Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Budget roundup
Next Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Personal PAC mailers; Madison County (Use all caps in password)
Posted in:
First, the setup, from today’s Rockford Register-Star editorial page…
Illinois should become one of the 24 states that prohibit teachers from going on strike.
Only 10 states allow teachers the same right to strike as private-sector workers. Illinois already has laws to prohibit strikes by workers essential to public safety and security, including police and firefighters. […]
Everyone loses when teachers strike. Teachers and administrators lose some of the trust and confidence the community places in them to handle the business of education fairly and in the best interest of the students.
School districts exist for only one purpose: to educate children. Educators should be able to fulfill that mission without fixating on salaries and benefits. It happens in other industries; why can’t it happen in schools?
Now, the question: Should public school teachers be allowed to strike? Why or why not? Explain fully.
Also, please do your very best to confine your responses to the question at hand. Thanks.
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 9:24 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Budget roundup
Next Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Personal PAC mailers; Madison County (Use all caps in password)
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
No public employees should be allowed to go on strike.
Comment by Fire Ron Guenther Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 9:37 am
===School districts exist for only one purpose: to educate children. Educators should be able to fulfill that mission without fixating on salaries and benefits. It happens in other industries; why can’t it happen in schools?
Errrr…what industries aren’t fixated on salaries and benefits? And why should teachers have fewer rights than private sector employees? It’s not an issue of public safety as with police and firefighters.
Comment by ArchPundit Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 9:38 am
It’s interesting to discuss, but how about a political reality check? There’s no way in hell the General Assembly would take away the right to strike from the teachers unions.
Comment by cicero Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 9:41 am
Teachers should not be allowed to strike. The harm to the public, and children, by missing their education outweigh the teachers right to strike.
Education is mandatory in IL. Teachers should not be allwoed to interfer with that law by striking and effectively denying education to our children.
Comment by Ghost Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 9:43 am
Puhleez. The only reason people are irritated when teachers go on strike is that their free baby-sitting service is interrupted.
If teachers can form unions, then they absolutely should be allowed to strike. It is not an issue of public safty.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 9:48 am
I believe strongly in the rigjts of all workers, including teachers,to organize and bargain collectively. In order to be able to bargain effectively, workers need the strike option to ensure that management bargains in good faith. Mandatory arbitration might be a reasonable alternative to the strike option - it works pretty well for the Chicago police and firefighter unions.
Comment by Captain America Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 9:50 am
When our students enter their junior and senior years of high school, there is a lot of college planning taking place. In most instances, admission to college depends on the student transcript for 3 1/2 years of high school. In some rare instances, such as a US military academy or a private military school, the transcripts for all 4 complete years are necessary for final admission to that school. College admission entails more than just academics. A teacher strike can affect the results of an entire sports season should the school have to forfeit games for a particular sport. Some extra curricular clubs, such as a debate team, would also be affected. In some instances, this comes into serious play for a student’s admission to college. The only reason teachers strike is because they can hold the students hostage.
On the flip side, a strike creates havoc for the children of working parents. I’m not of the opinion that all mothers should stay home with their children. In a perfect world they could do that but in this day and age, there are a lot of minimum wage parents and it takes both incomes to keep their heads above water. In this case, the parents are being held hostage.
Unfortunately, it works, and it should not be allowed to continue.
Comment by Just My Opinion Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 9:52 am
Illinois is so out of step with the rest of the Country in so many ways. Teachers right to perpetually strike is just one of them.
We need to change Illinois politics and have grassroots representation. Even Rockford is starting to rebel. It has an Mayor who ran as an independent, and in the last Governor’s election the Green Party did quite well.
Comment by Anon Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 9:58 am
Geez, what a bunch of 19th Century goons.
I’m sick and tired of people who on one hand raise teachers to the levels of saints; invaluable public servants - building our future - life of children in their hands - molding our leaders - saving our communities - dedicated and loving, you know these generic praises, then on the other hand believe teachers should do all this with a minimum of demands from the same communities that praise them.
Sainthood doesn’t pay. Ask nurses and social workers. Our culture wants dedicated Mommies that tend to our every whim, but expect these people to live off of our respect and love.
Baloney!
If you want a Nanny State, so be it - Nannies don’t work free. They are dedicated professionals that attended expensive colleges. They have earned the right to be paid handsomely and the right to strike when they are not paid handsomely.
Love isn’t free. You want to put teachers on a pedestal, but leave them there high and dry? Get a clue!
This editorial is an insult to thinking readers.
Comment by VanillaMan Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 9:58 am
Teachers are not paid anywhere near what they are worth. So during a strike transcripts might be a little screwed up (and my sis went to a military academy so I’m aware of this issue) or sports teams schedules messed up or god forbid parents might have to actually find another babysitter for their kids, well the teachers are fighting for their fair pay and benefits and the ability to take care of their families right now. Kids not being at school is not a public safety issue unless their parents can’t be bothered to pay attention to them. In the private sector if you don’t get a raise you can simply go to a new company, but that’s not possible for teachers.
