Teachers' pay shouldn't be compared with police

Don’t compare pay of teachers to cops

A reader says that teaching "relies heavily on exploited labor" and in order to do their job correctly, teachers work through lunch, evenings and weekends without overtime compensation ["Women teachers are still devalued — why?" Letters, Nov. 4].

I have had the pleasure of knowing many teachers and, to their credit, most if not all put in these extra hours. The reader then compares  them to Nassau County police officers, who are overwhelmingly male while the "vast majority" of teachers are female. She  then states that while requiring less education than teachers, police officers have an average pay higher than teachers. One of the only things the two careers have in common is they are both in the public sector. The reader concludes that this devalues the work of women. How is that?

Teachers and police officers both male and female make the same salary in their respective positions. If the reader has complaints about the working conditions, which may be justified, don’t drag another occupation into the fray.  

— Bill Regan, East Rockaway

A reader complained that teachers earning $100,000 per year are underpaid compared with Nassau County police officers who make $104,000 annually. She made it into a gender issue when male teachers are making exactly what she is making.

The police put their lives on the line every day, and they do not get time off for spring or winter breaks plus the whole summer, as teachers do. Teachers work about 10 months each year. If I were a teacher, I would be happy to earn this salary.  

— George T. DeSpirito, Williston Park

PSEG should push solar, not punish

A solar tax will be regressive ["LIPA mulls ‘solar tax’ on new installations," News, Oct. 28]. When I got solar panels, I was sold on the fact that I was essentially trading in my average Long Island Power Authority bill of $300 per month for a $300-per-month solar panel payment for the next 15 years (and creating relatively clean energy).

Apparently all LIPA sees is that I am paying it less money. When it starts adding taxes on the electric bill for having solar panels, will it also pay toward a customer’s new solar panel payment bill?

I thought Value of Distributed Energy Resources, another thing to confuse people on solar, was supposed to address distribution inequities. LIPA needs to stop the money grab, stop sabotaging solar, and instead work toward ideas for getting those without solar to adopt solar, rather than punishing those who want to adopt solar.

— Thomas Rhein, Massapequa Park

Paying off Shoreham debt is worthwhile

A reader brings up a salient point that the primary reason Long Islanders don’t have a choice of energy suppliers is because the Long Island Power Authority is still paying off the bonds for the unused Shoreham nuclear plant ["Solar, nuclear power gives LI choices," Letters, Nov. 1]. But he is misinformed in that he believes the defunct nuclear plant could be reopened and contribute nuclear power to this region.

After it was decommissioned in 1989, the Shoreham plant was gutted of anything of value and sold off for pennies on the dollar to other utilities. What’s left is essentially a sarcophagus of an outdated nuclear plant, too expensive to dismantle and too emasculated to even consider firing up.

However, I believe the best cost-effective short- and long-term answer to cut Long Island’s exorbitant energy prices would be for New York state politicians to band together to pay off LIPA’s Shoreham debt. Surely, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer could find a creative way to squeeze this out of the $1.75 trillion congressional bill.

With the institutionalized Shoreham debt extracted from everyone’s LIPA bill, coupled with the competitive discounted rate of an energy service company, it’s not inconceivable that ratepayers could experience a discount. 

— Eugene R. Dunn, Medford

Congress’ massive bills are wasteful

These two massive congressional bills are not something we’ve needed and we certainly cannot afford ["Biden hails bill as ‘monumental step’ forward," News, Nov. 7]. The second spending bill, for $1.75 trillion, is another step toward socialism, and we should not burden our children and grandchildren with the debt that these spending bills will certainly burden all of us with.

Most of the money in these wasteful bills are for the left, which is why the progressives have been so passionate about passing them.

— Richard F. Hay, Garden City