Chicago Braces for Teachers Strike

[downtown]

It's been a little while since a major US city had a teachers strike (Detroit in 2006). Unless something major happens before Monday, it appears that we'll have one in Chicago.

CHICAGO (Reuters) - The Chicago Teachers Union, which has vowed to strike next week without a new contract, filed unfair labor practice charges against the Chicago school system on Wednesday, ratcheting up pressure on Mayor Rahm Emanuel to make concessions as a key deadline looms.

The union also said on Wednesday it would not extend the Monday strike deadline if no contract agreement is reached with the city.

A strike by the nearly 30,000 public school teachers and support staff in the nation's third-largest school district would be the first in Chicago in 25 years and one of the largest labor actions nationwide in recent years.

The union filed complaints with the state labor board accusing the school district of violating state law by unilaterally imposing changes in teachers' working conditions - including new teacher evaluation procedures - while both parties are still at the bargaining table.

The union also charges that Chicago Public Schools, which has more than 400,000 students enrolled, is refusing to allow arbitration on some complaints and has intimidated teachers picketing at a school.

Chicago Public Schools spokeswoman Becky Carroll said the district was disappointed, and called on the union to focus its energy on the contract talks.

"It's time to put antics aside and negotiate in good faith," Carroll said.

Unless the two sides can agree to a new contract, the union said it will strike at 12:01 a.m. on Monday, the second week of classes for most students. Both the school district and parents are scrambling to come up with contingency plans to cope with possible disruption.

Chicago Mayor Emanuel, a former White House chief of staff to President Barack Obama and a speaker at the Democratic National Convention this week, has made reform of the city's troubled public schools a top priority of his administration. Earlier this year, he succeeded in pushing through a longer school day.

But the union is opposed to other proposed reforms backed by Emanuel, including tougher teacher evaluations tied to student test scores and giving principals wide latitude in hiring.

The union also wants a larger pay increase for teachers than the 8 percent raise over four years that Chicago is offering.

Jean-Claude Brizard, Emanuel's school system chief executive, has said that the district cannot afford the raises demanded by the union because of a projected $3 billion deficit over the next three years.

The city of Chicago and the state of Illinois are in dire financial straits and credit ratings for both the city and state have been downgraded.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/...-claude-brizard-teacher-evaluation-procedures
AND http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/03/chicago-teachers-strike-f_n_1852689.html
TL;DR? Here are the basics:

1) Despite the meme of the all powerful teachers union, the Chicago Teachers Union has been beaten up a little over the last few years. Chicago is one of the three most chartered school districts in the US (behind Washington DC and a LOT behind New Orleans), and the nation's big corporate ed reform guns, from DOE head Arne Duncan (a Chicago guy) to Teach for America to UNO, have been chipping away at CTU and CPS's influence for several years.

2) The big battle was over working conditions. Mayor Rahm had fought for a long time over increasing both the length of the school day and the length of the school year, while the union opposed both measures unless pay was increased. City Hall backed down a little and offered to hire more teachers in exchange for lengthening the school day, but there is some bitterness there, especially after the city recently canceled a 4% raise. CTU worries that all raises will be done via test-score merit programs in the future.

3) The CTU also claims that the district's policies of evaluating teachers via test scores are unfair, that closing CPS schools to open corporate or friend-of-the-mayor-backed charters takes resources away from the poorest kids, and that teachers are being asked to give up too much to balance the budget. The city counters that it's broke, and that CPS performance, outside of a few magnet schools, sucks. The city is right, but that isn't necessarily CPS's fault.

Should a strike happen, the people who are going to be most screwed are, surprise! the poorest kids who cannot afford to miss any school. Students in the south and west sides run the risk of being even more academically behind if they only miss 2 weeks. College applications will be delayed, and all CPS sporting events will be canceled. Selfishly, I *really* want this to be resolved, since I have a contract to cover CPS football and I won't be paid if the games don't happen.

What do you think? Should teachers be able to strike at all? Whats fair here? Raising taxes honestly isn't very practical in the case of Chicago, since the local tax base may be getting tapped out...

