Yesterday, BC students held a day of protest over rising tuition fees. Now that I’ve been on the other side of the fence for a few years, I can see that they’ve got a real public relations problem. In short, hardly any non-students seem to care about tuition fees.
But to the point: Here are some facts that BC students failed to mention:
- They still pay less for tuition than Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Ontario,
Saskatchewan and Alberta. So, most of Canada (Quebec has remarkably low
tuitions–lucky French). - Although BC students have seen big rises in their tuitions over the past
two years, tuition increases over the last decade has been 15% below the national
average. - BC tuition fees only average $4140 for the 2003/04 school year.
So, while I got a lucky ride from the NDP government during the 90s, it’s
hard to have much sympathy for BC students. They’re simply facing the same costs as most other Canadian students. All of these numbers come from this Stats Canada page.
UPDATE: A colleague of mine wrote an editorial along similar lines when he was at Simon Fraser University. He was not popular with his fellow students.
DarrenBarefoot.com 
This is more Capitalistic and pro-liberal voice. We don’t need to compare our self’s with other provinces, why cant we be who we are?
Now that you are making big bucks it is not fair think like that. Be sympathetic to students…….
I’m a non-student and I care about tuition fees.
One thing that really bugs me about the issue is when people compare other provinces and national averages. I may be a partial capitalist myself, but I distinctly do not think that should be a factor whatsoever. I despise capitalism when it inteferes with education.
Education is part of our social system/structure and over the years it has become less so. That disturbs and disgusts me, it isn’t ‘right’ as far as I’m concerned. If you do want to compare provinces, in B.C. more than most (perhaps Ontario) there is a high cost of living especially in the neighbourhoods of the better schools, that when combined with rising tuition ends up in the better-off get better education.
The elitism that results bothers me.
While it was reported here as BC-only, the protest was happening all across the country. For some reason, in the other provinces also it was reported as a local event.
I’m not surprised students are protesting. A yearly tuition bill of $4,140, with housing, food, clothing, books and materials to find on top, is a significant outlay for one family with a child at university, and hellishly expensive if they have more than one.
The current BC & federal governments may think they don’t have the budget to subsidize any of this, but if they don’t, where are we to get an educated workforce of the depth and breadth necessary to continue to support Victoria and Ottawa in the style to which they have been accustomed?
Students today, if they do it all on loans, will graduate owing $15K to $20K, and that’s if their loans only cover tuition & fees. I don’t think this is an acceptable debt load for an entry-level worker, and I have my doubts about the kind of society that this will create.
I’m not interested in them developing their characters by living hand-to-mouth for years paying off loans. I’m interested, and willing to support through taxes, them graduating with a solid education and with equally solid prospects, landing decent-paying jobs, and thereby maintaining the kind of economy and society that will make my old age a happy and peaceful one.
In an ideal world, education would be free. That’s how they do it in many European countries, and it works great. Anybody can afford to go to university and–miracle of miracles–some of them don’t even work in the summers.
There’s roughly 675,000 under-graduate students in universities in Canada. If you wanted to make education free, based on current tuition levels, it would take an additional CAN $2.7 billion dollars a year. Whether it’s in cuts or additional taxes, that’s a big chunk of change, don’t you think?
Even if you want to merely reduce tuition by 10%, from an average of $4025 to $3622, that would still cost you $272 million. Where’s that money going to come from?
Pericat: “The current BC & federal governments may think they don’t have the budget to subsidize any of this”. I trust you recognize that all levels of governement currently subsidizes our post-secondary education system to the tune of 75-80%. I suspect you meant “subsidize any more of this”?
Rog: Why shouldn’t a national picture be relevant to education costs? Why does somebody in Quebec get to pay less than half what somebody pays in Nova Scotia for the same education? Should we not be considering that question? The same education ought to cost roughly the same, whichever province you live in.
Compared to BC, it costs $1400/year more to attend university in Nova Scotia, and $500/year more to do so in Saskatchewan. That has an significant balancing effect against cost of living.
More importantly, before you leap to conclusions about the cost of living in BC, check out the Consumer Price Index: http://www.statcan.ca/english/Pgdb/econ09k.htm. It illustrates that the cost of living in BC is decidedly average.
I’m a student, and unfortunately I tend to agree more with you… except for a few things:
One, I think education should be free. “I can’t afford it” should NOT be a reason to not get an education. Telling someone that they should go $40,000 into debt for four years of school is preposterous — what about for those of us who aren’t doing this simply to make money? The classes should be free. Students can pay for books & living expenses and even student union fees — this will keep people from *completely* abusing it — but the actual classes themselves should be free.
That said, the day BC has free education is the day I shit a brick. So, along those lines, I recognize that to offer GOOD education, we have to think like capitalists. If our ass-stupid government isn’t going to fund the education system properly, the money has to come from somewhere. I, for one, am willing to pay a few bucks extra if it means that my education will be worth something.
Hmm. I think I’ll post this to my site, too. 🙂
Everyone who hates the Liberals -lovvvves- pointing out the freezes the NDP put on tuition as well as on businesses. Yes, god bless their little fee-freezing hearts.
Guess what naysayers? Had businesses and educational institutes been able to adjust their fees as inflation (and a million other factors!) fluctuated we would have all seen STEADY increases over the past few years (which would be much easier to swallow) rather than huge all-at-once increases of 100’s of percents when the freezes were finally removed so biz/schools could recoup.
