Chicago Public School Teachers on Strike...

81

how many kids can you teach for $32M annually?

why $32M?

per the teachers union's website, union dues were just a tick over $1K per teacher per year in 2011 and there are 32,000 teachers

http://www.ctunet.com/for-members/membe ... nformation

81

SPEEDY MCCREADY wrote:

81 wrote:

at least get it right you blithering idiot

In all honesty..
I truly wanted to know who paid for the pretty red shirts.

The teachers themselves?
The union?
Combination of both?
You?
Me?

It was an honest question.

union is selling them for 10 or 11 depending on size.

http://www.ctunet.com/for-members/text/ ... D-ONLY.pdf

81

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

81 wrote:

how many kids can you teach for $32M annually?

why $32M?

per the teachers union's website, union dues were just a tick over $1K per teacher per year in 2011 and there are 32,000 teachers

http://www.ctunet.com/for-members/membe ... nformation

81... I'm very curious to know what it is you do for a living? Speedy ducked the question (not wanting to be exposed)... but I'm sure you won't. I mean, with such strong opinions being tossed out there regarding the teaching occupation... I'm sure how you make a living must be exemplary to allow for such a strong voice.

Are you throwing rocks while living in a glass house? What do you do?

i'm a tax payer

pretty sure everyone knows speedy's profession....just read the boards....pretty sure you can find mine too. but if you can't... i work in the private sector doing budgeting/planning/forecasting/analysis etc. not that my profession really matters in this.


feel free to address the $32M in union due question....where is all that money going?

Jason P

Just raise taxes!! Problem solved.

Come on. The states surrounding Illinois could use more businesses moving into to help their economies. :twisted:

Thirty Bills Unpaid

81 wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

81 wrote:

how many kids can you teach for $32M annually?

why $32M?

per the teachers union's website, union dues were just a tick over $1K per teacher per year in 2011 and there are 32,000 teachers

http://www.ctunet.com/for-members/membe ... nformation

81... I'm very curious to know what it is you do for a living? Speedy ducked the question (not wanting to be exposed)... but I'm sure you won't. I mean, with such strong opinions being tossed out there regarding the teaching occupation... I'm sure how you make a living must be exemplary to allow for such a strong voice.

Are you throwing rocks while living in a glass house? What do you do?

i'm a tax payer

pretty sure everyone knows speedy's profession....just read the boards....pretty sure you can find mine too. but if you can't... i work in the private sector doing budgeting/planning/forecasting/analysis etc. not that my profession really matters in this.


feel free to address the $32M in union due question....where is all that money going?

Why would you need an answer to this question? It's obvious- it can go wherever they choose. It's money they contributed to from their salaries. Duh.

Know 2 things:

1. As a teacher... trust me when I say the job is difficult, teachers work hard, and they have earned their pay. Measuring their worth is extremely difficult, but generally speaking... if the kids say good things... they are doing something right. They are not getting rich. They live comfortably... but shouldn't they? What exactly do you think is fair?

Not all teachers are great. There are certainly your rotten apples that give the profession a poor name. Why do you paint every teacher with that paint brush though? You have not tempered any of your comments with even the slightest acknowledgement that good teachers are out there- they are the overwhelming majority.

2. Teachers have very little choice to practice their profession without becoming part of a union. Opportunities do exist, but these options are very undesirable compared to conditions offered in the public sector. You really can't blame a teacher for choosing the more attractive job can you? Is it any fault of a new teacher that unions have been developed before they became one?

The union has serious pitfalls, and I get frustrated with my union more than I care to discuss. With that said, unions are critical if the powers that be have an attitude and line of thinking even remotely close to yours. You make a case for unions.

81

i think you are getting me and speedy confused.

i've not bashed the teachers for the job they have done....i've bashed them for striking. i've bashed them for giving away $32M in tax dollars to a corrupt union. Yup, i said corrupt. It's a chicago union, how can it not be corrupt.

I've bashed them for crying poor when the school system is under water. Come to the real world and see what happens when your employer's expenses outpace revenue by millions upon millions of dollars.

i've bashed administrators. guarentee there is bloat there.

take the admin money and the union dues and you have your self what 60M of funds to play with for school supplies/AC/more teachers.

don't even get me started on pensions.

cornnifer

DS1119 wrote:

How should a teacher's perrformance be assessed then? And I'm being serious. If we're not supposed to look at graduation rates, standardized test scoring, college admission rates, etc. what should we be looking at?

It's tricky, granted. However, assessing teacher performance and competence based on the factors you mentioned is to assess teachers the same way you would, for example, production workers at an automobile plant. You can't do that. It isn't like, say, an electrician, who flips a switch and the lights don't come on, or a carpenter who can't seem to get his measurements correct and the houses keep falling down. For teachers, there are many other variables to consider. Why are we not placing any burden of responsibility on the students themselves! If a student doesn't care at all or put forth any effort, if the students legal guardians don't care or place any expectations on the student, if the community doesn't promote a strong student work ethic, than all the teacher is doing is providing free daycare and little else should be expected. If you send an electrician into a house with licorice ropes in place of copper wire, and then fire him when the lights don't light up, it probably wouldn't be considered an accurate assessment of that electricians performance. Generally speaking workers can be assessed by their output. Their output depends almost solely on them. For teachers, that is no where near true.

