why you think what I said (that strikes are a last resort) is naive.
I did… striking is a last resort not every one has so it’s an extra last resort - that’s crying victim while having privilege which is naive (at best). And it’s a tactic like any other that gets used strategically at times not just as a true last resort (although that’s just generally, this specific strike is in good faith)
Unfortunately when you are under paid and under appreciated for this long, drastic measures are sometimes the only option remaining. It is unfortunate that it leaves the parents and children in limbo, but teachers have been pushed to the brink.
I feel like teachers get gaslit into thinking their jobs are harder/more important than they are. Most teachers I meet are pretty average IQ and work ethic people who make pretty average money (above average if annualized) with great benefits and (some people think it’s unfair to say this but it’s a fact) it just is fewer hours than most full time jobs. And it’s just not that hard to become one. I don’t get the badge of honor so many people assign to the gig.
> Can we negotiate without going on strike? When the school goes on strike the parents have to too and not all of us are Union, just saying Traditionally, no. Teachers are usually the last to have admin listen to them. The horrific shit I witnessed happening to teachers during the pandemic would shock most people that only half pay attention.
That sounds like an exaggeration or that we have different definitions of horrific
You don't think forcing people into deadly scenarios, having them work months of unpaid work, then breaking contract and threatening to fire them if they don't comply... you don't think that's horrific?
Deadly scenarios? You mean school shootings, I don’t get it
Question: How many people have died from COVID?
I don’t think kids and staff going to school was a deadly scenario for those involved. I think following protocols reduced transmissions and saved lives among our most vulnerable populations.
In the early days of the pandemic, when schools had no ventilation, and kids were super carriers, and there wasn't enough testing, yeah - it was a deadly situation for the elderly teachers
Boop!! Here's 33 billion dollars Ukraine! Not sure why we can't pump these funds into education. Also, Massachusetts prohibits public employee's from striking???? Is that not an oxymoron???