Suck it up, now you’re ALMOST on par with other provinces – it’s more expensive to live in BC but a bit cheaper for schooling – it all evens out in the end.
This is what happens when you freeze tuition. The world lacks forsight.
make that foresight.
To quote:
“…education’s impact on social mobility has diminished somewhat in the last decade. An undergraduate degree – a BA, a BSc, or a B.Eng – serves less as a guarantee of upward mobility than it did in the past simply because more and more entrants into the job market now hold such a degree. In earlier decades many high school-educated parents successfully sent their children to university, but today’s post secondary students are increasingly likely to have at least one parent with a degree (Hout 1998).
… has the level of jobs available to these people increased?
Probably not – if we are all scrambling to apply for the same positions, is the cost of a career-oriented education our only concern?
Primarily I think the point of the protest rally(s) is to raise awareness and get people answering the questions and my frustration is exactly as Darren puts it “hardly any non-students seem to care about tuition fees” and this shows even more from the points debated, because they often miss the point.
Darren: Sure, it sounds like sound logic to say that education should be the same cost everywhere and on the surface I’d agree with that sentiment.
But it also sounds deeply like cop-out reasoning, it never addresses why the fees should go up if it’s just a matter of compensating for country-wide averages. If the reason couldn’t be given that we were one of the cheaper provinces for tuition then I’m dead certain that the numbers would be compared with other countries.
It just doesn’t answer the inherent question ‘why’ for me.
Jenix: I dislike looking at this as a partisan political point. Again, I’d like to see solid reasons why, not comparisons between provinces or between gov’ts.
Donna: The primary disgust I have with our gov’t in the education debacle is much like our medical debacle: which gov’t? local, provincial or federal? They all seem to like passing the buck on whom should pay. Well in this case, between provincial & federal gov’ts.
Darren, Canada’s total federal income for 2003, near as I can make out from roaming the finance website, was $184.7 billion. We appear to once again be running a surplus of about $2 billion. I think with a budget that size, all in the black, there’s wiggle room for at least increasing tuition subsidies. My preferred goal would be for exiting degreed undergrads to have no more than $10K in student loans to pay back.
(I’d supply links, but looks like you’re set up to strip those, and now I’ve lost them.)
Pericat: You can’t actually link, but you can include links as text (as above). For my money, I’d rather see more spending go into healthcare, but each to his or her own.
I think a maximum debt load of $10K is a reasonable expectation. I know lots of people who graduated with more or less than that figure (the most being about $25K). The people with big debts usually came from disadvantaged families, but they also weren’t great money managers. If you’re frivolous, $8K of debt can become $15K pretty quickly.
I’ve been kicking some numbers around. This page (http://www.queensu.ca/cora/polls/2003/Sept4-university_costs.pdf) says that the average university undergraduate degree costs, all in, about $52,400. It also says that the average Canadians family has saved about $15,600 for their child’s post-secondary education. So, on average, it falls to the student to make up the other $36,800.
After running over a few scenarios, that’s a tall order for a four-year degree. It’s certainly doable, but it requires working at a decent wage during the school year and that the student has some money saved before school.
Darren: For those of us who don’t look at education as a career stepping stone, or who are going to school to learn how to make a difference — rather than to simply get a good job — it’s unreasonable to have $10-25k of debt by the time you’re done. In my case, this means I do it part time and work at the same time.
My career and my education are mutually exclusive. Expecting me to go into debt simply because I want to learn MORE is mean.
And for those who ARE going to school for their careers, I still can’t see any good reason — other than to the lenders who like collecting interest — why anyone would see free education as a bad thing. In the end, having an educated populace benefits us all and if I could, *I’d* certainly have no problem subsidizing other peoples educations.
I don’t see free education as a bad thing. I just don’t see it as a very practical thing right now, in Canada.
You can be certain that, if you’ve ever paid a dollar in tax, you’ve subsidized other people’s education.
Also, the supposition that ‘an educated populace benefits us all’ is not ironclad.
I don’t believe that everyone should go to university. If everyone did, and had expectations (as almost everyone who attends university does) of a non-craft or manual labour job, who would dig our ditches, fix our toilets and lay our roads? Who would do the majority of today’s jobs, which do not require or benefit from a university degree?
That’s an exaggeration, but consider this. Say university gets monstrous funding, becomes free and the number of available spots doubles. You’ve just removed three-quarters of a million Canadians from one part of the work-force and put them in another. That’s a big deal–it’d take two years to get your house built.
Secondly, every education does not benefit our populace equally. Imagine two scenarios:
* Education is free, and 20% of people take visual arts and become painters.
* Education is free, and 20% of people take biochemistry and become research scientists.
Most people will agree that the second scenario benefits our society a lot more than the first. I might be happy funding scientists, but not artists.
In short, the notion that ‘an educated populace benefits us all’ is highly debatable.
(I would have added the links as text, but I’d already lost them by then. They were boring, anyway.)
Also, I don’t see subsidized tuition and subsidized health care as being mutually antagonistic goals; I’m for both. After thinking about it some more, I’d like to see a system whereby the government subsidies are based on dual considerations of income and grades. Another possibility might be requiring the graduate to accept a position in a remote or rural part of the country. I think some teaching programs offer that now.
