Negativity against public service and public good is dishonest and shallow

From the Orlando Sentinel, By Dan Gilmartin

Teachers cannot allow politicians to define their life's work. Many leaders privately view our core beliefs with patronizing contempt. Further, we don't work hard, are paid too much, have too much time off and hold opinions contrary to what passes for the prevailing wisdom.

The most recent in a seemingly endless parade of insults to teachers is the assertion that we don't contribute to our retirement. Despite the self-evident bankruptcy of this notion, its champions are relentless in pandering to those who seem to resent any public good for anyone, except for themselves.

Negativity against public service and public good is dishonest and shallow.

This negativity is fundamentally a complaint against limits. Government imposes limits. In the classroom, to some I represent limits. Students who desire an "A" and don't want to work will experience limits. They will not be happy with those limits, perhaps increasing their resentment of government in general and teachers in particular.

Limits were part of the deal when I chose my career. More than 30 years ago, it was not a secret that teaching offered less financial compensation than private enterprise. Prospective teachers were presented with a deal: You get less now, but your retirement will be better than most.

The deal was a simple trade-off, and people made their calculations and acted accordingly. In my case, the decision was easy; I would "do history," even if I weren't a history professor — I love my subject and generally like people. In my view, the only thing better than discovering history is talking about it. It's my passion, and I get paid, too — how good is that?

Well, mostly good. Remember, there was this deal we made about wages and retirement. Teachers have kept their part of the bargain, but the governor has taxed us 3 percent for the pleasure of working for the state. And many in Tallahassee have the gall to label this targeted income tax a "contribution." Call it what it is: breach of contract.

What is the end game for this behavior? Would you advise a young man or woman to pursue a career with a government that breaks its word when it is convenient?

The decision to single out teachers and other government workers for a special income tax of 3 percent was shortsighted, unethical and mean-spirited. The long-term consequences of this behavior cannot be a good thing for the public, or public workers.

Dan Gilmartin of Winter Springs teaches history at Seminole State College

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/opinion/os-ed-teachers-pay-retirement-myword-030812-20120307,0,896409.story