Ready: Aim: Fire

When I was a high school student in the 1970s, I remember my economics teacher talking about the difference between choosing a job that pays well, and one that provides more professional fulfillment but pays modestly. For some people, their career path isn't so much a choice but instead a calling, one that they pursue despite the economic realities.

So here I am, 27 years later, very happy that I chose teaching. During my first year I earned $9,600. That was in 1982, when the average income for a college graduate was $21,000. Although I worked at a Catholic high school, I knew that in time, my salary would improve. And it did. A lot. Moving to the public school system certainly accelerated my earnings potential, as did the legislative action taken 25 years ago by a Republican governor who said that to attract top talent in education, salaries must become more competitive with other professions.

And where are we now? In a really bad place. The economy goes into the toilet, and suddenly teachers become easy targets, what with our generous pension plans, health care benefits, airtight tenure laws and 180-day school year. It's human nature to respond emotionally to problems rather than looking at the facts. For teachers, it's a tortoise and hare thing; we very slowly and methodically build our salaries and benefits over time. We're back-loaded, deferring larger salaries for better benefits when we retire. And no one who enters education begrudges those who reap the benefits during economic boom times; likewise, we don't expect to be asked to make concessions when for so long we were at the very bottom of wage earners who had college degrees. So it's frustrating to hear public officials decry the power of teachers' unions when for decades we have very quietly done our jobs, even when the Dow reached 14,000 points and some people's bonuses were more than our entire salaries.

As New Jersey Governor Christie continues to craft a budget that leans heavily on the sacrifices of public workers, a couple of points need to be made. First, asking teachers, who earn an average of $59,000, to freeze their salaries for a year, but not continuing the income tax surcharge for those residents who earn over $400,000 is unconscionable. Christie's mantra that New Jersey residents are taxed enough is not plausible; we are all overtaxed, not just those in the highest income brackets. Some economists estimate that the tax could generate $1 billion in revenue. Why would a budget-conscious governor ignore this? Also, a 1.5 % tax on those who make $59,000 amounts to $885.00; subtract the homestead rebate of $1,000, and we're at a total deficit of nearly $1,900. And how much more would those who earn $450,000 have to pay if Christie maintained the tax surcharge? Approximately $815.00. I'm no math teacher, but that simply doesn't add up.

Second, it is terribly convenient to attack public school employees. We serve children, and appealing to the public's emotions regarding their well-being is easy to do. People forget, however, that the business end of running public education has nothing to do with what teachers do every day in the classroom. Teachers trust that those individuals responsible for school and state budgets are doing their jobs, and we don't ask questions. This is what makes the request for a salary freeze so startling. What happened?

I suspect that things will be contentious for a while, with Governor Christie continuing to attack teachers and cutting state aid. Is there room for improvement on both sides? Of course. But this isn't the way to go about affecting change. State officials, school boards, residents and teachers' unions must all come together to solve the budget crisis. In the meantime, I'll do what I love to do, and hope that any future educators in my classroom won't be discouraged from entering one of the most fulfilling and rewarding careers around.