When people have to have an undergrad degree to be considered for anything better than a McJob, it shouldn’t be so gut-bustingly expensive to go to school.
“who would dig our ditches, fix our toilets and lay our roads? Who would do the majority of today’s jobs, which do not require or benefit from a university degree?”
Essentially the same people who do those things now, minus the ones who do so only because they can’t afford post-secondary.
Also, even if tuition and fees are paid for, the students still have to feed, clothe and house themselves. It’s not a career move hoardes of folks will make on a whim. OTOH, folks whose primary jobs are seasonal might be encouraged to spend their downtime in continuing ed. rather than catching flies in front of Jerry Springer re-runs.
“* Education is free, and 20% of people take visual arts and become painters.”
It’s not that I want to rain on you today, but I can’t help it. 20% of possible applicants are not going to take visual arts and become painters, or sculptors or actors or whatever, because they won’t have the talent or the portfolios or the audition skills or even the interest to either get into or stay in those schools. Same with science professions– one does have to make grades. Just paying the fees alone isn’t going to do it.
“Most people will agree that the second scenario benefits our society a lot more than the first. I might be happy funding scientists, but not artists.”
That’s another argument we could have sometime. 🙂 I think a healthy society needs both, that neither art nor science are expendable luxuries, and that they overlap, especially in areas of cutting-edge research.
“Essentially the same people who do those things now, minus the ones who do so only because they can’t afford post-secondary… It’s not a career move hoardes of folks will make on a whim.”
That’s not necessarily a provable or logical conclusion. We’ve got no precedent for what happens if education becomes free in Canada. If you didn’t increase the number of places in university, all you’ve got is contraction, making it more difficult to get into university. If you did significantly increase the number of places, you might have a seriously deleterious effect on vital industries.
Take Ireland, for example. It’s far more difficult to obtain a builder or plumber or a dozen other craft-oriented workers than it is in Canada. Is that because of the information economy and the ready availability of education? Possibly. It certainly can’t be helping matters.
“I think a healthy society needs both, that neither art nor science are expendable luxuries, and that they overlap, especially in areas of cutting-edge research.”
I said “most people will agree that the second scenario benefits our society a lot more than the first”, and I’m pretty sure that’s true. We need only look at global funding for scientific research compared to the arts. The former is always going to be significantly higher.
I have to agree with Darren on most of his points. I don’t want to see post-secondary education become free, because then people will use it as an excuse to avoid getting a job and contributing their tax dollars to the social systems (if nobody’s working, who pays the tuition? the tuition fairy?)
I’ve got to take issue with the apparent line being drawn between going to school “to get a job” or “to learn how to make a difference.” How can someone make a difference without some kind of appointed or selected position which gives them the authority to make decisions that influence the world, and therein make a difference? That’s called a JOB. Generally, people who make a difference get paid to do so. Or you can be Mother Theresa, but the nun’s life isn’t necessarily one most university students would voluntarily pick.
I graduated from my undergrad degree with $ZERO in student loans. So did my husband, and he didn’t even live at home. We both worked our asses off at summer and Co-op jobs, both before and during our university years. Granted, I was lucky that that was during tuition freeze time, but also consider that when I started saving money for tuition, I was 14 and minimum wage was $4.25. That’s a lot of ice cream scoops just for one half-credit course.
Tuition doesn’t need to be free. It doesn’t even need to be cheap. We need to have students with a better work ethic, who recognize that they need to save their money to pay for their education, not spend it on CDs or cars. Sacrifices have to be made, and I’m thinking it should be the students making them, not the rest of the taxpayers.
As a parent I feel that it’s MY job to worry about tuition fees so that my daughter won’t have to. I’m putting enough aside to pay for both her tuition and living expenses for four years of university (at least), and this is taking into account the rate tuition has been rising at for the last five years.
This is just my opinion, but my view is that any parent who fails to provide a proper education for their children is an irresponsible one, to say the least.
My lengthy comment here: http://www.web-goddess.net/peechie/003356.html#003356
“That’s not necessarily a provable or logical conclusion.”
You asserted that millions of labourers would down tools and head for the unis the second tuition was abolished. Why do you assume they would all, or even most, pass the entrance exams? I don’t think that’s even close to likely, even among just the percentage who would be interested.
“If you didn’t increase the number of places in university, all you’ve got is contraction, making it more difficult to get into university. If you did significantly increase the number of places, you might have a seriously deleterious effect on vital industries.”
What you might have is every available place in the better schools occupied by the most qualified applicants. You’re conflating “free tuition” with “tuition for all comers”.
Sue, I finished undergrad owing nothing also. I did it on government grants and part-time jobs, and because I had grants, I could take badly-paying part-time jobs and internships *in my field* instead of being stuck behind a counter with a deep fryer just because it paid a little bit more.
At the same time, no one, not me (I’m arguing for subsidized tuition, not free) nor anyone else is positing paying for more than tuition & fees. Full- or part-time, students would still have to find their own livings.
We need students. We need people who will put the effort and energy into learning the things that will continue to pump our economy through the rest of the century and beyond. I don’t care if it’s post-secondary university, or trade school or continuing ed– we need people who know something more of the world and what makes it tick than what they can see at the end of their noses. The part where they sell plasma and eat shit isn’t necessary to that end, and it doesn’t make them better people or more responsible citizens.