Everybody talks about how they want better schools and the key to better schools is great teachers who are allowed to do their jobs. How many mathematicians and scientists are becoming teachers? Not many because they can make 2-3 time or more the salary in the private sector. If you really dislike the strikes and want better schools then start writing letters to your school board and state legislators now to tell them how important it is that they find more money to pay the teachers.
Comment by Keep me out of IL Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 10:02 am
As the daughter of a former president of a teachers union in Michigan, I was raised with the belief that a teachers first responsibility is to the student and therefore striking is not an option. Adults should never be allowed to hold children hostage and when teachers go on strike it is the children who suffer, therefore they should not be allowed to strike.
Comment by Leigh Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 10:15 am
I find it ironic that teachers demand to be treated like white collar professionals, yet insist on having the blue collar right to unionize and strike. One or the other, please. In most industries, unions have gone the way of the dodo. The biggest exception is government services. The only reason for that is that we can’t send government jobs to Mexico. I’m also tired of reading about how little teachers get paid. I’d take a pay cut if I could take the summer off and have every freakin’ holiday invented by God and man.
No government employee should have the right to strike, but the bottom line is that no elected official has the guts to say that out loud.
Comment by HoosierDaddy Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 10:20 am
HoosierDaddy, I usually stay out of these QOTD’s, but, really, would you want to spend your days with those kids? Not me. Not even if I didn’t have to take a pay cut.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 10:22 am
Teachers should not only be allowed to strike, they shouldn’t be allowed to belong to a union at all. Teachers used to be dedicated to children, an honorable profession. The pay was never the greatest but it was good. The pay, as it was, was the tremendous value of helping others learn. Now, with the exception of perhaps 25%, teachers have become more interested in what’s in it for them and far less than how to help a child learn. I personally feel the union has destroyed the good teachers can do. Talk about bullies in the school yard. They, through their union and their ability to strike, have themselves become the bully. Not a good example to set and certainly not the way to help kids learn what is right. Absolutely the wrong message to be sending through their own behavior.
Comment by Justice Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 10:27 am
The right to strike is as much as sacred cow as the right to “tenure”. As long as the IEA controls downstate lawmakers and as long as the IFT and Chicago Public Schools lobbyists control Chicagoland lawmakers, there will never be support to restrict the right to strike.
It is an intriguing political discussion. Does an “education governor” put children ahead of union interests or does he support the collective bargaining process at the expense of children being out of the classroom?
Like tenure, this is an issue about absolute rights (or perceived absolute rights). Teachers should not be in the same category as emergency response professionals but they should be elevated to a level higher than assembly line workers under a relevant bargaining agreement. Another issue here is the right of the employer, in this case a school district, to establish employment policies. If the state laws governing local employment policies are skewed in favor of bargaining agreements, someone should make the logical argument that all public school teachers should be considered state employees.
Would that be a bad solution? It would certainly put the butter on the bread for a Governor and legislature and would raise the political ante in the never-ending game of supporting teachers.
Comment by dc Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 10:29 am
I agree that public sector employees whould not be able to strike.
And as a reply to ‘keep me out of IL’ in 2006 my high school district has 30 teachers who earn more than 90K per year. The highest paid teacher at 122+K is a physical education teacher. Teachers in my area are at least paid what they are worth, pehaps a bit more.
Comment by plutocrat03 Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 10:30 am
Justice, the “goodl ol’ days” argument usually never stands up to scrutiny. Remember the Sputnik crisis? America realized back then that its schools were woefully inadequate. That was during a time when teachers weren’t usually union members.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 10:30 am
I as a kid wished I was in a school district where teachers went on strike so I wouldn’t have to go to school…didn’t happen.
Comment by Crimefighter Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 10:32 am
Just how many people still think of “Little House on the Prairie” and one-room school houses when they open their mouth about how to pay teachers?
Listen, teachers will not become corrupted if you pay them what they are worth. Little Laura Ingalls will not become a communist if she goes out on strike.
What a bunch of liars! I believe the unspoken truth about this issue is that people know that they cannot pay teachers what they are worth because there is not enough pay in the world to force them to spend their entire career every day with 40 children.
So they blather on about how “wonderful!” teachers are. They blather about how “dedicated!” they are. What they are doing is damning teachers with praise.
Sainthood doesn’t pay. Teachers need to be paid. Either shut up and open your wallets, or keep your kids and your neighborhood kids in your kitchen drawing on your walls and fighting in your basement. Your praises don’t pay the rent.
Comment by VanillaMan Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 10:38 am
Could we inject some facts into this discussion? I’d like to know what scale of supposed “harm” to kids we’re really dealing with here.
