Should Teachers Stick Around
At Bellwether, Chad Aldeman wants us to know that the classic teacher retirement plan "shortchanges teachers."
Aldeman's entire argument rests on a curious assumption-- but let's see what he's saying, first.
His point is a two-parter, and you can follow link one and link two to read his briefs at length if you like. But I think we can hit the drift of his gist pretty quickly.
Aldeman's argument is that it takes many years-- 25 (and he adds an exclamation point, like, good lord! can you even imagine someone staying in teaching for an entire twenty-five years!)-- for a teacher to have a pension that's worth as much or more than her contributions to the fund. When Aldeman says that the program shortchanges teachers, he actually means "teachers who aren't in teaching for an entire career."
It’s commonly accepted that public-sector workers such as teachers trade lower salaries for higher job security and more generous benefits. But that trade only works well for the small minority of teachers who actually stick around until retirement.
I would argue that the pension set-up is long-term as an incentive for teachers to be teachers for the long haul, that like seniority protections and job security and the other features of employment, it CURMUDGUCATION: Should Teachers Stick Around: