City Could Save $1.4 Billion by "Only" Offering Benefits Similar to Top Law Firms

"Survey finds that New York could save $1.4 billion by bringing its benefits plans in line with the average used by 52 large firms here."

That's a great idea. But then the unions will demand that they get the same salary as associates at top law firms.

From the article:

"In fact, in many job titles, municipal work pays more. For instance, according to the most recent (2004) Bureau of Labor Statistics figures for the New York City metropolitan region, laborers in municipal government make an average $19 an hour, compared to $14 in the private sector. There's a wider salary gap for white-collar jobs, Mr. Brecher said. For instance, engineers and architects in municipal government make an average $29 per hour, the 2004 BLS numbers show, compared to $40 an hour in the private sector. %u201C

if the city employees will work the same hours and those paralegals and do not get overtime, they will get paid about the same.

My husband works for a top law firm and the health benefits are getting much worse for a much larger premium. Still it's better than having no health insurance.

"In fact, in many job titles, municipal work pays more. For instance, according to the most recent (2004) Bureau of Labor Statistics figures for the New York City metropolitan region, laborers in municipal government make an average $19 an hour, compared to $14 in the private sector. There's a wider salary gap for white-collar jobs, Mr. Brecher said. For instance, engineers and architects in municipal government make an average $29 per hour, the 2004 BLS numbers show, compared to $40 an hour in the private sector."

Ihe first and last sentence of this paragraph seem to contradict each other. And personally, I am sick of publications like Crain's having a bias against muncipal workers. They seem to bash them every chance they get.

Crain's = Chicago Chamber of Commerce = The Dirty Republicans

The very worst of Crain's NY is that twisted Alair Townsend

"Survey finds that New York could save $1.4 billion by bringing its benefits plans in line with the average used by 52 large firms here."

Really.

Perhaps if you paid city workers SALARIES that were more "in line with the average used by 52 large law firms", their unions might be more willing to accept the cutback on the benefit plans.

Ooops ... thought I saw the word "law firm" in there.

However, even still, just because the private sector has been screwing over its workers for years doesn't make it right for everyone else.

Which NYC workers do you think are underpaid? Do you even know how much NYC municipal workers make in salary? Because the lavish pensions and health benefits are killing this city's budget.

I'm not advocating increases, but LIC are you honestly suggested no city workers are underpaid? How about teachers? How about COPS? Especially the rookies--and please don't point to some aberrant example of some detective who got a lot of overtime last year. I'm talking rank and file uniformed cops. How about assistant district attorneys? How about city law department counsel? How about staff at the Criminal Justice Coordinator's Office? These are by and large incredibly competent, highly trained people who devote themselves to bettering the city for remarkably less than they could get in the private sector. They know they are making huge financial sacrifices to serve the public and generally don't complain. They go out everyday and make our lives better. But for you to turn around and basically insult them saying "which NYC workers do you think are underpaid" and suggest they make what they deserve is just offensive, ignorant, and needlessly insulting.

I know there are plenty of bureaucrats who don't pull their weight. But among the groups I mentioned, I know these people. They don't deserve your snide attitude and broad strokes of condemnation. Teachers I know dig into their own pockets to pay for supplies for their kids. The NYPD has defied all predictions of crime spikes due to recession and you say they're overpaid? Career civil servant attorneys among the sharpest and most skilled in the city serve throughout the city at pitiful salaries because they believe in what they are doing. How about a little thanks. You know what a starting ADA makes? About $50,000 after 4 years of college and 3 years of law school. That's about 25% of a private firm first year associate's salary.

Sometimes you just really piss me off with the off hand comments you post.

"How about teachers?"

How about dividing teacher's salaries by 8 (the months of the year they work) and multiplying that figure by 12. They make 50% more on an annualized basis than their salaries show, + they get paid in the summer if they work, + they have a defined benefit retirement plan, + they have lifetime health insurance.

Want more?

"How about COPS?"

How about retiring after 20 years, pumping up your OT in the last years of service to increase your pension, lifetime health benefits, STATE TAX FREE PENSION - I could go on and on.