I believe there are about 1,000 school districts in the state, and maybe three strikes a year?
If anyone knows those figures for certain, it would add a lot to this discussion.
If my suppositions are anywhere near correct, however, the reasonable conclusion is that striking is a very rarely used last resort for teachers. Barring its use would disproportionately harm teachers, not students, since without the threat of possibly resorting to a work stoppage, teachers would have far less leverage in bargaining for fair treatment.
Under the current system, that important leverage is preserved, but only a very tiny percentage of students ever experience any loss of class time. If ain’t broke…
Comment by Reality Check Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 10:44 am
Remove the right to strike and make all public school teachers “state employees” under a much more equitable compensation/benefit structure. I would argue the teachers have more responsibility and accountability than a lot of the “Public Service Administrator” titles that clutter state agencies. There’s probably some “intern” positions that pay twice what teachers in Pembrook make. Extra brownie points for anyone who knows where Pembrook is… (except Rich, he and I share the same home county)
Comment by dc Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 10:45 am
A teacher no longer interested in the welfare of children should not be teaching. The word”Teacher” itself demands a level of reverence and dedication, but todays teachers have managed to drag it into just another job where I can get high pay, excellent benefits, and the summer off. Oh, and yes, I might have to actually teach. We came out of the Sputnik crisis because we were damed if we are going to be last at anything. Today we have complacency in our schools and for certain in our interest in who our leaders should be. I fault our teachers for this as much as the parents. When was the last time you saw a demonstration by teachers for the benefit of the students? Teachers do not have the right to barter our children’s education. Call it old fashion if you like but we need a lot more old fashion in this country if we expect to survive the likes of China. Our teachers have an outstanding deal and want still more, trying to use our kids to get it. I don’t give them a passing grade.
Comment by Justice Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 10:46 am
Teachers are trusted with the biggest responsibility there is….caring for children. Yet they get crap pay, and more often than not usually have angry parents to deal who think their precious Johnny or Susie is being unfairly treated, regardless of what Johnny or Susie did. For the stress and amount of crap they put up with on a daily basis, they should be at least given the right to strike if they feel their grievences aren’t being met. If as a private sector employee, you don’t like your salary, you can always go back to school to enhance your skills. I have a friend who refused to go get her masters until after she got her first teaching job because if she had too much education, she wouldn’t be able to get a job. She was told that if you had your masters, they would have to pay you more, and many school districts don’t want to do that. If the teacher’s don’t stand up for themselves, who is going to stand up for them?
Comment by Miranda Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 10:47 am
Okay, so we are all agreed upon to pay more in property taxes (or income tax, or…), right?
The salary differences in teachers is amazing. In our district we have teahers that have “tenure” and are getting paid well that haven’t changed their teaching methods in 20yrs. The new teachers, getting paid chump-change, are using newer teaching techniques and having their classes get better scores on state tests than the “tenured” teachers.
I, for one, would be HAPPY to pay more to the school district if each teacher was paid based on performance of the students.
And NO, I haven’t figured out that part yet…
Comment by Healthcare Worker Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 10:49 am
Since the discussion has somehow fallen from the “right to strike” to simply a pay issue, does anyone know how teachers salaries stack up to other public service salaries and benefits? I have never been shown that teachers are at the bottom of the ladder on pay? Am I wrong? Still don’t think they should have the right to strike.
Comment by Justice Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 10:55 am
My wife was a public school teacher in the west suburbs, and her contract explicitly stated that only binding arbitration could be used in contract disputes. In other words, school districts are negotiating no-strike clauses into their teacher contracts. Local control–isn’t that what the small-government types like?
Also, go read this month’s Harper’s Magazine for a viewpoint on America’s schools. It puts the recent history of public education from Sputnik forward into perspective. (I know it’s a left-wing rag, but it won’t make your head explode if you don’t agree with all of the content.)
One statistic that stuck with me: polls say that Americans think our nation’s schools stink, but NOT the ones that their children go to. Everyone has an opinion, but few bother to rely on facts.
Comment by Lefty Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 10:56 am
It could be funded with a tax-swap, or, if recent actions are any indication, just simply cut unidentified pork out of a budget. Logically, if school districts are not paying the salaries of teachers (70% of most budgets), they should be able to reduce property taxes to primarily building and life safety issues. The tax savings to property owners would be enormous, particularly for businesses whose property is often artificially assessed at higher rates. Conversely, paying an extra 1/4 percent in income tax dedicated specifically to the State Board of Education for teachers and training would seem to be a win-win (of course Filan et. al might have some other thoughts - perhaps we could ask Rebecca Rausch if the Governor would support that)
Comment by dc Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 10:56 am
Plutocrato3 - That’s great teachers in your area actually get paid. On the other hand my mom was a teacher in central IL until she retired 2 years ago. She has a master’s degree in math and had taught full-time for nearly 2 decades. She was making less than $70,000a year In her last 5-6 years of teaching the teachers in her district barely got cost of living raises (and some years didn’t). In some years their salaries went down because they didn’t get a raise and their health insurance costs went up. The teachers were loathe to actually strike and ended up accepting these absurd salary games. They deserve much better though and our education system will not improve until its real value is recognized.
