It matters a lot how old you are at retirement. To retire at age 40 I would want more than 2 million. To retire at age 65 I could probably feel OK with half that.

It depends when you are buying into the market, and what your timeline looks like. Were I going to retire in five years I would not be that excited about putting money into stocks right now. Past performance does not predict future success. I am a very careful type, and to me a well balanced portfolio will include some rental income and physical assets, along with stocks/bonds. Of course brokers are going to tell you to put everything into the market.

In American schools there are more band and choir positions out there in the world than orchestra positions. Choir skills would be the most marketable, as you can promote your choir teaching experience when applying to elementary or middle school general music positions, as well as choir positions. Band/choir positions are not uncommon at small schools. Guitar and singing ability would be a good skillset for middle school general music. Band might get you in the door somewhere. Orchestra is a very niche market, and top high school choir/orchestra/band positions would require teaching experience in those areas. So I'd say either band or choir, but if you love orchestra then do that.

I would go back if it is a decent school, but that is just me. If it is a very low paying school then maybe it is a different story. It seems very unlikely that you would still be prevented from returning to Canada in 2-3 months. The two weeks in a hotel sounds pretty awful, but seems it would be worth it to get your paycheck and bonus and finish the contract. This has hit everybody pretty hard, so time to step up and do something for your students and school. (Although this may not apply if you don't have any warm feelings for the school).

Do you really think the Corona will keep circulating in China for the next six months without showing up all over the world? Public health experts seem to argue it either is contained now, burns out when the weather warms up, or it becomes a global pandemic. The disease will not respect borders. It is also not looking particularly deadly if you are healthy and younger.

Twice I've had the experience of moving into situations where things suddenly looked a little uncomfortable. In both cases if you stepped back from the hysterical news headlines, and examined the dangers from a statistical point of view, there was little risk. With a current 2% mortality rate, most of the deaths are in older men with existing health problems. So if you get sick then the chances of death are very slim if you are younger and healthy. This could easily become a global pandemic, in which case avoiding China will not save you. As others said, people may take a dim view of you if you immediately renege and things turn out fine in six months.

I guess it depends on how pregnant someone is, because when a family waltzes into their new school with a baby that wasn't previously disclosed, anyone who can do single digit subtraction is going to figure out how far along the pregnancy was at the time of accepting the job. It would be hilarious to say "jeez I was six months pregnant with my third child and didn't even know it! Oops" Of course people the world over hate cheating and lying, and they don't tend to forgive and forget these things, so it would be a terrible way to start a new life somewhere. Fortunately it all worked out for the OP.

I am pointing out strong cultural differences, and saying that culture matters. American schools heads and their schools operate with influences of American cultural norms around how Americans run business, conceive of schools, and run institutions. It seems like you are saying American school heads don't show up with any cultural baggage. This would be the case if American school heads are not very different from heads of other nationalities on the international circuit.

If the Economist isn't a good enough reference to show I did not make up the term employment for life then I don't know what you need. But that is beside the point of the post. It is very difficult to terminate employment in France, and in many former French colonies. Anybody who has spent time living in France would be aware of this. Negotiating a settlement where both the employee and employer want to end the agreement can often take a year. The devil is in the details, and the amount of severance pay is what matters.

Really this is all beside the point, because I merely used France to illustrate that the US has very different norms in terms of labor. Companies have relative flexibility in hiring and firing, and we have a culture of changing jobs often in the USA.

Heliotrope:

Employment for life is expat slang for the French jobs in the public and even private sector that cannot simply be taken away.

https://www.economist.com/certain-ideas ... s-for-life

I see more common ground than differences, but the quintessential American idea of unfettered capitalism, and the individual building some grand enterprise in spite of terrible and irrational government regulation is very much a part of American culture. American schools operate in a very free market way, with many directors gleefully recreating the schools in their vision, and celebrating the lack of regulation. Directors are literally rewriting vision statements to fit their desires. I personally think this flexible approach and lack of entrenchment has many benefits, but it certainly influences what the OP complained is a "sacking culture" in American schools.

"Most Americans view European style labor rights with disdain and consider this 'socialist""

Well, you really latched onto this statement, which is a bit hyperbolic (was meant to stir things a little on a forum). Honestly I thought it was obvious that this is unprovable because "European style labor rights" is not even a discrete thing. But the gist is true, in that even progressive Americans are free market liberals. Americans are not demanding rights like employment for life (like they have in France). If you did a poll in the USA asking "do you support European style labor rights" would 50% come out in favor?