City workers are VASTLY overpaid.

kyle, nice rant. Do you live with your head in the clouds? I grew up with and am friends with city workers too. Most are not overpaid, sorry.
First, you can't look at 1st-year salaries. You have to look at what they make after 5-8 years. Teachers make $80-$100k+. Rank and file cops and firefighters a little less. Sanitation makes about the same as cops. Those promoted to supervisors and lieutenants, etc., significantly more.
$50k to start for a lawyer is not bad, considering 1) you are comparing it to big, corporate law firms, whereas most firms that hire most law school grads don't pay nearly as much as the big firms, 2) the city lawyers are not working near as many hours as big firm lawyers, and 3) most of the 1st-year city lawyers don't have the academic qualifications for the big firms.
Don't give me this song and dance that all these people are sacrificing themselves for the public good. They love having jobs from which they basically cannot be fired, good hours, decent salaries and great lavish benefits.

I'm all for increasing salaries somewhat if they agree to partial payments for their health insurance, changing from pensions to defined contribution plans, and higher age minimums before retirement payouts. This is taxpayer money we are talking about, and the unions are soaking everyone way too much.

how do you figure that teachers only work eight months? doesn't school start in september and end in june?

It seems funny, but steve and I are on the exact same page when it comes to this issue.

You wanna take on ADAs and corporation counsel, Steve? Explain how they are overpaid. Explain how it doesn't cost a fortune to keep hiring and training new attorneys because the city can't pay enough to keep the ones with experience once they're seasoned. Explain to me how they are over paid, please. And those OT stories on detectives are from what year exactly, Steve? What can you tell us about OT controls Kelly's put in place and the amount of OT today versus 5 or 10 years ago? You are such an authority of everything, answer these questions.

check out this link:

http://schools.nyc.gov/NR/rdonlyres/CD18AE57-CC05-4016-8BC8-B2BACFC82122/38101/2008SalarySchedule.pdf

after 10 yrs, teachers make between $67K and $79 K based on academic qualifications.

that's not 80 -100K.

that's 10 fucking years after starting at $45 K. ten years.

The City Law Departments are filled with lifers. They get decent pay, great benefits and relatively easy hours.

How much more do you want taxpayers to pay for people who retire young with tax-free defined benefits plans?

tell us about your fantasy about teachers, you moron.

That's base salary. The document you linked even states the $100k compensation.

Keep trying.

you are hopeless. this is a city document trying to get people to become teachers. just like a recruiting poster for the fucking army.

"doesn't school start in september and end in june?"

That's 9.5 months. Add in Easter Break (1 week), Christmas Break (1 week), Spring Break (1 week), Thanksgiving Break (1 week), Teachers Days (1 week), and voila, 8 months.

and...your thought about employment opportunities for these vacation periods? you can't even be a greeter at walmart.

Steve, that calculation is retarded. You going to also apply that to law firm associates who get 4 weeks vacation a year? Or any other vacation time professionals get? Why you singling out teachers for their time off.

I note, no one is even suggesting that ADAs are overpaid, so I take it we are all agreed that not ALL city workers are overpaid which is what I initially responded to. ADAs are salaried--no OT. They work 40+ hour weeks in courts and offices. When on trial they spend pretty much every waking minute working with no financial benefit. Many are on-call several times a month and go out in the middle of the night to hospitals, precinct houses, crime scenes and lawyer through the night and then go to work the next morning. They don't get one cent extra for that. Overpaid? Right.

And no one has touched more specialized units of city government like the Criminal Justice Coordinator's staff who regularly work 60-80+ hour weeks for relatively low salaries and no glory.

You think Mike Cardozo as Corporation Counsel is overpaid? A man with 35 years experience leading a litigation department at one of the countries top firms? You can argue he doesn't need the money, but are you seriously saying a man with his experience and talent is overpaid leading the city's civil attorneys?

Sometimes you people really don't know what you are talking about.

I know multiple NYC public school teachers teachers who retired on over $110k/year pension. As in, yes, they are paid $110k a year or more for life from pension only. And they retired at 60 or so. And who will now take on new jobs while collecting that money.

And, no, that doesn't include the money they put away that was then matched... or social security... or the lifetime healthcare.