Comment by Keep me out of IL Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 10:57 am
I don’t believe they should be allowed to strike. This is not because I don’t believe in unionization or worker’s rights. It’s because kids should not be placed on the backburner while the IEA or IFT push demands on a school district. I know kids would love to stay home from school, but the reality is that a strike just delays the end of the school year, and seniors looking to graduate in a non-year-round school system probably wouldn’t appreciate walking in July.
And I support education wholeheartedly, and I also believe teachers do a good job and are often hamstrung by silly state and federal laws. But the IEA and the IFT have too much power in Springfield and we as taxpayers (and those with children in public schools) pay for this influence. And when the IEA and IFT continually oppose charter schools and often times seem to be against school “choice”, the public has a right to question the motives of the teachers and their unions. It’s only fair.
Comment by Team Sleep Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 10:59 am
Vanilla I am all for paying teacher lots more money; BUT how do you turn back time and fix the lost time in school? Alos if we think teachers are just babysitters, then we need to replace the teachers. My kids go to school to learn, not to be watched during the day.
teachers have no need to strike for more money BTW, they can quit their job. Also, teachers who are underpaid can go get higher paying jobs elsewhere. This thing where teachers demand job protection and security…i.e. strike, is the cowards way and should not be built on the backs of our kids. A strike says you want to hurt kids, but want to keep a guaranteed job. If teahcers want to bring real pressure, they need to have some guts and quit their jobs. That will create a real crisis. But if they are not willing to demand higher pay and quit if they do not get it, then they have no need to strike.
BTW the need to Strike is antiquated. Gone are the days of the Jungle.
Comment by Ghost Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 11:02 am
I’m all for teachers striking and getting paid what they are worth, but if we are talking about teachers’ salaries, don’t forget the teachers who are usually forgotten in these discussions: preschool teachers. Many school districts have them, and those that don’t have them have many privately-owned schools within the community. While we have to have degrees and such as well, preschool teachers are generally paid far less than elementary/secondary teachers, as they are paid based on the fees paid the school. We have no option for striking for more pay. When I left the school I taught at for a career change, I was making less than $20,000 and had no health insurance. I would love to have had an elementary teacher’s salary! Why are preschool teachers’ needs left out of “teacher discussions” such as these? We are teachers, just the same!!!
Comment by Anon Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 11:07 am
It’s a difficult question. Unions were originally formed to bring something like economic justice to the workplace. They succeeded to a large degree, and then, in some industries, priced themselves out of jobs.
Of the two teachers unions in Illinois, the IFT is much more militant than the IEA, and it must be acknowledged that both are more interested in the interests of their member teachers than in the education of students. That is the job of the union. The UAW fights for the wages and working conditions of its auto makers, not for making better cars. The same is true of teachers unions.
Teachers do not perform public safety duties and, therefore, should have the right to strike. However, they use that right sparingly. Of the more than 900 school ditricts in Illinois, only a handful strike in any given year.
I have been a local union president and a school administrator, and I have bargained from both sides of the table. Teachers have never held students “hostage” by striking. They have simply held the district accountable for good wages and working conditions.
Sometimes strikes are borne from animosity and greed, but that is the exception. Most of the time boards and unions work together to forge a contract that pays teachers equitably and protects the district from funding woes.
Comment by Fan of the Game Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 11:09 am
Let us not forget that the teachers usually do not wish to strike. Do you think they want to teach into mid or late June to make up the lost educational days. The right to strike is a tangible benefit accorded to non public-safety governmental workers. It is best used as a leverage tool and is employed only after mediation has failed. It should be the nuclear option but it should be an option.
Comment by Jake from Elwood Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 11:32 am
Teachers should be able to strike … and school boards should be able to fire and replace them … and constituents should be able to vote school board members out of office.
Comment by Upton Sinclair Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 11:47 am
Are teachers “Professionals” or “Labor”?
Comment by Nick Naylor Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 11:50 am
State law requires that missed days be made up - the unions lobbied for that - so they know they will never lose money in a strike. This makes it much easier for them to threaten strike than in the private sector. The lack of strikes is not because the right to strike is no big deal - it’s because it’s such a big deal, always a loss for the district and the kids, that boards cave in. Union contracts have been hovering 3-4 % points above inflation in the Chicago area for many years.