“Generally, people who make a difference get paid to do so. Or you can be Mother Theresa, but the nun’s life isn’t necessarily one most university students would voluntarily pick.”
Along with raising and teaching children, caring for the sick, the elderly and so forth. None of those are paid worth squat, but their worth to society is not tied to how much the individuals make. More’s the pity, but if you think about it, there’s a whole range of occupations which I for one would hate to live without but which aren’t monetarily profitable to the workers themselves.
Pericat, “You asserted that millions of labourers would down tools and head for the unis the second tuition was abolished.”
I called that an exaggeration, and then went on to suggest what might occur if the number of university spots were doubled. I then cited the example of Ireland as a country that lacked skilled craftspeople and manual labours, in part, possibly, because of free post-secondary education.
“What you might have is every available place in the better schools occupied by the most qualified applicants. You’re conflating “free tuition” with “tuition for all comers”.”
There’s no question that the free tuition advocates also support more spots at university. After all, a central premise of this discussion is “having an educated populace benefits”. Clearly, if you buy into this logic, having more people educated is a good thing.
It’s a supply and demand issue. If you reduce the tuition to zero, you increase the demand. If you don’t increase the supply as well, all you’re doing is benefiting the really, really smart poor kids.
“Along with raising and teaching children, caring for the sick, the elderly and so forth. None of those are paid worth squat, but their worth to society is not tied to how much the individuals make.”
Average teacher’s salary in BC: $60,000 (I’ll find the reference for this stat if you like)
Nurse’s salary in BC: CAN $40,241 – $49,798 (http://www.cbc.ca/news/indepth/background/nurses.html#stats)
Doctors obviously average considerably more.
These people care for the sick and raise and teach our children. What rate of pay qualifies as not ‘squat’?
I can’t read all these comments … but, in many countries, post-secondary education is free for the locals, or student loans are easily given out and only repain when financially able. BC had a good deal for students until recently.. affordable university/college education.. a student loan was heavy but not unmanageable if one picked a degree that could get a good job afterwards.. I think BC is still competitive in Canada for fees in the school sense.. but.. promoting education can only help Canada’s economy later.. so why increase tuition? increase enrollment! increase bursaries! increase scholarships! increase the number of classes, teachers, tutors, TAs!
As a Montrealaise, I wanted to weigh in on this question: “Why does somebody in Quebec get to pay less than half what somebody pays in Nova Scotia for the same education?”
The low tuition cost for Quebec residents doesn’t come without a price tag. We pay the highest taxes in the county — the highest in North America, in fact. However, we do have benefits such as affordable education to show for it. But is raising taxes, even for much-needed subsidies, ever an election promise?
Case in point: To win last spring’s provincial election, Jean Charest and his Liberals promised to cut taxes. It’s hardly surprising, then, that one of the first programs to go was universal $5-per-day daycare. And now the university tuition freeze is on the chopping block.
The folks in the very upper tax brackets will be saving thousands of personal dollars, though . . .
Jodi, speaking as one of those folks in the upper tax brackets, I’d like to know why I’m compelled to pay for your education? I’m already struggling to pay for my daughter’s.
Sue: To answer this bit…
“I’ve got to take issue with the apparent line being drawn between going to school “to get a job” or “to learn how to make a difference.” How can someone make a difference without some kind of appointed or selected position which gives them the authority to make decisions that influence the world, and therein make a difference? That’s called a JOB. Generally, people who make a difference get paid to do so.”
That’s not even remotely true. They’re called “Activists”. Activists generally don’t get paid. Or if they do, they don’t get paid much.
I’m still idealistic enough to think that I’ll do my crusading and world changing stuff after hours, and continue to do my job during the week. 🙂
It’s also known as “Volunteering”. 🙂
Sean: You’re not paying for my education. I got both of my degrees in Ontario — both of which I completed on scholarships that I worked extremely hard to maintain — before moving to Quebec when I was in my late twenties.
As a freelance book editor I make a very modest income. In Quebec, a large portion of that very modest income goes to taxes. Many of my friends and family ask why I continue to live here when I could be keeping much more of my money if I moved back to Ontario.
My answer is always the same: I am willing to part with a chunk of my personal income if it will be put to use for services that benefit my community. I don’t understand how a Charest government can cut those services and give tax relief to high brackets while the rate in my bracket remains virtually unchanged. I would rather continue to pay what I do — but ONLY if vital programs such as education remain funded.
someone in the highest tax bracket is maybe paying $50,000 to $100,000 a year in taxes and you are possibly maybe paying $5,000 a year -THAT is why you don’t get a ‘break’ on your taxes -you already have one!
“I called that an exaggeration, and then went on to suggest what might occur if the number of university spots were doubled.”
Which is at best tangential from my POV, as I’m not advocating doubling the number of places available, nor lowering entrance requirements. (I’m against *free* tuition myself, just not for the reasons you’ve given.)
“After all, a central premise of this discussion is ‘having an educated populace benefits’. Clearly, if you buy into this logic, having more people educated is a good thing.”
I think it is, for reasons I’ve already stated. Why do you think it’s bad? Do we really need a permanent underclass based on ability to pay, rather than interest and qualifications, for post-secondary schooling?