Not bad for 8 months a year...

And for those who complain that young cops/teachers/etc. don't get paid enough... well, guess what, that was the UNIONS' choice. The old teachers chose to screw the new teachers by backloading the salaries... and, of course, you can't get rid of the lousy ones.

This is why NYC/NYS is toast...

"you are hopeless. this is a city document trying to get people to become teachers. just like a recruiting poster for the fucking army."

And neither lies about the numbers. They are accurate.

Its a crock of sh*t to say teachers are still underpaid. New folks at ad agencies, with better credentials, make significantly less.

"Why you singling out teachers for their time off."

Because they get more than anybody else. You tell me who else gets 10 weeks of summer vacation (half of June, all of July and August), then an 11th week over Christmas, a 12th week over Spring Break, a 13th week over Thanksgiving week, every state and federal holiday off (including Veteran's day), Election Day, miscellaneous religious holidays, etc.

Then can't be fired! (Tenure makes NO SENSE for public school teachers, who don't need to publish.) Can retire after 25 years. Get full retirement health benefits. Get a guaranteed benefit retirement plan, and so on and so forth, with a 6.5 hour work day to boot!

And they give the same lessons over and over and over again.

It's ridiculous.

"you can't even be a greeter at walmart."

Teach at summer school. I know lots of people who do.

Steve, I can see why you argue teachers aren't overpaid. But what about the other workers I wrote about? Why so silent about those? Just be gracious and acknowledge that there actually are extremely dedicated, hard-working public servants who are indeed underpaid. Why does it pain you and others so much to admit it? Just because you admit there may be some who are underpaid doesn't mean you can't still cry that many others are overpaid or underworked, etc. Give an inch on this one and gain some credibility. You always so self-servingly ignore facts that don't fit into whatever point you are trying to cram down other's throats.

After I went to college and then law school, I worked as a Special Assistant US Attorney for about 4 years. Most of the attorneys in my office weren't kids- many were working in the office for quite a few years and had families to support. They worked on average at least 10 hours a day and often came in on weekends. The support staff as well as the court officers were very hard working in general. Most of the attorneys enjoyed working for the US Attorney's office because they got to work on interesting cases and had alot of autonomy although they could definitely leave and work in private practice for a significantly higher salary. In my experience, many of the support staff chose to work for the government because it was their best option. They often didn't graduate from the best high schools and/or colleges and they really wanted to better their lives. Working for the government is a good option for many people for many reasons.

and by the way....

here's what i said"

"and...your thought about employment opportunities for these vacation periods? you can't even be a greeter at walmart."

was addressing employment for vacation not the fucking summer.

and while i'm on the subject:

tell us again how all our problems would be solved if the fucking teachers hadn't wrecked everything. come on already. this is ridiculous.

This is just mean-spirited. Bashing teachers is not a Christmastime thing to do. Education can be improved in NYC, but come one--bashing teacher pay isn't right. Attack tenure. Talk about summer classes. Argue DOE vs. local control, autonomy of principals, testing methods... But these are by and large really hard working good people who love kids and give a lot more than most people do to contribute to the quality of lives of NYers.

Steve, what do you do to contribute to the quality of life of this city? Somewherelse, what about you--what do you add or give? You gots lots to criticize. What do you contribute to the solution?

Lobster gets it. CC gets it. Tell us, as you sit there in your livingroom eating bon-bons: you are so quick to criticize, what do you contribute?

well, its a pretty easy one. Most of the local budget is spent on... healthcare and education.

And most of the rest... still union cost.

This isn't just a problem here, its just worse here because the unions own the politicians.

"working families" party has bought and paid for most of the democrats... koch and yaasky did an editorial on this...

Bloomberg is responsible for the city budget. Not the city council.

Actually, the state is most responsible.

"But these are by and large really hard working good people who love kids and give a lot more than most people do to contribute to the quality of lives of NYers. "

Actually, until you deal with the tenure/merit issue, unfortunately... this really just isn't true.

And, sorry, but when teacher pay is one of the largest items on the city budget.... sorry, when they are talking about NOT COVERING KIDS GETTING TO SCHOOL... sorry, now IS the time to talk about those things.

