Pamela Marentette and Khulia Pringle seem to suggest that teachers in Minneapolis and St. Paul are already adequately paid, if not overpaid ("Students, families need stability, not a strike," Opinion Exchange, Feb. 19). Aside from obfuscating that pay increases are not the sole — or even primary — reason for the strike vote, they also neglect important context.
They cite $85,457 as the average teacher salary in St. Paul — the "highest in the state." Perhaps so, but the (publicly available) St. Paul Public Schools salary schedule makes clear that such a salary requires at least a master's degree with 20 years of teaching experience, a Ph.D. with more than a dozen years of teaching experience, or some combination of experience and education falling between those two. If that's the average salary in St. Paul, that speaks, primarily, to the quality of teachers working in the district.
A master's degree and 20 years of experience could lead to two to three times that $85,000 salary in many industries. Suggesting that teachers don't deserve commensurate pay with the rest of the working world devalues the work teachers do.
Mike Phillips, Minneapolis
The writer is a teacher.
•••
To help the public better understand how their education tax dollars are being used, please publish the names and positions of all employees at the Minneapolis Public Schools Davis Center (the district administrative offices) who earn $100,000 or more. Do any of these people hold Minnesota teaching licenses? If so, why aren't they in the classroom where they are needed? Surely, classroom teachers should be paid as much or more than administrators.
In addition, how many classes do principals and vice principals teach each week? I remember a time when principals served double duty and were full-time teachers. I'm not saying we need to go back to that model, but surely these people should be teaching at least one class a week.


