A Retired Administrator Sets The Record Straight

As he tries to appear tough for the upcoming byelections, Ontario's self-proclaimed Education Premier, Dalton McGuinty, has been indulging in the kind of demagoguery that is an affront to critical thinkers everywhere. I was therefore pleased to read this article by Tom Roden, a retired vice-principal, attempting to puncture some of the myths about teaching:

Just don’t tell me teachers are overpaid

Don’t make savings on our backs: End Catholic school funding This opinion article is in response to Ontario’s Liberal government as it attacks public school teachers in an attempt to alleviate some fiscal problems and increase their chances in two byelections. It is also in response to those praising Catholic teachers for accepting unreasonable demands from the provincial government.

It comes from the perspective of a retired teacher who has a reasonable pension because I paid for it my entire career. I believe my teaching career was relatively routine and will use examples from it to illustrate.

Teachers are not well paid given the academic requirements, responsibilities, and stress of the job. They are required, as a bare minimum, to have at least five years of university. Most have more. In addition, any of the considerable numbers of teachers that I know work far more than the standard 2,000 hours per year. Any of their male friends in industry, with comparable responsibilities and academic qualifications, have far greater salaries. This income disparity is not as obvious with women because teaching is one of the few areas in which salaries are not gender-dependent.

I knew salaries in teaching were not great when I entered the profession, so I am not whining about it. Just do not tell me that I was well paid.

After graduating from McMaster University, I worked in the hourly personnel department at Ford Motor Company for nine and a half months. It was not until my fifth year of teaching that my salary equalled my earnings at Ford. This income disparity is the reason that it is very difficult to attract technical teachers. Most tradesmen/women are not willing to accept a decrease in their salary of approximately 50 per cent.

Just as I was retiring, I was kidded by a pick-up hockey teammate, who works in management in industry, with the often-used “overpaid, underworked school teacher” line.

I replied: “I just retired as a vice-principal of a school of 1,600 people (including students, teachers, secretaries, caretakers, cafeteria staff). My salary was $75,000. If I were assistant plant manager of some factory that has 1,600 employees, would I have made $75,000?” He replied that I would have been paid at least double that.

Again, I am not whining because I knew what I was getting into when I started teaching.

Retirement gratuities are common in industry, as are sick leave plans. My golfing buddies who retired from industry have their benefits paid, most until death. The minute I retired, I had to pay for all benefits. Because of cost, I did not pick up a dental plan. Again, I am not whining. However, if teaching is to be compared to industry, make a fair comparison.

It should be noted that teaching is considered more stressful than almost any other job in society.

Also, much of the media mislead the public because, I believe, they are afraid to raise the issue of public funding for separate schools.

It is just plain wrong to fund Roman Catholic schools but deny that funding to all others. The United Nations has twice condemned the Province of Ontario for this discriminatory practice.

As well, the duplication of services squanders billions of dollars annually. William J. Phillips of the Federation of Urban Neighbourhoods of Ontario (urbanneighbourhoods.ca) presented a study estimating the duplication of services costs Ontario taxpayers between 1.27 and 1.59 billion extra dollars annually.

In addition, separate school students cost more. Using Ministry of Education figures for 2009-10, Catholic students use 38 per cent of education funding, but comprise only 32 per cent of the total of students in Ontario. Each separate school student costs $12,4440.42 while each public school student costs $9,468.46, a difference of $2,971.96. For the 659,392 separate school students in Ontario, that is an annual $2 billion ($1,959,686,648) more than would be spent if they were public school students.

Combining those two facets, and because some of the extra per pupil cost for separate schools is included in the figures in Phillips’ study, we could save approximately $2.5 billion to $3 billion annually by having one publicly funded, secular school system while maintaining the same quality of education. That saving would negate the need to attack teacher contracts.

Anyone who feels the need to have their child attend a religious school can do it on their own dime, as is done with Christian, Jewish, and Muslim schools, among others.

Is it possible that Catholic teachers are willing to give up so much in order to retain their privileged position?

Tom Roden lives in Grimsby.

McGuiny Brings Out The Worst In Me

I readily admit to being a bit childish today. Contempt of premier brings out the worst in me.

Eugenics in Alberta

Given the province's rather fanatical conviction that its tarsands projects should be subject to little or no oversight, it might be useful to bear in mind another kind of fanaticism it embraced between 1928 and 1972: eugenics.

Between 1929 and 1972, 4785 cases [for sterilizations] were presented to the board, and 99% of these cases were approved. The 60 cases that were not approved were deferred cases that were later re-considered, and 14 of them were eventually passed. Only 60% of all cases that were sanctioned by the Board were actually completed, resulting in 2832 sterilization procedures performed in Alberta during the 43 years that the Alberta Eugenics Board was in power.

