Further proof that ONE school division is all that Winnipeg should have.

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/louis-riel-staff-agree-to-richest-contract-in-city-46354162.html

Well first off... no DUH! that the teachers would agree to being paid better.

got that out of the way.

Anyway, this article just goes to show the great reason why Winnipeg should only have one school division.
Comments like..our salaries were the lowest...are just crazy, School divisions in Winnipeg should not be competeing for teachers based on salary. That just leads to out of control costs.. like this little gem of a comment buried in the article...

"However, the second year of the contract does not contain any guarantees Louis Riel would keep pace in 2010-2011 with any higher salary settlements negotiated subsequently elsewhere in Winnipeg."
WTF??? well why the hell should it? Christ this we have to be paid highest mentality of some people is just crazy and will completely kill this country eventually. I can only hope that comment was from the writer of the article and not from anyone actually involved in the process.

Also read last week how Seven Oaks is complaining because it lacks a real industrial base in its area so it has to rely on more property taxes and is asking the province to consider making all taxes (was it just industrial??) from across the province and dividing it up evenly based on enrollment so that taxes were more fair.

Seems to me that if we are dividing taxes up evenly, then we can start eliminating some of these school boards too..

If teaching was an industry, they'd be charged with collusion and having a monopoly.

well building a floodway would be considered an industry and collusion and monopoly was actually "forced" on them

Comrade Doer at his best.

Interesting.

It's nice to see School Boards actually negotiating future contracts. Usually by the time they finish negotiating a contract, 2/3 of the period has expired.

Do you honestly think that making one school division would reduce salaries? It would increase all salaries equal to the division with the highest salaries.

I'm not which divisions the person was comparing when they said Louis Riel was the lowest, but I don;t think that is correct.

Oh - one other comment - Louis Riel may need to pay more because the working conditions aren't as good as some other divisions.

This is exactly the same thing that has just happened to the Big Three and the UAW (caw) and that didn't work out too well.

JTF wrote:This is exactly the same thing that has just happened to the Big Three and the UAW (caw) and that didn't work out too well.

That doesn't make any sense whatsoever!

The union worked one against the other for the Big Three and the teachers are doing the same with the school divisions.

The various teacher associations do play one off against another. If one gets an increase or benefit when settling their contract, it is common practice for another one to use that as a bargaining chip. And on it goes.

JTF wrote:The union worked one against the other for the Big Three and the teachers are doing the same with the school divisions.

Okay. I thought you were referring to the obscene level of wages and benefits received by unskilled CAW bolt tighteners.

O/T, but Alberta is about to merge all of it's health regions into one.

Deank wrote:Christ this we have to be paid highest mentality of some people is just crazy and will completely kill this country eventually.

I've got to take a little bit of an issue with this....but here's why:

I understand what your saying, and I hear it a lot.....especially with regards to my "generation" which has been drilled with the notion that this is a capitalist society, where by you are judged by the amount of income you bring in. That's what sets the social class it seems.

Not to mention setting goals for yourself. For example, when I went back to school for my current job, I had every intention of earning a excellent mark, graduating top of my class (I was close!) and finding the highest earning job I could. And of course, I always wish I was paid more, even though at my age, I'm already light years ahead of where I technically "should be" compared to others my age.

So, that's where I take issue with some comments I've heard about my generation "expecting to be top earners right away" type of thing. I never realistically expected to be getting paid what I get paid at my age, however I did go to school and earn it, so should I feel guilty about that?

....I just felt that I needed to speak up a little...

I think where some older gen folks take issue with the me me me generation is the notion they believe they should earn $50k out of school, with a corner office, two cars in the driveway...

No one should feel guilty if they earned their way. It's just that some believe they've earned it two years out of school.

no my issue is not with the earning crap loads and such

mine is with ANY public sector group of employees getting a contract that stipulates no matter what some moronic people do in another area the employees in AREA X will always have 1st, 2nd. 3rd or whatever highest salary with no debate just BAM and they get a raise, regardless if the funding body can actually afford it or not.