Big influences of sacking culture:

"Children and education are far too important, and we can't let bad teachers ruin schools, and therefore these children's future. The school's obligation is to the children (and therefore their parents)" This is a view I think many would agree with. More the American mindset I'll argue. (Schools exist solely to maximize children's education)

Another view among French schools is "The school exists not just for the children, but for the community, including the people creating and sustaining the school. The schools obligations are to the teachers as well as to the children." More socialist view and one that I think Americans are not prone to agreeing with. (Maximizing educational value is not everything)

Now off to find my MAGA cap. One of the big drawbacks of living overseas and not in 'Merica is that it is heard to come by a good MAGA cap. I have to have them silkscreened myself, and mesh caps are hard to come by. First world problems.

When talking about something as broad as American culture you have to make generalizations. That doesn't mean it isn't worth talking about. The US ranks shockingly low in terms of workers rights.

https://www.ituc-csi.org/new-ituc-globa ... -index-the

Calling it a political problem ignores the reality that slavery, strike breaking, the glory of the corporation as an individual, the idea of the US being very meritocratic, are all part of the cultural heritage. Us is a democracy, so on some level this is happening because Americans are OK with it. This is part of American culture, just like it is part of French culture to celebrate workers rights. France is on a nationwide strike over some changed retirement laws. Can you imagine a nationwide strike in the US? I can't. Cultural differences matter.

The president elect is a symptom, and a very relevant data point. I am skeptical of that Gallup pole because it merely shows a recent uptick in pro worker sentiment as reported in a poll, and nothing more profound When it comes down to it, it is easy for American companies to hire and fire people. So Americans are conditioned to people being hire and fired, so are more amenable to it.

This is just my opinion and oversimplification, and I will change my views as soon as Americans rally around livable wages, taking care of workers etc.

wrldtrvlr123 wrote:
> nathan61 wrote:
> > Should I try to base my opinions of American labor norms on who I hang out with,
> > or the data?
> ==================
> Sure. Show me the data that demonstrates that most Americans consider strong labor
> rights to be 'socialist'.
>
> Here is some data for you, since you seem to be an expert on how most Americans feel
> about things:
> https://news.gallup.com/poll/241679/lab ... -high.aspx

Wow, snarky. Calm down with the sarcastic remarks about me, and talk about the issues.

I'll stand corrected if the USA is actually a bastion of workers rights among developed nations. Teaching may be one of the most unionized professions, but that little corner doesn't necessarily drive broad sentiment about workers rights among Americans. Lots of at will employees in the USA, who can be terminated without reason. In Europe you are going to need a reason to terminate an employee. This is pertinent because Americans take it for granted that they can hire and fire fairly easily, while Europeans take it for granted that it is very difficult to terminate an employee. This obviously drives what people consider normal behavior as a school director.

As for unions, over the last 5 years there has been a lot of publicity around the decline of unions and workers rights. And look at the democratically elected president is the USA. Famous for saying "your fired!" on the apprentice.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ty-problem

https://qz.com/1542019/union-membership ... here-else/

wrldtrvir123:
"LOL. You must not be talking about American teachers. We love the concept of tenure, which makes it difficult to fire/non-renew us. Many of us are also fond of unions.

You should hang out with a better, more enlightened class of 'Mericans."

Should I try to base my opinions of American labor norms on who I hang out with, or the data? The USA consistently ranks near the bottom among developed nations in terms of union membership. Unions have thrived elsewhere, and done nothing but decline in the USA. It is anybodies guess which nationality of directors are more liberal in sacking people, but general American labor norms are squarely on the side of leaders hiring, firing, and laying off employees at will.

I thought it was a given that I am talking about American IS directors and the boards/ownership here, not teachers and what we would prefer.

Most Americans view European style labor rights with disdain and consider this 'socialist.' "It is nearly impossible to fire people in Europe, that is why business and innovation thrives in the US, not in Europe." This is the idea many 'Mericans hold. I haven't necessarily seen this as making American directors more prone to firing people though. Who rises in leadership in American schools? More your 'hail fellow well met,' team building, marketing types, rather than your data driven, hyper rational, hard nosed intellectual types. So I actually think American school heads are less likely to fire underperforming teachers when given the chance.

Most directors take the easy path, and don't make hard choices to ensure they have the best teachers on staff. As an aside, the most universally loved director I have worked for was also the most prone to not renewing contracts of people he identified as less effective teachers. But he embodied the belief that effective teaching is the most critical part of a school. I wish more directors were like this, because if a director really believes this, they will do everything they can to make sure that their teachers are happy and able to do their work effectively.