All studies show that, when you take into account benefits, working conditions, hours of work, etc. that teachers are paid very well compared to other professionals. The perceived difference is because in most professions, you advance, and your salary goes up. In teaching, a second grade teacher does the same thing for 30 years, perhaps a little bit better after a few years, but then basically leveling off, until a decline in performance near the end. If an accountant did the same entry level job for 30 years, their salaries wouldn’t look great, either.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 12:03 pm
When a teacher applies for a loan to buy a house or car, where on the loan application does one find space reserved for “dedication”, “love of children”, or “professionalism”? They want the money like everybody else.
Comment by Enemy of the State Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 12:18 pm
Unfortunately, the “unionization of public educators” horse has left the barn. In the mean time, let local (elected) BOE directors establish merit-based salary structures for ALL teachers, regardless of their longevity in the field. If an educator’s students succeed, so does the educator. Organized labor wants its members treated as a whole. Hang that misguided concept and the result will be good teachers teaching and under-performing teachers going on strike and eventually looking for jobs in the Governor’s press office.
Comment by I'm With Upton Sinclair Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 1:04 pm
There’s no rationale for prohibiting teachers from striking other than a dislike for teachers’ unions. Police can’t strike because you can’t stop crime 3 days after it happens. Firemen can’t strike because you can’t haul people out of a building a week after it burns down. There’s no comparision to teachers.
Argue all you want about teachers’ salaries, unions, or performance, but they have a right to strike.
Comment by underdog Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 1:07 pm
Let me give you some perspective. Business units of the the unions are the negotiators. The Unions - not the teachers - are in it for one reason only and it has been stated time and again in more than one bargaining session with the arrogance that any uni-serve individual can muster - the only thing that will solve this is money. Teachers are paid well and have excellent benefits. The GA has taken away, with the assitance of the unions, the Illinois school attorneys, the IASB, IASA, IASBO assistance, management rights from school boards. Look at the sub-contracting bill that was passed this year. Management rights ripped out of the hands of elected officials when they are looking out for the interests of the school district, trying to follow the business model, and saving taxpayer dollars. The GA ignored the peas from school board members, the front line to the exhaustive mandates.
Comment by game plan Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 1:09 pm
I would love to have time to read all of the comments, but I don’t. My thoughts:
The point of a strike is to inconvenience people. If no one was put out, what incentive would there be to negotiate? If it weren’t for the unions forcing administrators and boards to pay attention, no one would want to teach!
Summers off? Ha! Ever heard of professional development requirements? Also, summer “vacation is essentially comp time for 50-60 hour weeks during the school year. Sometimes, the only way to get people to pay attention to the strange aspects of the job and compensate accordingly is to rattle the cage! Solidarity forever!
BTW, I am a school board member AND a member of the IFT! Imagine what would happen to school funding in Illinois if the IFT and IEA went away…
Comment by Pot calling kettle Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 1:12 pm
Any public service employee paid via tax dollars should not have the right to strike.
Comment by driver Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 1:21 pm
Imagine what would happen to performance if the millions spent on teacher unions was redirected to classroom teachers and text books.
Comment by dc Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 1:22 pm
dc, as far as I know, the “millions spent on teachers unions” comes out of the teachers’ own pockets, via dues. if it was gonna be redirected, it would be redirected back into their members’ bank accounts, not textbooks.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 1:29 pm
It has been more than three hours since I posted a simple question: How many school districts are there in Illinois versus how many strikes per year?
In that three hours, a lot of metaphorical warm gas has escaped a lot of mouths in running down teacher unions, but none of the gasbags apparently has the knowledge to answer this simple question.
Interesting how those with an anti-worker ax to grind never let facts get in the way.
Comment by Reality Check Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 1:49 pm
Please look at the facts about teacher collective bargaining. Every year between 200-300 contracts are negotiated in school districts around Illinois, and only a handful are ever forced to the picket lines. Since 2005, five or fewer districts statewide have had a strike by employees in any given year. The collective bargaining process works, except where boards of education use contract talks to punish teachers or “show them who’s boss.” Then things fall apart. Both parties must enter into the process with mutual respect and a sincere desire to reach agreeement. A process that works more than 90 percent of the time, like teacher collective bargaining in Illinois has since the mid-1980s, is a good one.
Comment by Democrat Grrl Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 2:02 pm
Reality Check,
From my 11:09 post above:
“Of the more than 900 school ditricts in Illinois, only a handful strike in any given year.”
In the 2005-2006 school year there were 873 ublic school districts and 29 charter schools in Illinois.
In 2005, Illinois had 4 teachers’ strikes.
Comment by Fan of the Game Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 2:10 pm
Rich– Man, you always call me when I shoot off my mouth. Good point, though. FFI, I’m married to a former (12 years) teacher. No, I would not want to spend my day with some of the kids she had to deal with, but according to her, the administration in some schools was worse than the kids. Seriously, though, I do not think it is legitimate to demand to be treated and paid as white collar professionals while simultaneously demanding blue collar union rights. I’d like to see teachers treated as white collar professionals, with commensurate pay, but with such pay based strictly on performance. The obvious problem, though, is fairly measuring performance, e.g. did that teacher really do a lousy job or did he/she have a batch of stupid kids. Bottom line, no strikes, no unions.