“If you don’t increase the supply as well, all you’re doing is benefiting the really, really smart poor kids.”
In addition to really, really smart poor kids, I think greater tuition subsidies would also benefit qualified students whose families are getting by okay but who cannot afford any kind of post-secondary schooling (not just uni) without assuming a debt load that would put them on the edge.
“Average teacher’s salary in BC: $60,000 (I’ll find the reference for this stat if you like)”
I think the average you’re citing is that of a Category 6 instructor; I don’t believe there are that many positions available for those, and the professional qualifications required are quite high. Cat. 3 & 4 levels appear to average around $40K, with starting salaries around $34K.
(http://www.bctf.ca/Publications/ResearchReports/2001ts01/report.html)
“Nurse’s salary in BC: CAN $40,241 – $49,798 (http://www.cbc.ca/news/indepth/background/nurses.html#stats)
Doctors obviously average considerably more.”
A calculation of the average nurse’s full-time salary in BC should take into account the recent cut-backs in actual funded full-time positions, so that a nurse who wishes to work a full weeks’ worth must take two or more part-time positions. Full-time rates don’t apply, along with overtime and benefits.
This is mentioned not just in the 2001 article you cite, but if this notice from 3 Feb is accurate (http://www.bcnu.org/media_advisory.htm), the situation has worsened.
(While doctors do make more, it’s my understanding that they have to pay their staff and supply their own equipment out of their salaries.)
“These people care for the sick and raise and teach our children. What rate of pay qualifies as not ‘squat’?”
Sue was making the point that professions that make a difference in society are, on the whole, paid rather than not, suggesting that the value of a given course of study to society can be measured by whether or not its practitioners are paid. My point was that while useful professions are indeed for the most part paid, that the pay scales for service professions are not in proportion to their social worth, and finally that social usefulness cannot be determined solely by whether or not the worker is paid to perform work directly related to his or her studies.
“Which is at best tangential from my POV, as I’m not advocating doubling the number of places available, nor lowering entrance requirements. (I’m against *free* tuition myself, just not for the reasons you’ve given.)”
I’ve got a solution that addresses all of your concerns: permit less people into post-secodary education. If you, say, reduced the available spots by 15%, you could pass that savings on to each student through further subsidy.
“Why do you think it’s bad? Do we really need a permanent underclass based on ability to pay, rather than interest and qualifications, for post-secondary schooling?”
Our ‘underclass’ isn’t formed of people who qualified for but couldn’t afford university–it’s formed of the majority of the population. In fact, It’s a very small fraction of the non-university-educated workforce who failed to attend university because they couldn’t afford it. Who are these people? Our government gives out massive student loans all the time. Have you got any stats on how many people we’re talking about here?
I refer you to Jen’s excellent comments on this subject on her site: http://www.web-goddess.net/peechie/003356.html#003356.
She had very little going for her, cash wise, but she managed to graduate. In short, I think it’s bad because we can’t afford to subsidize post-secondary education much more than we already do.
I cited the wrong page on the teacher’s study. Check out the bottom of this one: http://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/k12datareports/03tsqtext/2063.txt. It indicates that the average salary of a teacher (apologies for the caps, ‘A TEACHER IS DEFINED AS A PERSON WHO IS APPOINTED OR EMPLOYED BY A SCHOOL BOARD TO PROVIDE AN EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM TO STUDENTS IN A SCHOOL’)in BC is $59,999.
Given that the average salary in Canada is about $37,000, clearly none of nurses, teachers or doctors are earning ‘squat’.
“My point was that while useful professions are indeed for the most part paid, that the pay scales for service professions are not in proportion to their social worth.”
This is based entirely on your definition of ‘social worth’. Perhaps I think police officers or dog cathers or (God forbid) politicians are worth more than teachers or nurses. This is capitalism at work–society pays more for what it values (though unions tend to skew this phenomenon).
But this is getting rather off-topic. After all, all of these positions require a university degree.
“I’ve got a solution that addresses all of your concerns: permit less people into post-secodary education. If you, say, reduced the available spots by 15%, you could pass that savings on to each student through further subsidy.”
Well, we could just eat all the babies and be done with it. 🙂
“Our ‘underclass’ isn’t formed of people who qualified for but couldn’t afford university–it’s formed of the majority of the population.”
If we restrict post-secondary to only those who can either afford to pay up front or incur 5-digit debt (which was not the case when either of us were in undergrad) then qualified people will be left on the wrong side of the gate. That’s an specific underclass created based on lack of funds.
“In fact, It’s a very small fraction of the non-university-educated workforce who failed to attend university because they couldn’t afford it. Who are these people? Our government gives out massive student loans all the time. Have you got any stats on how many people we’re talking about here?”
No earthly. You? But it sounds as if you suspect it’s not that large a number. If so, why not absorb more of the total tuition bill?
“She had very little going for her, cash wise, but she managed to graduate. In short, I think it’s bad because we can’t afford to subsidize post-secondary education much more than we already do.”
Jen did very well indeed. I know little of RESPs, but they look like an excellent plan for families who can afford to set aside the money, along with RRSPs. And I like the sound of the Learn$ave program; it appears to be very much like planned tuition subsidies. If it makes it out of pilot status, and if disbursing the funds at the end is not tied to forcing the student into only government-approved courses of study (i.e., so-called money makers), I will be entirely satisfied.