 

[dutchfire]

I think longer school days and a longer school year are a good idea. First of all, kids will learn more if they have more classes, and forget less over the summer. Secondly, having the kids in school will keep them off the street and occupied, which might be a good thing in Chicago.

I think giving teachers more money if they have to teach more is reasonable, but I can see how Chicago can not afford that. I would like to think the union can see that too, and can make reasonable demands.

I think not having classes in public schools is not what Chicago needs, considering the state it is already in (the safety situation in large parts of it).

Is there a chance that this is going to affect the election, considering Obama's close ties with Chicago/Emanuel?

 

[emzie]

I'm of the opinion that teachers should be treated as essential services, baring them from engaging in full walk outs. Perhaps stagger it with half the teaching force out on alternating weeks with subs being brought in to cover. Service goes down but school goes on.

 

[downtown]

It certainly could. I imagine Obama is rooting very hard for a strike to not happen, especially since he won't be able to support the union, even though I imagine his progressive base would want him too. Republicans hate teachers unions, and would love to use clips from a strike in a campaign ad. I don't think anybody really wins in the event of a strike, except for maybe Mitt Romney.

 

[GhostWriter16]

I'm not knowledgeable enough of specifics regarding the strike so this is mostly a subscription post since I'm interested.

One thing I will say, while my main opposition to a longer school YEAR is personal bias (I don't want to be stuck in school longer and since I'm a senior now it won't matter anyway) I'm definitely against a longer school day. For high schoolers its normally already (Unless Chicago's day is way, way shorter than ours for some reason) six and a half hours a day plus homework. When you factor in possible school activities such as sports, well, making the day longer would be pretty ridiculous.

Oh, and why "Can't" Obama support the union if he feels like it?

 

[downtown]

Obama didn't come out and stand with striking teachers in Madison, WI, when they really had the public (or at least the state) on their side. In a more ambiguous situation, he would take too much of a political hit, especially since 1) his secretary of education used to run Chicago Schools, and laid the groundwork for this strike and 2) his former chief of staff and key ally is the mayor of the town.

Teachers Unions, for good or for ill, aren't really very popular nationwide.

 

[bhsup]

Chicago doesn't have a school board that is independent of the city government for the running of its school system?

 

[Farm Boy]

Are you sure Chicago doesn't want to be part of Indiana? Pleeeeease?

 

[Truronian]

So how long is this new longer school day? Also, how long is the school year?

 

[History_Buff]

there is some bitterness there, especially after the city recently canceled a 4% raise

I've never understood how governments get away with crap like this. If I had a contract with my employer that said I got 4% raise every year (or whatever you want), and then they unilaterally cancelled that later, there's no way that would be legal.

 

[Cutlass]

I'm of the opinion that teachers should be treated as essential services, baring them from engaging in full walk outs. Perhaps stagger it with half the teaching force out on alternating weeks with subs being brought in to cover. Service goes down but school goes on.

I'm against any restrictions on striking, even for essential service workers. It takes them from a position of trivial bargaining power to a joke that can't even pretend to be bargaining power.

 

[ELITEOFWARMAN8]

Tell them to stop asking for so much money.... Problem solve !

 

[Cutlass]

Tell them to stop asking for so much money.... Problem solve !

So they should settle for far less than a market wage for a very difficult job?

 

[GhostWriter16]

I'm against any restrictions on striking, even for essential service workers. It takes them from a position of trivial bargaining power to a joke that can't even pretend to be bargaining power.

Unless there are cases (Air traffic controllers) where actual DEATHS (Or close to it) will be caused by an immediate strike, I'd actually agree with you that it shouldn't be restricted. Free market and all of that. Of course, the government doesn't play on the free market, which is more reason it shouldn't be restricted.

Chicago needs to find a way to deal with whatever problems come by the teachers' striking.

Not saying I'm agreeing with the teachers BTW. They may well be full of crap, I don't know. But they have a right to do it. Chicago has a right to fire them outright in retaliation if they see fit.

I do have something of a disagreement with "Traditional" conservative view of unions. I'm not sure what issues they have with them, I've heard accusations of corruption which may well be accurate, but in and of itself, since I obviously have no problem with bargaining with an employer I have no problem whatsoever with doing so "Collectively." It puts workers on a more equal playing field, and it does so WITHOUT government interference. I have a hard time taking serious issue with that, at least as far as legality is concerned. Chicago can cope somehow.

