[hypnoscripto]

If your salary is high enough that you can save some money then you aren’t required to put up with bullshit in order to keep eating food.

[bnj]

Do you mean that by saving money people can leave the profession sooner or at least move to a school with more favorable working conditions?

If so, maybe you’ve hit on a kernel of truth: we can’t risk paying teachers enough that they’d have the financial security to leave a bad work situation.

[throwaway894345]

Am I the only one who thinks “we should pay teachers more so they can afford a new profession because public education is horrible” is the wrong takeaway? Like, why not fix public education (e.g., more teacher autonomy) or at least support some voucher program so more teachers can be private school teachers?

[hypnoscripto]

See my reply above. I didn’t think this idea would be controversial. Working conditions should improve when the workers have other options.

[hutzlibu]

"Working conditions should improve when the workers have other options."

So when the workers have not other options, working conditions can stay low?

[hypnoscripto]

It’s not a “should” it’s just what happens.

[hypnoscripto]

I mean that teachers would have a credible threat of leaving and hopefully administrations and school boards would respond to the threat by improving conditions.

[Jare]

High salaries means more people looking to get in, so it's not like administrators would risk running out of teachers.

(I'm all for financially rewarding good teachers, but because their work is incredibly valuable. It's just ab incredibly hard context in which to separate the good and the bad without creating perverse incentives)