“It indicates that the average salary of a teacher… in BC is $59,999.
Given that the average salary in Canada is about $37,000, clearly none of nurses, teachers or doctors are earning ‘squat’.”
Ah, but the Ministry of Education’s data isn’t subdivided by category in the same way as the union’s. It makes it difficult to compare the two, but I did my best this evening. Roughly two-thirds of BC’s teachers are classed as either category 5 or 6, 5 being a 4-year bachelor’s with advanced training, and 6 being a master’s with advanced training. Their average age is mid to late forties, so I don’t think it’s any stretch to suppose they’ve been on the job for ten to fifteen years, especially since the majority are at the high end of the increments within their categories. For the work they do and the qualifications they’re bring to it, that’s low pay in my opinion.
“This is based entirely on your definition of ‘social worth’.”
But of course it is! Who else’s could I use?
“This is capitalism at work–society pays more for what it values (though unions tend to skew this phenomenon).”
Now why is it that when employers bargain for the lowest compensation they can get away with paying, and the highest prices they can charge for their goods, that’s called “capitalism”, but when unions bargain for the highest wages they can get for employees, that’s called something else? 🙂 It all looks like capitalism to me.
“But this is getting rather off-topic. After all, all of these positions require a university degree.”
It is. My apologies for my part in tangenting.
“If we restrict post-secondary to only those who can either afford to pay up front or incur 5-digit debt (which was not the case when either of us were in undergrad) then qualified people will be left on the wrong side of the gate. That’s an specific underclass created based on lack of funds.”
Here’s an interesting fact. If I’m reading this page (http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/011207/d011207c.htm) correctly, the poorest 25% of the population is represented by 16% of students at university. While I agree that that ought to be 25% for 25%, it simply never will be. Even removing whatever financial barriers exist, there are plenty of other sociological barriers that keep poor kids out of post-secondary education. I think 16% is doing pretty well.
“No earthly. You? But it sounds as if you suspect it’s not that large a number. If so, why not absorb more of the total tuition bill?”
Not really–a small fraction of the non-university working population is still pretty huge. There must be at least 10 million people in that group. Even 5% of them would double our current undergraduate population.
“For the work they do and the qualifications they’re bring to it, that’s low pay in my opinion.”
The categorization of the teachers is academic. There’s no question that the provincial average is $60,000, is there? Or do you disagree with this stat? Let’s also keep in mind that that’s $60,000 for 9-10 months work. Yes, teacher’s work ‘unpaid’ overtime, but so do most other professionals. If a teacher wants to teach summer school or otherwise supplement their income, they could easily be averaging $65,000 or $70,000. How much would you pay the average teacher in BC?
“Now why is it that when employers bargain for the lowest compensation they can get away with paying, and the highest prices they can charge for their goods, that’s called “capitalism”, but when unions bargain for the highest wages they can get for employees, that’s called something else?”
I said “society pays more for what it values.” Unions skew this scheme by requiring that are signicantly higher than the market value for the same work in the private sector. A classic example is the cafeteria and retail works on BC Ferries, who average nearly twice what they’d make in the private sector (even accounting for the specialized Marine training they receive). Tax payers pay those bills. That’s not capitalism–where markets set prices–that’s socialism.
“I think 16% is doing pretty well.”
The top row averages all post-secondary, with the mean of all groups being 60%, which is not as high as it should be, imo. If costs continue to go up, those numbers will drop, and they’ll drop first in the lowest income group.
“Not really–a small fraction of the non-university working population is still pretty huge. There must be at least 10 million people in that group. Even 5% of them would double our current undergraduate population.”
Stipulating that as many as all that would not only be interested in attending university, but would qualify academically also, denying them the opportunity to do so solely on ability to pay is to reserve university places for students who have access to funds but who may not be the best scholars, and later, educated workers. (Burningbird has an interesting entry up, about the flourishing tech industry in India: http://www.burningbird.net/fires/culture/share_the_wealth.htm)
“The categorization of the teachers is academic. There’s no question that the provincial average is $60,000, is there? Or do you disagree with this stat?”
Stats must be viewed in context to have any meaning. So yes, I deny that figure means anything more than a blip on a graph when abnormally separated from the conditions I enumerated: on average, BC’s teachers have been teaching for ten to fifteen years, two-thirds of them have certifications beyond their initial training, and nearly half of that group have master’s degrees in their field. The categorizations you dismiss so easily are the standards and classifications that determine base salary, not the other way around. BC currently enjoys a highly trained and experienced public school workforce, and if their students are to be prepared for any post-secondary training, not just university, but college, trade schools, etc., we need to keep it that way.
“Let’s also keep in mind that that’s $60,000 for 9-10 months work. Yes, teacher’s work ‘unpaid’ overtime, but so do most other professionals.”
So, we hire professionals for most of the year, require university degrees, require ongoing training and so forth, and then say, “Well, it’s not really full-time, is it? It’s really only three-quarter time, so we’ll pay that scale, and by the way, we’ll need 49 to 57 hours a week from you. To make up for you getting all those summers off, did we mention this was a full-time job?”