Especially when the teacher's union refused to talk about these things for YEARS.

I really hate whenever I finally find a Park Avenue penthouse I really love, and those public school teachers on the coop board turn me down because I'm not top-drawer enough.

anyone who envies City workers is free to apply for a City job

Interesting battle lines here.

But count on one thing always: columbiacounty to curse, throw out nasty bombs and call people morons.

"I really hate whenever I finally find a Park Avenue penthouse I really love, and those public school teachers on the coop board turn me down because I'm not top-drawer enough."

Well, its all part of their plan. They lock in their salaries, then bankrupt the city enough that taxes have to go sky high. The city will evict you and offer the apartment to the teachers in payment.

Remember, the UAW got chrysler... you're next...

hi hfscomm1

So, teachers are underpaid if they can't live in park avenue penthouses?

Lets even assume the case... how ON EARTH can you do that to a position with no real standard, no ability to fire people who stink at it?

Imagine that... guaranteed minimum salaries for anyone who fills out the application.... and you are automatically rich.

Communism rules.

rich?

Oh it ON!

hi hfscomm1

Oh hello

hi hfscomm1

hehe, it tickles every time you do that.

hi hfscomm1

I hate when I am late to the party to defend public education and/or the middleclass in nyc. Sorry, sometimes I just have to have a social life.

Stevehjx - here is the DOE calendar (V\http://schools.nyc.gov/Calendar/default.htm ) so you can see exactly how little teachers are working. Some of the things you are stating are simply false. There is no week off during thanksgiving - only 2 days like most everyone else. Also, school this year did start about a week late, but it ends June 30th, not midJune. And wtf is teacher's week? Are those the days that they still have to be there but the kids are off? Because that does not count as a day off in my book. And don't get started on the 6.5 hr workday. Aearly every teacher either gets there before or after the actual school day hours and also spends time at home grading or doing lesson plans.

I won't argue against people who say that it is too easy for teacher's to get tenure and too hard to get rid of bad teachers. I wholeheartedly agree. But our teachers are just not paid enough for the shit they have to put up with and the responsibilities that they have. They are the one's educating the future. When you don't invest enough in education AND have good teachers, you end up with a bunch of students who don't believe in evolution, vote for Sarah Palin, get impregnated at a young age, and can generally just be drags on society.

"Which NYC workers do you think are underpaid? Do you even know how much NYC municipal workers make in salary?"

Well, you can start with the cops. A NYPD cop makes 25% less than a Nassau cop, a Suffolk cop, a NJ State trooper, an FBI agent, and a Port Authority cop.

"How about dividing teacher's salaries by 8 (the months of the year they work) and multiplying that figure by 12."

The school year is only 8 months long? I did not know that. I guess I better stop living under a rock, huh?

"First, you can't look at 1st-year salaries. You have to look at what they make after 5-8 years. Teachers make $80-$100k+."

Teachers only make that much after 20+ years and after earning a masters degree. The teacher pay scale is right on the Board of Ed website so there is no reason to pull numbers out of your ass.

Or, look up your public-employee friends' salaries at http://www.seethroughny.net/Payrolls/EmployeeSearch/tabid/69/Default.aspx

"They are the one's educating the future."

You're grammer teacher's are rolling in they're graves (or Boca Raton condos, as the case maybe). How many time's must you be told that theIr's no drinking on a school night?

I am truly ashamed. I definitely had a few beers and some sake before I wrote that last night. Please accept my humble apologies.

Did you post this on craigslist:

http://www.craigslist.org/about/best/sea/1403256967.html

wanted: girl's who know how to use apostrophe's
Date: 2009-10-02, 12:20PM PDT

If you like party's, event's, photo shoot's, and bicycle's, but don't know that plural word's don't require apostrophe's, then please contact me before any posting's. I will gladly proofread so I don't have to read another mis-apostrophed ad in search for a gig that better fit's me. Thank's.

* it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
* Compensation: no pay

Now people are just distorting facts to defend the outsized benefits of city workers that are killing the budget. Most teachers and other city workers make more than their base pay. After 5-8 years, a teacher's overall comp is $80k-$100k .