Comment by HoosierDaddy Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 2:21 pm
According to the Allegheny Institute Report, 19 strikes took place in Illinois between 2000-2007, far below the 82 in Pennsylvania in the same time frame. Of the states that do allow teachers to strike, Illinois ranks third in the number of strikes.
Comment by Fan of the Game Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 2:23 pm
I don’t quite get the distinction between white and blue collar here. Reporters aren’t blue collar workers. Most reporter jobs now require a master’s degree. Yet many of them are unionized and have collective bargaining and right to strike rights, just as the printing press operators do.
So, I think that’s not a valid argument.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 2:24 pm
Huh. I was not aware that any reporters were unionized, although I agree with the characterization of the job as professional.
Comment by HoosierDaddy Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 2:28 pm
Thanks, Fan.
So to be clear, the great and terrible harm to students that right-wingers want to ban is the threat of 2 or 3 strikes a year statewide.
I’m going to guess that many more kids are visited with much more harm by a lot of things these same right-wingers don’t want to ban or more strictly regulate. Like assault weapons. And second-hand smoke. And polluting factories. And so on. Please, anti-worker yammerers, save the outrage for something that deserves it.
Comment by Reality Check Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 2:30 pm
Newspaper Guild
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 2:30 pm
‘course reporters often make even less than teachers. I worked as a local reporter type for a few years when I was working on my master’s and JD. That was when my wife was a teacher. Interesting. That’s also a separate question from whether government employees should be able to unionize anyway. Entirely academic, since they are and will be until the government goes bankrupt in about 2025 or so. I think there was an assumption in the early days of labor law that professionals have a skill that can be marketed independently, and can be compensated based on their individual ability, whereas blue collar workers essentially sell their labor and are thus more subject to being taken advantage of by factory owners. I don’t know whether the distinction holds true anymore at all. That may be part of why unions have largely disappeared. That and the fact that the labor intensive jobs have largely disappeared.
Comment by HoosierDaddy Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 2:36 pm
And don’t forget all the other professions that are unionized, including broadcast news reporters, writers, film actors and directors, insurance workers, all those white collar state and federal employees, musicians, nurses, pro sports players, engineers, air traffic controllers, etc.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 2:37 pm
Ok.. Ok…
Comment by HoosierDaddy Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 2:39 pm
LOL
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 2:39 pm
And, of course, then there’s my union.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 2:40 pm
- HoosierDaddy - Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 2:36 pm:
…I think there was an assumption in the early days of labor law that professionals have a skill that can be marketed independently, and can be compensated based on their individual ability, whereas blue collar workers essentially sell their labor and are thus more subject to being taken advantage of by factory owners.
————————————————-
HD,
That is the way I would differentiate the two, and under these definitions, teachers seem to be more blue collar than professional.
Comment by Fan of the Game Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 2:46 pm
Fan, I don’t think I want anybody teaching my kids who is just “marketing their labor.” Being a good teacher takes applied skill and education.
Comment by HoosierDaddy Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 2:49 pm
We have a teachers shortage - not a surplus.
What does that say about the position?
How can we expect to get better students when we can’t even find enough people to become teachers?
All these comments about how teachers shouldn’t be able to strike. All these comments about how teachers should be forced to sacrifice their economic well being in order to prove that they care more about their students than their paycheck - what utter nonsense!
So, the facts and the market are clearly showing that those who believe teachers are being overpaid, paid fairly, are being fairly represented - are wrong.
Obviously something is wrong. Removing the ability to strike from teachers in order to prove that they care more about their students than themselves is wicked.
This is no time to demand that teaching positions be weakened. If teaching is so invaluable, why is such a low value placed on teachers?
Comment by VanillaMan Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 2:51 pm
Hoosier Daddy,
When you go to a doctor or dentist or lawyer, you are going to people who are marketing their labor AND their knowledge. Teachers do the same, so they are like professionals in that sense.
However, the vast majority of teachers cannot just hang out their shingle and look for business. They need schools to employ them, so they are much like blue-collar workers in that sense.
On a side note, many “blue-collar” jobs these days require a lot of applied skill and education. Auto mechanics come to mind.
Comment by Fan of the Game Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 2:57 pm
“We have a teachers shortage - not a surplus.”
Partially true there VanMan. We have a shortage of teachers in certain areas, like Spanish, Math, and Science. We do not have a shortage of Phys Ed, History, English, or Elementary Ed teachers. If someone can explain to me why we pay phys ed and history teachers (who are plentiful) the same rate as math and science teachers (who are scarce) I’d be mighty greatful.