“If a teacher wants to teach summer school or otherwise supplement their income, they could easily be averaging $65,000 or $70,000.”
I don’t think it’s quite the picnic you imply. There’s two full terms every summer, only compressed into half the time, as is the marking load. It doesn’t shrink, it just gets denser. I would think 70 hour weeks during summer terms are not uncommon. Doesn’t that sound jolly?
“How much would you pay the average teacher in BC?”
More. 🙂 And work on the overtime problem. Any job that has that much constant overtime built in isn’t planned efficiently. Most of us expect to work some overtime, sometimes unpaid, but it’s project-driven with the expectation of bonuses when the project’s completed. If my employer were to require that kind of extra time, week after week and year after year, I’d be frisbeeing my résumé all over creation.
“A classic example is the cafeteria and retail works on BC Ferries, who average nearly twice what they’d make in the private sector (even accounting for the specialized Marine training they receive). Tax payers pay those bills. That’s not capitalism–where markets set prices–that’s socialism.”
So you’re thinking that if the ferries were privatized then the unions would go *poof*? leaving all those despensers of coffee and cakes and lifeboats to settle individually for what they could get rather than bargain collectively and openly for a fair wage based on the market value of their labour? And that this would be a good thing?
I know taxpayers pay the bills for the ferries. We pay the bills for the roads, too, and the bridges, and the rails, and the mass transit that rides on it all. What is it about the public sector in your mind that makes it somehow not a market where demand is factored into cost?
“I deny that figure means anything more than a blip on a graph when abnormally separated from the conditions I enumerated: on average, BC’s teachers have been teaching for ten to fifteen years, two-thirds of them have certifications beyond their initial training, and nearly half of that group have master’s degrees in their field.”
It’s hardly a blip on a graph. It’s the statistical mean average. Regardless, all of the teachers coming out of university that I know have done a four-year degree plus a PDP program, which places them in category 5. Even if most of the teachers are in category 4 or 5, I think an average starting wage of $36K to $39K (http://www.bctf.ca/ResearchReports/2003ts01/report.html) is entirely reasonable. In their first year of teaching, they’re already earning above the national average salary. I was unable to find numbers to collerate to those categories, so it’s unclear where most of the teachers fall.
I might add that averaging $60K or $65K isn’t the end of the scale. Teachers can become vice-principals, principals and district administrators, who earn another $20-$30 on top of that.
Can you cite some (preferably not from the BCTF) sources for stats on the a teacher’s average work week? Regardless, I know plenty of people in the private sector who work 50 and 60 hour weeks and don’t get paid overtime or earn more than $60K a year. Do you think they should earn more? And they get two weeks off a year, not ten.
“There’s two full terms every summer, only compressed into half the time, as is the marking load. It doesn’t shrink, it just gets denser.”
That’s fine (though I’d again need some hard stats on summer teaching hours). The teacher can do something other than teach in the summer. Or they could teach outside of the public school system (night courses, community centres, colleges) There’s plenty of hobby-based, part-time businesses out there, and the alternatives are only growing. The point is, the teachers have at least 10 weeks of time off. That’s one-fifth of the year. If they use that time wisely, they could bolster their income by one-fifth (or at least one-tenth). That moves the average income to at least $65K a year. After ten years in a job, most Canadians would be happy to be earning that money.
“So you’re thinking that if the ferries were privatized then the unions would go *poof*?…What is it about the public sector in your mind that makes it somehow not a market where demand is factored into cost?”
Where did I suggest privatizing the ferries? I was merely pointing out that ferry workers’ wages are not subject to the free market. Demand is not factored into cost because supply isn’t. There’s a surplus of cafeteria workers and clerks–nearly anybody can be one of those. So, the wage in the private sector reflects that. However, the union has–through effective negotiation–artificially doubled that wage on BC Ferries. I view that as a problem because tax payers should be getting good (in fact, the best) value for their money. Don’t you?
Generally, I don’t object to unions where workers’ wages reflect private sector wages and respect the laws of supply and demand. I don’t know of any unions that meet that description, but globalization will no sort out those that don’t in short order.
I worked in a union once, and didn’t care for the experience. So, I’d never enter a field that required me to join a union (this requirement is another dubious practice). Additionally, I’ve found that unions smother innovation and over-achievement–two things I want my employer (or employees) to value.
“In their first year of teaching, they’re already earning above the national average salary.”
A more meaningful comparison would be to private sector occupations with similiar entry-level requirements. Otherwise, it’s apples meeting oranges.
“I might add that averaging $60K or $65K isn’t the end of the scale. Teachers can become vice-principals, principals and district administrators, who earn another $20-$30 on top of that.”
And they can leave teaching entirely and make packets in marketing. Teachers do classroom work because that’s what turns their cranks.
“Can you cite some (preferably not from the BCTF) sources for stats on the a teacher’s average work week? Regardless, I know plenty of people in the private sector who work 50 and 60 hour weeks and don’t get paid overtime or earn more than $60K a year. Do you think they should earn more? And they get two weeks off a year, not ten.”
