On July 8, as a public discussion on the restructuring of local education finance grants was held, national teachers' unions strongly opposed attempts to reduce education funding. The three unions argued that cutting budgets under the pretext of declining student numbers undermines the foundation of public education and called for the government to allocate separate national funds instead of shifting the costs of national policy projects onto primary and secondary education budgets.
The three unions, including the Korean Federation of Teachers' Associations (KFTA), the Korean Teachers and Education Workers Union (KTU), and the Korean Teachers' Union (KTU), held a joint press conference at 10 a.m. in front of the Government Seoul Complex.
The press conference preceded a public discussion on the necessity of restructuring education grants, organized by the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Economy and Finance, scheduled for 10:30 a.m. The unions emphasized, "This discussion should not serve as a justification for reducing education funding under the guise of declining student numbers," and demanded an immediate halt to discussions on reducing local education finance grants while reinforcing the government's responsibility for public education.
They stated, "Local education finance grants are not merely a budget allocation mechanism but a fundamental institutional basis for ensuring basic educational conditions for all students. Undermining this foundation shakes schools and disrupts the learning conditions for students and the teaching conditions for educators."
The unions also criticized the Ministry of Economy and Finance's rationale of 'declining school-age population,' arguing that education funding cannot be judged solely based on student numbers. They insisted that even with fewer students, essential facilities such as classrooms, cafeterias, care rooms, and special education classes must be maintained, and responsibilities for ensuring basic academic skills and improving aging facilities should not diminish.
They directed pointed remarks at the Ministry of Education, stating, "The Ministry of Education should not be a negotiating body with the Ministry of Economy and Finance but rather the responsible agency for safeguarding public education funding." They urged the ministry not to resolve support for higher education, lifelong education, and childcare institutions by diverting funds from primary and secondary education but to secure separate national funding. They specifically called for the government to provide dedicated resources for national policy projects requiring substantial funding, such as the 'Extended School Day Program' and digital education, rather than shifting these costs onto schools.
During the press conference, representatives from the unions vividly testified to the harsh realities in classrooms, calling for increased investment in education.
Park Young-hwan, chair of the KTU, remarked, "The Ministry of Economy and Finance argues for budget cuts due to declining student numbers, but classrooms are filled with students needing support for basic skills, special education, and counseling. If education funding decreases, the first to suffer will be actual educational activities, and that burden will fall squarely on students and teachers."
Song Soo-yeon, chair of the Korean Teachers' Union, pointed out the limitations of personnel and fixed costs. She stated, "We cannot demolish school buildings or extinguish them just because student numbers have decreased. Given that about 70% of grants are spent on teacher salaries, it is unreasonable to continue introducing new policies like the Extended School Day Program or digital transformation and expect them to be resolved within existing grants."
Kim Jin-young, vice president of the KFTA, also noted, "Even in non-rural areas, schools are dealing with outdated restrooms and heating and cooling costs. Ignoring the reality that schools are burdened with policies intertwined with welfare while cutting budgets is dangerous." He added, "If there are criticisms that only the size of the education office is increasing while support for schools is hard to feel, that is not a reason to cut budgets but a reason to reduce wasteful projects and ensure proper allocation to schools."
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.