Great discussion here today, and it points to numerous flaws in the system that can’t be addressed by just throwing more money at teachers.
Teachers should be able to strike, and school districts should be able to replace them with non-union or other union workers if they choose to strike.
Comment by Gene Parmesan Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 3:06 pm
If we have a system with local control of school districts, whose fault is it that teacher’s are underpaid? Apparently our community has stepped up and provides higher salaries. There is nothing to prevent a qualified teacher to look at the pay ranges and move to a better compensated area should they desire.
I would additionally argue several other points. All teacher’s have access to the overly generous retirement system ( I know teachers pay for it, but that type of pension is not available at any price outside the governmental system). A 50K annual pension, indexed for inflation is a darn good living. So that is a bonus for what you percieve as poor compensation, Secondly, what kinds of other jobs are available in your area for a persin with a similar education. I suspect that if you are in an area of more rural Illinois that I am familiar with 70K annually probably puts you at the top of the heap of the local compensation range.
Finally, while it seems like it, it is not a pay cut when insurance premiums rise beyond the raises in compensation. It is inconvenient, and annoying, but it would be far worse not to have a negotiated insurance polict to protect your family. (Try to buy an equivalent policy as an individual, and thank your/her lucky stars that it was available.)
Comment by plutocrat03 Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 3:34 pm
VanMan, you assume the problem is with the pay, and not with the job itself or the educational system.
Fan. There are some jobs you couldn’t realistically pay most people enough to do. Also, there are a lot of jobs that you can’t just hang out a shingle and do. I don’t think that is the determinative factor. There are and always will be a lot of different school districts, and particularly with certain specializations, a good teacher can job shop. When we moved to Indiana, and when we moved back, my wife had competing offers and got to pick.
Fan, good point on the mechanics, though. Except for that clown who loused up my brakes.
Comment by HoosierDaddy Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 3:56 pm
Rich, I am sorry, but every dollar that goesinto a school district budget for whatever purpose comes from — in one form or another — the pockets of the taxpayers. That includes teacher salaries and union dues paid from their salaries, which dues are neither voluntary nor can a teacher specify that he does not want to join the union.
Barriers to entry raised by the legislature and schools of education stop people from entering the teaching field. Neither in science or in math is there any shortage of people to be teachers. I include here people who have taught in military education programs after a modicum of in service teacher training and who are retiring upon completion of military service. They may be forty one years old, but they have taught, some without college degrees in the technical training programs at nuclear power schools. Others have taught in post graduate schools as well as at the military academies. They are not qualified to teach in Illinois high schools, even though people with an education degree and a so called ‘math certification’ are.
The education profession is worse than the medical profession and the legal profession in self policing — removing under qualified teachers.
Comment by Truthful James Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 4:05 pm
I agree with the earlier post about how school boards should be allowed to fire bad teachers. With the power and influence of the IEA and IFT, is tenure REALLY necessary? I understand why teacher’s unions want them, but we live in such a competitive era that a school district should dictate the terms of employment and merit.
As a side note, I am for the abolition of school boards. I truly believe that school administrators who are at a school every day are better-equipped to deal with pressing issues.
Unions for “white collar” professionals are a good thing. I wish more office personnel in places such as the St. Louis suburbs and Chicagoland would attempt to unionize. Many of these yuppies work long hours and are not paid commensurate to how long they work or even to their level of education.
Comment by Team Sleep Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 4:40 pm
Truthful James hit the nail on the head. Qualified people who have career experience that could substitute for classroom credit hours aren’t allowed to because of having to meet standards. The alternate certification option needs to be expanded. Or maybe there should be more charter schools that have their own hiring guidelines. It seems to me, and I’ve heard this said before, that the excessive standards imposed by legislation and bureaucracy make our education system ineffective. And in answer to the QOTD, yes, I think teachers should still have the strike option. Teaching is the most important type of public service and should be paid as such. So sometimes just that threat of a strike for decent raises is necessary.
Comment by Liberal Louisa Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 5:02 pm
Well there are several points I’d like to address.
Teachers should absolutely have the right to strike, and add to that school board members and administrators should be trained in collective bargaining if they are going to be involved in contract negotiations. IEA and IFT both train their local bargaining teams in the process and have staff to assist in bargaining contracts. Unfortunately, I can’t say the same thing for the school boards and management. Some school board members and administrators have had training and some haven’t had a bit.
Also, the answer isn’t more charters or anything of the sort. Invest the money and resources in the current public schools to lower class sizes, fully fund exisiting programs and such and you will see results, period. Investing more and implementing more charters and such without living up to your obligations and commitments to existing public schools (something Illinois has been exceptional at) and then complaining about how public schools aren’t doing the job is ridiculous.