 

[MobBoss]

Chicago...fighting with New Orleans and Washington DC to be the most corrupt city in the USA.

 

[Patroklos]

1.) you have to love a group of people who are failures striking for more money.

2.) I agree with the teachers that standardized test scores are a bad way to measure teacher performance all by themselves.

3.) props to Rahm for taking them on. Life's a little different when you can't have the bottomless pockets of the fed to draw from.

 

[downtown]

Chicago doesn't have a school board that is independent of the city government for the running of its school system?

In theory, yes. In practice, not particularly. The board ratifies contracts and makes hires, but the city determines their budget.

So how long is this new longer school day? Also, how long is the school year?

The current school day is 5.75 hours. Rahm would like it to be 7.5. He also wants to add 10 days to the school year.

One of the big beefs is that half of Chicago's elementary schools already don't have recess, and they might not get it in the new plan. Most more well-off suburbs have a 6.5 hour school day, with recess.

Tell them to stop asking for so much money.... Problem solve !

They are asking for more money, but the biggest concerns are with quality of work life issues.

Chicago...fighting with New Orleans and Washington DC to be the most corrupt city in the USA.

I'm not disagreeing, but I'm not sure how this story has much to do with corruption.

 

[GhostWriter16]

The current school day is 5.75 hours. Rahm would like it to be 7.5. He also wants to add 10 days to the school year.

One of the big beefs is that half of Chicago's elementary schools already don't have recess, and they might not get it in the new plan. Most more well-off suburbs have a 6.5 hour school day, with recess.

7.5 hours + homework is ridiculous. Most elementary school teachers in my experience give as much, if not more, daily homework than the sum total of high school teachers on a schedule give. For a little kid, that's absolutely ridiculous. I've always thought that expecting an elementary school student to sit in a classroom even as long as they do is a lot. It really shouldn't be more than 4-5 hours at that age. IMO.

For high schoolers its not quite as bad, but then when you factor in the likely existent after-school activities, it could easily become too much pretty quick, doubly so for those who actually challenge themselves and take AP type courses.

 

[downtown]

1.) you have to love a group of people who are failures striking for more money.

I don't think that is fair at all. There isn't anybody...not a corporation, not a charter, not another city, who could take the same rules and the same kids that CPS has right now and be successful on a large scale.

2.) I agree with the teachers that standardized test scores are a bad way to measure teacher performance all by themselves.

and that is a huge reason why they are striking, since test scores constitute the vast majority of every current merit pay program in the city. If you're going to lose an automatic raise and have them only tied to test scores, only a stupid person would teach in CPS.

7.5 hours + homework is ridiculous. Most elementary school teachers in my experience give as much, if not more, daily homework than the sum total of high school teachers on a schedule give. For a little kid, that's absolutely ridiculous. I've always thought that expecting an elementary school student to sit in a classroom even as long as they do is a lot. It really shouldn't be more than 4-5 hours at that age. IMO.

For high schoolers its not quite as bad, but then when you factor in the likely existent after-school activities, it could easily become too much pretty quick, doubly so for those who actually challenge themselves and take AP type courses.

Remember, most of these CPS kids are coming into the school system at least a half a grade behind. By the time they get to early middle school, it's more than a grade. I actually agree with Rahm that additional instructional time, whether that's each day or over the course of a year, is one of the needed tools to overcome that gap.

 

[GhostWriter16]

Remember, most of these CPS kids are coming into the school system at least a half a grade behind. By the time they get to early middle school, it's more than a grade. I actually agree with Rahm that additional instructional time, whether that's each day or over the course of a year, is one of the needed tools to overcome that gap.

Fair point. I am, in part, biased by the fact that I'm generally smart enough to learn without needing all of the extra time and homework. I've also, of course, been blessed with a decent education. I agree that bias shouldn't creep into my thinking as much as it does.

I'd say "More school days" is a better option than "Longer ones." The latter still leaves a lot of summer days where nothing is done at all but leaves very little free time on school days.

Granted, I don't want either proposal taking effect where I live