Sure. Managers and like occupations are right up there with teachers when it comes to the unpaid overtime catch-22. But I have no idea what your friends should be paid; I don’t know what they do or what qualifications they bring to it. However, if they are not unionized teachers they cannot be legally compelled to work without compensation. They may not be aware of this, or it may be worth it to them for other reasons.
http://www.jobquality.ca/indicator_e/dem003_1.stm
http://www.jobquality.ca/indicator_e/dem003_2.stm
http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/printarticle/gam/20020816/MGOVER
http://www.mps.k12.nf.ca/cfc/old/3.html
http://collection.nlc-bnc.ca/100/201/301/daily/daily-h/1997/97-07/97-07-14/d970714.htm
http://www.oise.utoronto.ca/depts/sese/csew/nall/res/14teacherlearning.htm
http://www.afl.org/publications-research/briefs-presentations/br-2002-learning.cfm
and, just because the BCTF might actually not be making all this up:
http://collection.nlc-bnc.ca/100/200/300/bc_teachers_federation/teacher_workload/html/2001-wlc-01-report.html
“That’s fine (though I’d again need some hard stats on summer teaching hours). The teacher can do something other than teach in the summer.”
Then who would teach in the summer? Shouldn’t we at least try to make it attractive?
“Or they could teach outside of the public school system (night courses, community centres, colleges)”
They’re already working at night. They’re grading homework, making lesson plans, supervising extracurricular stuff such as band and choir and drama and all the other hundred and one things we all remember as being such a vital part of our secondary school experience.
“The point is, the teachers have at least 10 weeks of time off. That’s one-fifth of the year. If they use that time wisely, they could bolster their income by one-fifth (or at least one-tenth).”
Or even get more certifications. Or, if they teach math or science, shop a little down south. I hear California offers fat signing bonuses.
“Where did I suggest privatizing the ferries? I was merely pointing out that ferry workers’ wages are not subject to the free market.”
I didn’t say you did. But if they’re not public, they’re private. The only way I know of to talk about them as if they were not public, is to consider the situation as if they were private.
“However, the union has–through effective negotiation–artificially doubled that wage on BC Ferries. I view that as a problem because tax payers should be getting good (in fact, the best) value for their money. Don’t you?”
The union wasn’t the only negotiator sitting down at that table. If they’re getting a good deal, perhaps their argument was better than you realize. I don’t know what the concessions workers got out of the deal, and would myself prefer to contract that out *except* that if the boat becomes unsafe and has to be evacuated, that’s a whole lot of passengers compared to relatively few crew, so it seems to me a good idea that everybody working on that boat is familiar with its emergency procedures and charged with rounding up the passengers and getting them off with a minimum of chaos. If the concessions are contracted out, then a bunch of otherwise-unoccupied people will have to be hired on just to handle emergencies, which is even more expensive.
“Generally, I don’t object to unions where workers’ wages reflect private sector wages and respect the laws of supply and demand. I don’t know of any unions that meet that description, but globalization will no sort out those that don’t in short order.”
You’re making distinctions between “unions” and “private sector” that I find confusing, as unions operate in and influence both public and private sectors. It sounds like your disgruntlement is with unions getting better deals for their members’ work than non-union workers get when left to their own devices. I don’t have a problem at all with workers getting the best deal they can for their time and labour and experience, no matter who they’re negotiating with. They pay taxes, too.
“I worked in a union once, and didn’t care for the experience. So, I’d never enter a field that required me to join a union (this requirement is another dubious practice). Additionally, I’ve found that unions smother innovation and over-achievement–two things I want my employer (or employees) to value.”
They’re not perfect by any means, but I’d druther have unions and push for them to be better than not have them at all. I’ve worked on some scary job sites in my time, and if it’s that or union, I’ll take the unions, warts and all.
(Darren, it’s been fun, and interesting, and I mean that. I’ve read about as much as I can stand to about the working life of teachers, though, so I’m going to toddle off now.)
Maybe what you say is correct & we have had it easier than other provinces in the past. But is it really the provinces goal to make things harder for the young generations just because other provinces do? Or do you not care b/c your life is almost over so who cares about the younger generations opportunities? Well thats just selfish. No wonder why the world is in the state it’s in with people like you running around. It should be the provinces first priority to look out for its young & want to give them the best as soon as possible, not justify why some kids will have to work harder and wait longer for an opportunity to do what they love, and have already worked so hard for. I know myself, that I will have to take off 3 years & work 2 jobs just to go to college and do what I want to do so I can just barely pay for all the food & tuition that I will owe. My parents won’t be able to help me b/c my dad had an accident at work & my mom already pays for me, my brothers & sisters to just barely survive. It’s people like you who crush the youths hopes & dreams.
I’m a 3rd year student. I find for myself the issue of rising tuition fees goes beyond while i’m in school. If tuition fees continue to climb in the future the way they have the last decade then i believe less and less people will be filling those jobs needing high post secondary education. Our country is already in big trouble with not having enough people simply as a country to fill all the jobs that will be available when the baby boomers retire. So even the jobs that do get filled will be filled by un-educated people. This is why for one of my statistics courses i’ve decided to do a hypothesis test (since we need to compare if there’s a relationship between any two things) on the rising tuition fees compared to the number of graduates in BC. I am trying to collect data for it and was wondering if anyone knew somewhere good i could get comparable data such as this. I thinks statistics is an increadibly boring class but if i’m going to do a project i will do it on something important like this. Data is bland but it shows people plainly what’s true. Maybe this will raise some eyebrows.