I also love the argument that since Nassau cops are tremendously overpaid, NYC cops must be underpaid if they don't make the same amount. It doesn't work that way, sorry.

I think most teachers, cops and firefighters do a great job and should be commended and compensated well for what they do. That does not mean they are underpaid. That also doesn't change the fact that it is right for them to get lavish benefits at the expense of all taxpayers.

Correction: that also doesn't change the fact that it is not right for them to get lavish benefits . . .

"After 5-8 years, a teacher's overall comp is $80k-$100k ."

this is flat out wrong.

"But our teachers are just not paid enough for the shit they have to put up with and the responsibilities that they have."

Did you ever read a teacher's contract? I did. ABSOLUTELY NO responsibility for performance.

I went to Catholic School for a time. 50 kids to a class. Lay teachers made a pittance. And we WORKED.

So you're arguing that teachers have no responsibilities because there is no required "performance" listed in their contract? That is a solid argument.

So teachers have responsibilities. Go cry me a river. What professional job doesn't have responsibilities, demands, stresses? Welcome to the world.

columbia, you are talking crap. I know lots of NYC public school teachers. That is how much they make.

i think the real issue here is that teachers have been woefully underpaid beginning with the fact that for many years it was the only career option available for women. rather than facing this squarely, municipalities threw long term benefits at the problem. we are now at the part of the cycle where we have to begin to pay the long deferred bill for prior services and at the same time deal with the current reality that initial compensation for teachers is still not competitive.

The problem with requiring performance from teachers is that teachers have no control over the students that they are given but they are supposed to teach all of the students at the grade level. Even if the student doesn't speak english and is 3 years behind grade level, you're still held responsible if they cannot meet grade level.

And if their job is just dependent on some students passing a test, well you know that that will eventually just lead to cheating on tests.

This is not to say that teacher's do not get tenure too easily and it is too hard to remove bad teachers. Because I agree with that.

i know lots of teachers?

that's your factual basis?

I say double teacher's pay and make them accountable. Make tenure an achievable, but difficult goal based on true performance. Our school system is failing. Our young citizens are not graduating with enough skills to compete in a global market. If you travel three hours out of any major city, the skills of average workers are appalling. This is one of the most important issues that face our country today.

No one should be questioning the pay of teachers. We need to make salaries competitive enough to attract intelligent, hard working, skilled professionals. What we need is reform. Teachers are challenged by children who are suffering through family problems caused by poverty and are baby sitting children ripped on Ritalin (sp?). It is not an easy job. The Harlem Zone experiment needs to be implemented across this country. It is very short sighted to complain about teacher's pay without first addressing the need for dire change in the system.

The public employee pension plan is in serious need of reform. If it isn't reformed, the city will go bust. So change is going to come one way or another.

Couple of points:

There are always top law school grads who elect much lower paying ADA positions because they get to do really interesting work and don't have to suffer thru the big law firm associate period where they would have no life. It positions them very well to move into politics down the road. It is a conscious decision and it is absurd to suggest that ADAs should be paid the same as Big Firm associates.

The education unions have successfully increased salaries so that they are competitive with many other college grad career tracks. When you fully load the compensation to include benefits that are no longer available in the private sector, they are paid more than the average college grad. Add in the fact that they can't be fired and they have no financial incentive to go above and beyond, this career path tends to attract those who were not high achievers in school. Obtaining a masters degree in education is a walk in the park compared to getting a law degree or an MBA, both in # of credits required and difficulty of subject matter. Pay the top teachers, especially those teaching math and science at the high school level, more, eliminate tenure, drastically reduce the benefits package, and increase the length of the school year.

I don't think that anyone is suggesting that AUSA's and ADA's be paid $150,000/year starting salary- just that they are clearly not overpaid even when they have 5-10 years or more of service as a government attorney. These attorneys work 50-70 hours a week for a not terribly high straight salary with no overtime. Personally, I don't think that a 26 year old recent law school graduate should ever be paid $100,000/year, but I also don't think that professional athletes should be paid $10 million a year either. Law firm atmospheres vary quite a bit from firm to firm- not all top firms are "sweatshops". Some people are better suited to a law firm atmosphere and others to public service.

