> because we can easily calculate the value they produce,
I am not trolling but I would really, really like a citation on this. I hear this sentiment so often but nobody ever produced that calculation. Would be great (or maybe not ;)) for negotiations going forward.
I mean it in the simplistic sense that we can sum up the revenue of the software industry. That's not really a complete calculation but it's clearer than trying to measure the value add of teachers.... even though it's arguably more.
well, the software industry is filled with non-software engineers. and if you go with the revenue angle, what do you do with companies that don't produce "value" (i.e. product doesn't sell)?
It wasn't my intention to claim that it could be calculated exactly. It was my intention to point out the distinction between software engineers, where there's a bottom line somewhere to be counted, and teachers, where the bottom line is effectively impossible to calculate.
This isn't about how much programmers are worth, but about why it is we get away with paying teachers so little while programmers are paid so much: their contribution to a corporate profit. The details are beyond the scope of the post.
I am not trolling but I would really, really like a citation on this. I hear this sentiment so often but nobody ever produced that calculation. Would be great (or maybe not ;)) for negotiations going forward.