Most importantly, schools are simply a reflection of the community and society they exist in. Parental involvement is extremely important to a child’s education success and overall that involvement is declining. School children are becoming victims of a society that shuns self-responsibility. Previous generations of parents saw themselves as partners in their child’s education with the teacher. Today, more and more parents see everything as the teacher’s job or more and more are working longer hours to make ends meet.
Finally, paying teachers on their performance may sound good, but it’s a “business model” that doesn’t work in an educational environment. How do you objectively judge a teacher on student performance? It’s not possible due to the fact that so much that determines student performance is based on external factors of which the teacher has no control.
Comment by Speak Truthiness Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 6:00 pm
Nice topic ! SOOO are the teachers an association or a “union” do you base collective bargaining on levels of tenure or scope of work and ability, I consider the Farm Bureau, the AMA, the Bar, Professional Engineers etc. a union if Teachers do. Bargain your skill/ability not your title!
Comment by dis-connected Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 6:23 pm
Rich, I’m out of town and you place this for qotd?
One thing that was left out…. but some very good points made here… before the collective bargaining rights law, Illinois was averaging over 20 strikes a year. You read that right… over 20 strikes a year when it was illegal to strike. Teachers had no voice and were so furious, they walked out. Now that they have a voice through collective bargaining, the number has dramatically decreased. (one or 2 last year)
The problem in the Harlem school district is the teachers took a wage freeze last time when the district was broke. Now the district is sitting on a big surplus and they still are hard lining the teachers. If Rod would go ahead and act, veto or otherwise, that district would know what kind of state aid they’ll receive. It’s having an impact.
Comment by DC- a different one Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 8:46 pm
Since this discussion has turned into a back and forth about teacher’s pay. I have a question. What is a fair salary for a teacher? They do get tenure after (3 or 4 years), about 3 months off a year and many holidays. So what is a fair salary?
Comment by ChokingCub Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 9:39 pm
I wonder how many of those here who use the best interest of the children argument to supercede the rights of teachers to strike actually volunteer at school.
You want to help our children to suceed than volunteer your time and help teach them to read.
Comment by Rick Tuesday, Aug 21, 07 @ 10:47 pm
DC, I wondered why I didn’t get an email from you today. LOL
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Aug 22, 07 @ 12:34 am
I know this is essentially a dead discussion, but I have to answer Choking Cub…
The job is unusual. As I said above, the summers are essentially comp time for 50-60 hour work weeks during the school year. Also, teachers are required to use their summers for professional development and most spend at least half of the summer prepping for the fall. The next time I hear “summers off”… I have yet to get a summer off. I had more vacation time in the “real world.”
In addition, most teachers spend 100’s to 1000’s of dollars on classroom materials for which they receive little, if any compensation.
Final point, how much is the future of the country worth? 1/2 of all new teachers leave within the first 5 years. Pay and working conditions are major factors. Imagine being responsible for teaching 30 6-year olds to read, write and do math. Imagine that their parents are unable or unwilling to help (even by making the kids do a little homework). How much is that worth? How much does A-Rod get paid? What real benefit does he provide to our society? Is it more valuable than teaching kids to read?
If we want a high quality teacher corps, we should expect to pay top dollar. If we continue to nickel and dime education (low teacher pay & high class size), high tech companies will continue to apply for more H1-B visas while under-educated Americans go to work at Wal-Mart.
Comment by Pot calling kettle Wednesday, Aug 22, 07 @ 12:51 pm
I know of no profession in which the wages are hourly as opposed to salaried.
No teacher is required to use their summer for professional development. Smartly they do that because most contracts provide for two typs of raises — longevity; and for completing 15 hours (a summer semester, or one course a week during school year.
But the courses are naturally from the schools of education, working for graduate degrees in that field. Subject matter mastery is a foreign language.
The whole argument about smaller classrooms producing better results is a triumph of hope over experience. More classrooms just means that the baseline of teacher experience and experise drops. The parents don’t get any better.
Get rid of the closed shop which exists. Let the teachers strike, but prmit the boards to fire and replace.
Comment by Truthful James Wednesday, Aug 22, 07 @ 1:30 pm
If Professional Development isn’t undertaken in the summer, then it is on evenings and weekends, which can make it difficult to complete the prep, grading, etc.
My point is not that the job should be hourly, but that there is a very high workload during the school year that is offset by an unscheduled summer.
BTW, subject mastery is now a requirement of NCLB.
What point is striking if you can be fired and replaced? The idea behind the right to strike is that you inconvenience the employer and they sit down and negotiate. It most cases, the right to strike, not the action, keeps everybody at the table.
Research indicates maximum benefit at around 15 students in the lower grades…
I would also point out that the mere existence of union in a sector pushes many employers to deal fairly with their non-union personnel thus keeping the union out. Unions work! (I know they are not perfect)
Comment by Pot calling kettle Wednesday, Aug 22, 07 @ 2:37 pm