"The problem with requiring performance from teachers is that teachers have no control over the students that they are given"

And the problem with requiring performance from anybody else is that they have no control over the assignments they are given on the job. The problem with requiring performance of traders is that they don't know which way the market will move. The problem with requiring performance of real estate agents is that they don't know who will walk into their office. The problem with requiring performance of firefighters is that they don't know what building will go up in smoke next.

PLEASE. Enough with the excuses.

Teachers' retirement benefits in NYC are estimated at $1 million PER TEACHER. It's not a question of whether you want teachers to be paid more (fine by me if they perform), but rather a question of what is sustainable given the tax benefits and careers with a similar level of responsibility and education in the private sector.

"tax benefits" = tax base. OOPS!

lobster, yes you can argue that based on salary they are not overpaid, or underpaid, but the issue is the massively expensive pension and health benefits they receive on top of their pay, which is just too expensive and puts too much strain on taxpayers. These city attorneys can get the same pay, maybe even a little more, and have to pay part of their premiums for healthcare just like everyone else, and have a defined contribution retirement plan just like everyone else, and this would be more fair for everyone.

"I am truly ashamed. I definitely had a few beers and some sake before I wrote that last night. Please accept my humble apologies."

Apology accepted, and that's very bug of you to not blame auto-correct on whatever gizmo you were typing on. Now when it comes to your teaching position, this might keep you from getting tenure.

BTW, why the decision to teach K-12 as opposed to college? Back early in high school, I thought about teaching K-12. By the time I finished college, I could barely stand the level of stupidity found in a top university, couldn't see myself explaining the same things over and over every year to an academically average population. Considered being a professor (I could stand the idea of teaching a course or two a year at a good school), but just ended up doing something else. Strange how I went from liking teaching people stuff to "eh".

"bug" => "big". Damn iPhone!

"Teachers' retirement benefits in NYC are estimated at $1 million PER TEACHER."

Isn't that simply how much any responsible retirement fund needs to be? I'm not sure how that number is being calculated, but it probably amounts to no more than stowing away $10K a year for 35 years. Stated another way, your social security benefits are probably worth in that range as well (probably something less, but not a factor of 10, maybe a factor of 2).

Just because people are too stoopid to properly save for retirement, it doesn't mean we should keep our public employees from joining that stupidity.

"should keep" => "shouldn't keep". Damn iPhone.

Use of double negative. Damn iPhone.

I can't comment on the pension and health benefits afforded to the attorneys who work for the NYC Law Department since I never worked there as an attorney. When I worked for the federal government, I remember having to pay for a portion of my health insurance, but it's been many years so I can't recall what amount was deducted from my paycheck. I question the wisdom of treating every job like a private business. People seem to gravitate towards different work environments for their own reasons and making every place of business like a high powered corporate environment doesn't sit well with me.

That's a nice luxury position to take lobster, but these outsized benefits are being paid for by taxpayers, and when they impose such a huge burden on the tax base, and everyone else does just fine with a different benefits structure. The government benefits structure rewards people for stopping work at relatively young ages, and to get taxpayer funded payments and benefits while not providing any services. It is a bad system.

"your social security benefits are probably worth in that range as well"

As I recall, I pay into Social Security, and have exceeded the payments needed to make the maximum payment decades ago.

"it doesn't mean we should keep our public employees from joining that stupidity."

They don't contribute.

I'm not and never have been a fan of the sink or swim mentality. I also don't tend to look at everything in mainly financial ways- my focus seems to be more socially oriented. Government jobs are different from private sectors and to me, there should be more than one type of work environment available to people. I think that retirement works fine for people who contribute to their retirement plans, but offering people pensions after 20-30 years in the same job isn't a terrible option to my mind. Not knowing anything about the actual workings of the city pension system, I can't argue that there is no need to reform that system- just that I wouldn't make the city pension system identical to that of private business. You may be right that overhaul is needed, but to make everything run just like a corporate environment seems wrong to me in a social environment context.

