Is 52k really an excessive average teacher's salary?

a $52,000 average is actually somewhat low depending on where you live. For example, in the San Francisco Bay area teachers who are getting paid 52,000 in a place where cost of living is super high probably don't get paid enough. $52,000 in Wisconsin where the cost of living is much lower than San Fran is probably adequate but not great. But if you're numbers are correct $30,000 a year means that the teacher is getting paid about 18.50 an hour. A mcdonalds employee could possibly make that. Now considering that most new teachers, the ones getting paid 30,000 are new teachers who have somewhere around 150,000 dollars in debt because of college, they are getting grossly underpaid. Imagine you are only earning 30,000 and then a certain percentage goes to tax, rent would be around 7,500 a year and then to compound on to that you got to pay a few thousand in debt you are left with like 1,000 dollars for food and gas and leisure.

58 grand is the "average". Wouldn't that mean more than half are paid more ? I'd be more comfortable with figures showing the salaries per teacher in 4 groups, ranging from highest paid to lowest. If we were to see a sizeable group over 70 thousand; we might want to ask questions. I'd also be concerned seeing a group under $25 thousand, which seems too low. They're overpaid if their wages can't be paid. It's reality's fault. The State of Wisconsin doesn't have the funds to pay current expenses. It's not even a question of being overpaid. Wisconsin could raise taxes, float a bond issue, or borrow, to pay their expenses. That approach will prolong the issue, and make the default far more disastrous when the house of cards collapses. It's not just teachers. All Wisconsin State Employees are entering hard times. The private sector's been sucking canal water since 2007; welcome to Hamburger Helperville.

Salaries for teachers vary from state to state. Also the range of pay is considerable as pay is determined by a teacher's educational level, how long they've been teaching and who they teach (elementary, high school, college). I don't think 52K is excessive.

depending on what source its at or above the average depending on a number of factors.

but you have to add in their benefits, retirement, and the fact that they work about 9 months out of the year while getting paid for 12 id say they are coming out ahead (especially the poor performing teachers).

but when you add in the fact that the state is broke it doesn't matter. if they can't afford to pay an average salary then those teachers either need to take a pay cut, or go find other employment.

in sure there are plenty of fresh college grads that wouldn't mind 25K for 9 months work.

thats how they replaced the air traffic controllers in the 80's. a lot of those young replacements had full careers, and are starting to retire.

EDIT- "raising salaries and benefits would attract better candidates. Why is that not the case with teachers?"

because thanks to the teachers unions we can't get rid of the poor teachers to make way for the better candidates.

thus another reason to abolish the union.

EDIT- they are on salary. weather they divide it up by 12, or nine is irrelevant. if they make X in a year, a year has 12 months, yet they work 9.

EDIT- "Unions don't prevent people from getting rid of bad teachers, but require that there is a fair process to determine whether there is cause to fire an employee."

ill admit that i dunno about WI itself. but in CA, and NY it can take years, and 1000's of dollars to fire a teacher. in some cases in both states even teachers that have committed lewd acts were simply put in "rubber rooms" while collecting their full wage. a teacher can sit in a rubber room for years, or even till retirement because its cheaper, and easier then the firing process.

"What happens though is that they get paid for 9 months of work but spread out over 12."

if i pay you 52K for 9 months of work, and that is your only income for that year. you just made 52K for that year, while only working 9 months. whether i give it to you all at once, are spread it out doesn't matter, and that is still a better deal then the person that makes 52K, but works 12 months don't you think?

the fact that they are getting paid 52K for 9 months not 12 only hurts your argument that they are underpaid.

I do not think 52K is excessive. To be a teacher you need to get a 4 year degree, go to school an extra year or two and get a license.

Yes some teachers only work 9 months out of the year, but what type of job can someone get for 3 months?

With year around schools and semi year around it is almost like working 12 months. My daughter gets out in late May and school starts in mid August.

All of the people who complain about the "excessive" pay had the ability to go to college graduate and become a teacher, yet they did not? Why? They did not want to make that much money?

Coupled with fat pensions and lavish benefits that the private sector (which pays for every dime of it btw) can only dream of, yes. It's rather excessive. Especially when you have mediocrity as a standard, billions of dollars of debt, and taxpayers having no say. Public unions are corrupt, wasteful, inefficient, and a huge strain on our economic situation.

Now average in their benefits packages

Pension

Health Care

And now dont compare it to a CEO of a major corp

But compare it to someone who owns a small business or works as a private accountant

You can not compare one factor you must compare the entire picture

Not if they're a good teacher. Great teachers should be paid more than that, crappy teachers should be fired without unions making it impossible.

Nope. I am all for people making as much money as they can. This is America ya know.

For 9 months of work, yes.