When I think about compensation, I often consider the 'completely incompetent' criterion... What's the worst possible outcome if the person doing this job is completely incompetent? In the case of teachers, a group of students will have to relearn a bunch of material that was taught poorly. If you teach specialized classes or electives, like I do, the impact is even more minimal. So, arguably, a K-3 teacher should make more money than I do because the impact that they have on their students' academic trajectory is far greater than mine.
On the other hand, if a firefighter or paramedic or construction worker does their job poorly, the worst possible outcome is loss of life; so rationally, they should make more money than I do.
In the Army, an artilleryman who fires high explosive 155mm rounds at targets miles away should make more than a finance clerk whose only real career risks is paper cuts or carelessly stapling themselves.
This makes sense to me.
Comments