"Did you ever read a teacher's contract? I did. ABSOLUTELY NO responsibility for performance."

Sheldon Silver and the other morons passed a LAW last year saying that tenure decisions could not include... uh... performance.

It would be easier to think Shelley and the boys are this stupid... but, no, they're just that corrupt. In the union back pockets.

"i know lots of teachers?

that's your factual basis?"

CC, just stop it already... you're wrong here. I'm not only related to several teachers, someone in my immediately family works for the board of ed (the part that, uh, hires and pays the teachers). ;-)

She will be the first to tell you that the salaries are wacky at the top end.

inonada - having been a student at two pretty good U.S. universities for the past 9 years, I feel that I have a pretty good idea of what the current standards of students are. It's true that undergrad and high school have been dumbed down considerably. My feeling though is that the kids who have already made it to college - those are not the ones that really need the help. It's the one's in the failing high schools who need the most help.

I am also a realist though. I plan to stay in nyc, and the chances of me getting a teaching gig at a local engineering dept. are slim. Even if I was able to snag a job, I would likely be a lecturer or adjunct who gets paid very little and teaches at multiple colleges, or I would try to be tenured prof. which requires a lot of successful research and grant winning for the next 10 years. I am somewhat disenchanted by my current research and want to move towards a different direction, so its unlikely I would be offered a tenure-track position anytime soon.

Interesting conversation....so many ways to go here.

My view is Mike Rowe should feature NYC school teachers on Dirty Jobs. Some teachers have 150 kids! Anyone who has to deal with so many disease carriers wins a medal in my book.

Side note: I took on my client's girlfriend's portfolio as a favor to him. She's a NYC schoolteacher. Like I said above, I have nothing but praise and astonishment for people who want to work with whatever kids get thrown their way. I asked her how she banked a six figure portfolio. "Tutoring" was her reply. She told me there are teachers who charge $130 AN HOUR for this. She's a good girl, and reports this on her taxes. How many don't?

wow that's honest. Does she pay sales tax on everything she buys over the internet?

its funny, Marquez would probably see a major uplift in pay if he switched from being a college professor to a public school teacher... and then he doesn't have to worry about any standards.

"I asked her how she banked a six figure portfolio. "Tutoring" was her reply. She told me there are teachers who charge $130 AN HOUR for this. She's a good girl, and reports this on her taxes. How many don't?"

Absolutely.

I had a guy leave my company after a year here post-college to go into teaching, and I couldn't for the life of me understand why. Turns out the kid upped his salary a bit... AND got summers off... AND now tutors for $100 an hour. And doesn't report it.

Mind you, where does the guy get his tutor clients from.... from school, of course.

> Some teachers have 150 kids!

wow, that must be one large classroom. They teach in the gym?

"It's the one's in the failing high schools who need the most help."

From the movie "Dazed and Confused". Mike: "You know, for the last year or so, I've been talkin' about going to law school so I can be an A.C.L.U. lawyer and be in a position to help people who are getting bleeped over and all that? Well, I was standing in line at the post office yesterday, you know, and I'm lookin' around. And everybody's looking really pathetic. You know, what I mean? I mean, people are-- got like drool, just sorta-- And like this guys's bending over, you could see the crack-- It was just like wife beaters-- Anyway, it was-- And I realized I just didn't want to do it. You know what I mean? It sounds good and all, but I have to confront the fact that I really don't like the people I've been talking about helping out. You know what I'm sayi-- I don't think I like people, period. I mean, you guys are okay. I'm just trying to be honest about being a misanthrope."

"Does she pay sales tax on everything she buys over the internet?"

Why not? To some people, honesty is more important than money. Nowadays, given the fact that it's a standard line on your NYS tax returns, you have to explicitly fraudulently mis-state and then sign under penalty of perjury or whatever, and it's pretty much the same as committing fraud on your taxes.

Speaking of which, your choices are to either figure out all your items and apply the tax individually, or pay a fixed-sum based on income, plus an explicit amount on over-$1000 purchases. I look at the fixed-sum amount, and I'm thinking "How much shit does Sheldon think I'm buying on the Internet?" So I troll through my CC statements and do them individually.