Well, I guess that comes down to a decision then.
One that I had to make, and make on a regular basis....

The way I see it, your either moral and bankrupt....or you're morally bankrupt!


I can't control what I'm paid, that's dictated by our CBA...so I suppose I could quit and get a lesser paying job, but that leads back to the morality question above. If given the option, which would you rather be....

Wasn't the topic of teachers salaries beaten to death in an earlier thread?

oh probably..

JTF wrote:This is exactly the same thing that has just happened to the Big Three and the UAW (caw) and that didn't work out too well.

which is why we should have one division and it is forced to use a tax rate set by the province. (or in some people's minds better yet taken right off property tax all together._)

Regardless of the method that the "taxes"
for school are collected. Each student should get the same funding. The school boards would then be forced to work within the budget handed to them.

JT Estoban wrote:Well, I guess that comes down to a decision then.
One that I had to make, and make on a regular basis....

The way I see it, your either moral and bankrupt....or you're morally bankrupt!


I can't control what I'm paid, that's dictated by our CBA...so I suppose I could quit and get a lesser paying job, but that leads back to the morality question above. If given the option, which would you rather be....

Never feel sorry for getting more than you should...feel lucky.

I don't fault those who do well because of demand or skill set. If I could be making $100M/year as an executive somewhere...I would...and not feel sorry about it at all.

From your story, you "lucked" into a good paying job because of your skills, performance, and the availability of a position at the "right time" that you filled.

Ideally though, if you KNOW you're making more than you "should", you're ahead of most people. The financially smart thing to do, is to figure out what you SHOULD be making (ie. you currently make $100k, but others in your industry make $60k) and live at the $60k level. So 40% of EVERY cheque goes into an investment or savings.

Why do this?
1) Rainy day fund (a big one in that case)
2) Living within your means (you'll never have to worry about buying what you can't afford)
3) Unemployment - with all the cutbacks, should you lose your job...you know what you could live off of comfortably.

There's other reasons...but mostly to remind yourself what benefit you have over others in the same level of skill/training have.

That financial savings should be automatic too...so you never really see it leave. Automatic transfers/deductions off your cheque or from your account are the best way.

If you really find you have too much money though...I can provide you with another account you can transfer money too There's no return on the investment, other than you know you're contributing to a good cause. You could even write it off as payment to a financial adviser .

I can do you one better.. buy me beer.. I will give you the empties... right there thats a better return then Ages is offering.

That's some sound advice. Much of which, I've been striving/attempting to do....
Thanks!

my comments will be a little but...

I'm currently helping my wife go through the same process as I did (graduate high school, take time off to work in the rel world, realize that sucks and doesn't pay enough, go back to school and be trained for a career) she's almost finished and then we can get back on track (two incomes are much better than one!). We've accumulated a lot of debt, and have been living off one income (with no child lucky,... financially speaking) but that's the rub.

Now, once she get's hired, we can pay off the debts and resume retirement savings and such.

Actually, I've seen some numbers of someone investing in a savings account and someone investing in beer...was a while ago though...have to look it up I guess.

...but the results for the beer "invester" was pretty good....you get to drink the beer, and then you still get a better return by taking the empties back!

Maybe it wasn't a savings account....could have been stock....I don't remember!

I beleive you are referring to the Nortel V beer and worldcom v Beer and such

Does anyone feel that a starting salary of $52,000, that is after 4 years of Education degree is wat too low?
9 years experience and another 3 year masters degree gets $78,000.
That would put a "family man/woman", with appx 7 years of University and 9 years experience working , 36 years old .
Seems like a bloody good wage , and should attract very good people.
A plumber today would be earning what? for a 50 hour work week?
appx the same $78,000?

Starting wage of 40K would be reasonable right out of school.