Articles
Advice of the Day (Forum)
Books (Forum)
Druidic Ramblings (Forum)
Dumb Ideas (Forum)
H-Town (Forum)
Links (Forum)
Movies (Forum)
Music (Forum)
Opinions (Forum)
Photo Albums (Forum)
Prose/Poetry (Forum)
Questions (Forum)
Video Games (Forum)
Member Login

Username

Password

Register Here

Forum
 

Forum posts for I don't know how I feel about this

Posted by Nerhael on Apr 20, 2010
I'm confused....they're retired...why are they teaching? This for the substitute pool?

Posted by Nerhael on Apr 20, 2010
Also, having watched it, yeah, that was pretty poor judgment. However, being fired over it also seems like poor judgment, unless it was a last straw type deal. It's a high school, not like the kids are going to be scarred by this.

Posted by phduffy on Apr 20, 2010

They get called in as substitutes. I think the rule is that you can work 100 days per year for the first 3 years you're retired, adn 20 days a year after that.

Posted by Nerhael on Apr 20, 2010
100 days....sheesh.

There are like what, 165ish teaching days in a year when you take our 13 weeks for summer break + xmas + march break. Take out PA days and other holidays? So they can nearly teach a full year.

That seems ridiculous. If that's the case, why are they being paid at 2x the salary of a regular teacher? This like a group mentality to give yourself a bonus once you retire?

Posted by Katie on Apr 20, 2010
It's not that they're getting paid 2x a regular teacher, it's that they earn their regular wage that they would have earned pre-retirement. So they have all the years of increases, plus any additional pay they received for specializations (e.g., if they were the head of a dept., or they took courses to teach special needs kids).

Contrast this with the pay of a brand new teacher, who are generally the ones trying to break into the ranks and can be stuck on the supply list for many years.

It's an interesting situation....my dad has been on the supply list for ages and made almost his full salary through supplying for quite a few years m(in addition to his pension). When he retired he was in a "window" and he was able to supply 100 days for 6 years. He has only for the past year been decreased to 20 days.

And my sister is on the supply list, trying to make enough money to live on, which is nearly impossible if she was just supplying (at best, 1-2 days a week, often half days). All the schools go first for a proven teacher, who are generally retired. You really have to bust your butt to get them to select you as a new teacher. She's been lucky enough to get long-term supplies (generally covering for someone on mat leave or LTD). But it's very tough. There's a lot of discussion within the schools as to how appropriate it is to keep letting retired teachers come back.

Posted by phduffy on Apr 20, 2010

They're not being paid 2x what a 'regular' teacher makes, they're being paid twice what a first year teacher makes.

Posted by Nerhael on Apr 21, 2010
I didn't read it very critically. I assumed it was 2x their wage from when they were a full time teacher themselves. I'm a bit more 'meh' on this, but does seem like they should be trying to help out the new teachers with work rather than the teachers who've retired. Obviously going to be a skill/knowledge gap between the two sets, but the newcomers aren't gonna learn much being passed over for the old hands.