"and it's pretty much the same as committing fraud on your taxes."

not really.

nolo.... "Auditors are trained to look for tax fraud -- a willful act done with the intent to defraud the IRS -- that dark area beyond honest mistakes. Using a false Social Security number, keeping two sets of financial books, or claiming a blind spouse as a dependent when you are single are all examples of tax fraud. Although auditors are trained to look for fraud, they do not routinely suspect it. They know the tax law is complex and expect to find a few errors in every tax return. They will give you the benefit of the doubt most of the time and not go after you for tax fraud if you make an honest mistake"

"From the movie "Dazed and Confused". Mike: "You know, for the last year or so, I've been talkin' about going to law school so I can be an A.C.L.U. lawyer and be in a position to help people who are getting bleeped over and all that? Well, I was standing in line at the post office yesterday, you know, and I'm lookin' around. And everybody's looking really pathetic. You know, what I mean? I mean, people are-- got like drool, just sorta-- And like this guys's bending over, you could see the crack-- It was just like wife beaters-- Anyway, it was-- And I realized I just didn't want to do it. You know what I mean? It sounds good and all, but I have to confront the fact that I really don't like the people I've been talking about helping out. You know what I'm sayi-- I don't think I like people, period. I mean, you guys are okay. I'm just trying to be honest about being a misanthrope." "

I wanted to help my fellow Americans until I met them.

"I wanted to help my fellow Americans until I met them."

I know how you feel.

RE tax fraud: "not really"

On your NYS return, you have to state the amount you spent on out-of-state purchases, or if you cannot itemize them for yourself, pay some fixed-sum amount. If you purchased out-of-state, used in NYS, did so knowningly, but put $0 on the line, how is that no a "willful act done with the intent to defraud". How's that different from "claiming a blind spouse as a dependent when you are single"? Perhaps you'd have an easier time proving willful intent with a blind spouse, but if you explicitly state that you didn't buy anything out-of-state knowing that you actually did, that sounds like willfull intent.

this one is pretty simple... forgetting to include vs. coming up with something that doesn't exist. much easier to say "oh I forgot that" or "oh, I didn't know that included THOSE types of things" vs. "oh yeah, I accidentally make up a social security number".

in my case, many of my "out of state" purchases are already taxed, because the online companies have some presence here... plus, the whole tax law that turns affiliates into a domicile. So, I'm paying taxes already on 'em, to forget one or two others that aren't.... if this thread hadn't come up, I almost definitely would have.

From the tax form:

"59 Sales or use tax ( See the instructions on page 81. Do not leave line 59 blank.)"

From the referenced instructions at the top:

"You owe sales or compensating use tax if you: - purchased an item or service subject to tax that is delivered to you in New York State without payment of the New York State and local tax ..."

So if someone "forgets to include" their bonus in the wages line because they can say that "they didn't know that included THOSE types of things", that's not tax fraud either?

The criteria that defines tax fraud is willful intent. Just because it's easier to pretend that you didn't know doesn't change the crime. Murdering someone on New Year's Eve in the middle of Times Square is no more or less a murder than doing it in the middle of nowhere and hiding all the evidence; you're simply more likely to be found guilty. Since when did the ability to weasel one's way out of a crime make it any less of a crime?

Friggin' tax cheat. It's crap like this that makes me think "screw people, they're a bunch of animals". You're making me a misanthrope!!! ;)

"So, I'm paying taxes already on 'em, to forget one or two others that aren't"

Certainly that is not willful intent if you think you've already paid on all of them but miss a couple. My love for you and all humanity has been restored.

"So if someone "forgets to include" their bonus in the wages line because they can say that "they didn't know that included THOSE types of things", that's not tax fraud either?"

ionada, you only read half of what I posted...read the other half.

"Just because it's easier to pretend that you didn't know doesn't change the crime"

actually, it does. read the earlier posts.

the correct analogy for willful intent here (vs. the making up a fake spouse) would be the guy who mailed empty crates to jersey so he didn't have to pay taxes on the art he bought in Manhattan.

"actually, it does. read the earlier posts."

I re-read the earlier posts but am not following what you are saying. Can you explain?