Readers' comments on AP story on rehiring retirees (Canton Repository, 12/27/06)

Article (click): More teachers retired and rehired, at highest salaries

Brenda Grass - 5:46 AM on December 27, 2006
This trend is not only for the teachers, many state employees are retiring and returning back after six months to their old jobs. They collect their retirement and they work their old job. This is double dipping. No one else can get hired. Good old boy network still alive . This is not fair hiring practice.

Mary Beth Habunek - 7:44 AM on December 27, 2006
So, please tell me how exactly this is saving money in the various school districts who rehire such as this? Then they have the nerve to ask for more tax money? LOL.

Mark Adams - 8:17 AM on December 27, 2006
Retiring and rehiring goes on everywhere, not just government employees. B&W, Detroit Diesel, just two local entities, do the very same thing. Although I am completely against the practice, it's not right to single one entity out. I feel that the practice does not give a new person a chance or current employees a chance at a promotion. I do think that new teachers have it the worse though, good luck in finding a job in this state.

Margaret Dowdell - 3:40 PM on December 27, 2006
This is why new teachers can not find a job in Ohio.

Sheri Dornhecker - 3:58 PM on December 27, 2006
Don't any of you people ever read the facts before you make stupid comments? I am a retired teacher who has worked as a teacher after retirement and again pay the same 24.5% of my salary back into STRS. That creates new monies for those teachers who have not yet retired. Do Fortune 500 companies care that you have additional income when they hire CEO's? Since public schools are anxious to get rid of teachers when they are eligible for retirement at age 51, there is a real lapse of time and money for relatively young persons out of a job. If, like me, you still have children dependent upon your income, it is not possible to just go away to the beach for the rest of my life. I worked most of my life for less than $40,000 per year. My retirement now leaves me with less than $30,000. As an educator, I feel that my children deserve the possibility of higher education. Society demands that teachers accept the blame for illiteracy, poor behavior, and a host of other problems of today's youth. I cannot stand the whining public who belittles teachers and resents every penny they make. Give me $1.00 per hour per child as childcare income (I averaged 150-180 high school students per day}. There is no child care facility anywhere that would provide what a teacher provides for 7.00 per day per child.

David Culp - 4:44 PM on December 27, 2006
This is no more double dipping than any retiree going out and finding a job after being on a pension. Benefits from Public retirement funds are not tax dollars. They are returns on investments legitimately earned from public employees' earnings and employer benefit contributions paid into those pension funds. In short, it is the retiree's money 100% and no one else's business. That they return to work at the same job they once had 6 months ago is also no one else's business. They are earning their pay check just like you and me.

Don Cirelli - 9:19 PM on December 27, 2006
I actually read a letter once from a jealous soul who didn't like the so-called "double dipping". This guy actually demanded that any public employee who stays on after retirement age FORFEIT THEIR RETIREMENT and start over!!! What a nitwit! Would YOU forfeit your retirement after working 30 years for it? I don't think so!!! People receive their salary plus their retirement pay after 30 years because it was EARNED, just like your paycheck is earned. They aren't getting anything extra that they don't deserve. "Double dipping" isn't a valid term in this case, but "jealousy" definitely is.

Donna Whelan - 10:09 AM on December 28, 2006
My question is: WHY is the pool of qualified people who can run school districts shrinking? Who will run school districts once these retired/rehires finally stay retired? Is there going to be a huge gap between 'experienced' teachers and 'new' teachers with no 'in-betweens' [those progressing through the ranks toward experienced/qualified]? While retiring/rehiring happens often, it usually is a money saving practice. Retire from a company, rehire as an independent contractor or part-time. The company saves benefit monies yet has their qualified, experienced, personnel back in place. Retired military often go into civil service/government jobs and retire with 2 government benefits. Back on point. I will say that 13,000 RETIRED teachers, returning to teaching seems like an extraordinarily high number. If they are rehired at their pre-retirement wages, the attrition factor in budgeting goes out the window. New teacher wages will be affected, they will find decent paying jobs with a future in the private sector. Revolving door of new teachers at entry level, revolving door of retire/rehires at the top. That's a system that will crash and burn.

Mary Spear - 11:13 AM on December 28, 2006
First of all, I wish the stats would show how many of these are teachers being rehired. In most districts around here it is ADMINISTRATORS being rehired after retiring at these huge salaries. I don't know many retired teachers who made $90,000 a year while working. And no, I can't understand how this saves a district money if TEACHERS or administrators are rehired at their salaries at the time of retirement. I also have a problem with the STRS picking up a retired administrator's healthcare costs when the retired teachers' healthcare costs have risen so much in the last few years and spouses are no longer subsidized. I think the good old boys network is indeed alive and well. I heard recently about 2 young college grads who could not get a job teaching in Ohio despite good credentials. They moved out of state to teach and then found that many Ohio districts are advertising for teachers mostly out of state. Ohio is not a state that tries to hang onto its educated young people even when there are jobs. Should a superintendent be making over $197,000 PLUS a pension? I can't believe that no one else qualified is available...and that no one could be groomed for this job. How about putting some of that money into helping a good young educator in a district get his/her credentials paid for...instead of helping a retired administrator live like a celebrity?????