At its best, tenure is a benefit given to good teachers to give them a greater level of job security. But at its worst, tenure can make it nearly impossible to get rid of a problem instructor. Allan Gerstenlauer, a superintendent at Longwood School District on Long Island in New York, has his own horror story, which he shared with the Associated Press recently. An English teacher at Longwood continues to receive a $113,000 annual salary, despite pleading guilty earlier this month to drunken driving. Hey, you might say, that's a serious offense for someone teaching young people, but shouldn't the teacher get a second chance? Well, it happens to be that teacher's fifth DUI arrest in the past seven years. She's facing a likely prison sentence but won't step down from her job. And it's just one of many similar cases across the country. The teacher's union, of course, has no problem pressing her case to keep her job. Said Richard Iannuzzi, president of New York State United Teachers, "Tenure provides the right to due process. It is consistent with the American way; a person is innocent until proven guilty." Just one problem, Richard. She HAS been proven guilty. According to the AP story, it can cost taxpayers $250,000 to get rid of one incompetent tenured teacher, and because some teachers remain on the payroll even after being found guilty of serious crimes, arbitration hearings on attempts to fire them sometimes have to be conducted inside prisons. The teacher with the five DUI cases will have a hearing in August. Until then, she's on paid leave. Nice for her. Without tenure, it would be much easier to get rid of teachers who violate the law or moral standards. Said tenure opponent B. Jason Brooks of the Foundation for Education Reform & Accountability, "Paying teachers and school administrators based on how well they do their job rather than how long they've had their job makes sense." Agreed.