Does Pa. really want teachers to come to work when sick?

Regarding state Senate Bill 229: I am puzzled what benefit the Senate Education Committee believes that the children of Pennsylvania will reap when their teachers no longer have any sick leave. You see, most teachers don't make as much money as our state legislators do, nor do they have a per diem. So, if the choice is to stay home and not have enough money to cover bills or go to work and perhaps infect students, some will feel they have no choice but to go to work. Certainly nobody performs at their best when they are sick, and why would you want a teacher with the flu working with your child?

With fewer and fewer people going into teaching in the United States, you would think the Pennsylvania Senate would want to make it more attractive to go into teaching, not less. Do we really aspire to be the next Kansas? Many teachers already work at a pay scale below what they would earn outside of education. This bill is just one more nudge to make qualified candidates decide to do something else. How does this benefit our children?

Sick days should be part of everyone's working agreement, not just for teachers. Human beings get sick. If you think this might be a costsaving measure, I have one that is even better. Reduce the number of our state legislators. With the largest fulltime legislature in the country, there is plenty of fat to be cut.

For those who would lose their jobs in Harrisburg, but who still feel a need to serve the good people of Pennsylvania, I have a suggestion: Go back to school and learn to be a teacher. LAURA WENNEKER

Point Breeze