The majority of the Board’s activities were conducted in secrecy, away from the criticism of the public eye, and even away from legislative inquiry.

Apples and oranges, you say? I'm not so sure. At the very least, it attests to the power of government to abuse its authority.

Ward, I'm Worried About The Beaver

In this complicated world filled with dire threats ranging from rapidly-escalating climatic disasters to unprecedented rates of marital discord to street (and theatre) violence that leaves everyone feeling more vulnerable than ever, I'm sure many Americans pine for the halcyon days of tranquility and simplicity epitomized by that classic family show, Leave It To Beaver.

You know the world I mean, where everyone owned a house on a quiet street, Mom was at home to provide a wholesome snack for the kids as they returned each day from their segregated schools, a world where even the biggest problems ('Beave ditched school today') were no match for the patriarchal wisdom of that archetype of fatherhood, Ward Cleaver, always ready to dispense sometimes severe but always loving solutions to wayward behaviour.

The only problem, of course, is that this world never existed, except in the fictional world of the television universe.

It is a fact apparently lost on the extreme right that now dominates the U.S. Republican Party. In his column today, The Star's Tim Harper casts some light on the reactionary platform that was endorsed and adopted at the RNC this week:

The platform adopted here would outlaw abortion, including in cases of rape and incest.

It backs a constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman and affirms the rights of states and the federal government to refuse to recognize same-sex marriage.

Same-sex marriage, it says, is an “assault on the foundations of our society.”

The platform says the party would overturn any bid to limit the capacity of clips or magazines for weapons and oppose any move to restore the ban on assault weapons.

It would aggressively pursue anti-union right-to-work legislation at the state level.

It backs energy exploration and development of the Outer Continental Shelf and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline.

It would overturn any immigration amnesty, and advocates making English the official national language.

It would reject the use of taxation to redistribute income or fund “unnecessary or ineffective” programs.

It is, in short, a platform that would win enthusiastic approval from even the darkest of hearts found amongst the Taliban and the theocratic regime in Iran, who would no doubt recognize kindred spirits in the country they now call "The Great Satan.'

Dalton McGuinty and the Ornge Scandal

As I recently observed in a post, Ontario's Premier Dalton McGuinty has refused to testify before the legislative committee investigating the Ornge air ambulance scandal.

Rather than try to help ferret out the wrongdoing that has cost Ontario taxpayers untold millions, enriched the accounts of high-placed Ornge executives, and engendered widespread doubts about the competence of his government, this pusillanimous politician who seems to enjoy the prestige of leadership while disregarding its responsibilities apparently prefers political expediency over public integrity.

A letter appearing in today's print edition of The Star succinctly sums up the situation McGuinty's dereliction of duty:

Re: McGuinty won't testify at ORNGE hearings, Aug. 26

Premier Dalton McGuinty’s refusal to testify at the hearings into the ORNGE scandal, where millions of Ontarians’ tax dollars have been misappropriated, is in itself a scandal. Nobody in the McGuinty government has ever taken responsibility for this, or any of the other countless fiscal mismanagement scandals that have constantly plagued his government.

As premier, Mr. McGuinty needs to realize the buck stops with him and we taxpayers need answers why he and his ministers refuse to be held accountable.

Larry Comeau, Ottawa

How The Right Deforms Our Attitudes

I have long believed it is not so much the 'genius' of the extreme right as it is their financial backing that makes them powerful propagandists. Their domination of the media and their captivation of politicians' ears give them advantages very difficult to surmount.

Read letters to the editor throughout the country and it seems that no matter where we look, the politics of envy, stoked by that right-wing power, permeates the attitudes of disadvantaged workers who look at what other workers have (good wages, benefits, and pensions)and dismiss them as unfair and unaffordable. Instead of working towards achieving those same kinds of benefits through unionization, they want to tear away what their fellow-toilers enjoy.

And while people go about this self-destructive behaviour, they give little thought to the real source of their discontent, corporate greed that sees its workers only as fungible commodities to be pitted against one another.

In her column today, Linda McQuaig offers some interesting reflections on the current landscape.

Attitudes Toward The Poor

"The more wealth you have, the more focused on your own self and your own needs you become, and the less attuned to the needs of other people you also become."

So says social psychologist Paul Piff in response to a Chronicle of Philanthropy report on charitable giving, discussed in a piece written by distinguished journalist Bill Moyers.

As a companion to my previous post about Carol Goar's article on worker exploitation, it makes for some thought-provoking comparative reading.