Kat

Closed for review.

Problem posts removed. See Posting Guidelines.

lukin2006

I live in an automotive town...and right now they are in negotiations with the Detroit 3...and the one thing I hear people complain about (especially those who don't work there) is their pay, pension and benefits. Its the same thing here with the Chicago teachers...seems more and more people have this attitude "if I don't get those perks, why do they?" am I correct?

elvistheking44

Strike is certainly for the kids........especially the student athletes. :roll:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/videogall ... l-72200032

Also, starting to here of a class action suit against the CTU by parents. Our tax dollars pay for the salaries and they aren't getting education for their children........

Hartydog

lukin2006 wrote:

I live in an automotive town...and right now they are in negotiations with the Detroit 3...and the one thing I hear people complain about (especially those who don't work there) is their pay, pension and benefits. Its the same thing here with the Chicago teachers...seems more and more people have this attitude "if I don't get those perks, why do they?" am I correct?

My biggest problem with some of the unions is for example: a lot of school districts base layoffs on seniority. Therefore as long as you've been there for a long time you stay. Doesn't matter if you're doing a great or terrible job. You get to stay simply because you've been there a long time.

bootlegger10

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

Why would you need an answer to this question? It's obvious- it can go wherever they choose. It's money they contributed to from their salaries. Duh.

(...)

2. Teachers have very little choice to practice their profession without becoming part of a union. Opportunities do exist, but these options are very undesirable compared to conditions offered in the public sector. You really can't blame a teacher for choosing the more attractive job can you? Is it any fault of a new teacher that unions have been developed before they became one?

The union has serious pitfalls, and I get frustrated with my union more than I care to discuss. With that said, unions are critical if the powers that be have an attitude and line of thinking even remotely close to yours. You make a case for unions.

From your own words, it sounds to me like the teachers don't have much of a choice in paying their union dues, and if it was their choice they would probably keep the union dues in their pockets. But, because the only way they can teach in the biggest school system in Chicago is to pay the union, they have to pay the dues if they want employment.

So now we circle back to the original point 81 is making. Tax money pays the salaries that union dues are required to be paid out of. It essentially is tax money paying the unions directly. Unions seem to be working against the students and taxpayers here, which you would think the tax money would support the students and taxpayers.

81

$32M flushed down the union drain annually in Chicago....

and since it's not about the salaries (yeah right)...i wonder how many text books $32M would buy? how many AC units to cool off the summer heat (you know when school is not in session save a few peeps). hell, that would buy you 320 teachers at an all in rate (salaries, taxes benifits) of 100K per teacher.

besides lining the pockets of union bosses, where does that $32M go? can't even use it to buy shirts. gotta buy your own shirt for 10 or 11 bucks. betting the union paid 5 or less for those shirts.

sorry teachers., just can't get behind the chicago teachers union.

elvistheking44

81 wrote:

$32M flushed down the union drain annually in Chicago....

and since it's not about the salaries (yeah right)...i wonder how many text books $32M would buy? how many AC units to cool off the summer heat (you know when school is not in session save a few peeps). hell, that would buy you 320 teachers at an all in rate (salaries, taxes benifits) of 100K per teacher.

besides lining the pockets of union bosses, where does that $32M go? can't even use it to buy shirts. gotta buy your own shirt for 10 or 11 bucks. betting the union paid 5 or less for those shirts.

sorry teachers., just can't get behind the chicago teachers union.

Well said, the support for this that was there from the parents is just about gone. Its gonna start getting real nasty between parents and teachers by weeks end......

bootlegger10

I just can't understand in an economy that is struggling at best, a state near bankruptcy (Illinois), and a school system near bankruptcy (Chicago Public Schools) that these teachers feel like they should have leverage to turn down 16% pay increases. They should be happy they have jobs. Sorry, right now the leverage is with the employers in fields where the workforce is larger than the jobs available.

If I were a Chicago parent who was working two jobs for half the pay of the teachers, or didn't have a job at all, I would be livid at these teachers. I just can never understand how these union employees can't figure out they are pushing themselves out of jobs by forcing these high salaries and pensions. The auto industry was going bankrupt because the union employees were getting paid way too much.

lukin2006

Hartydog wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

I live in an automotive town...and right now they are in negotiations with the Detroit 3...and the one thing I hear people complain about (especially those who don't work there) is their pay, pension and benefits. Its the same thing here with the Chicago teachers...seems more and more people have this attitude "if I don't get those perks, why do they?" am I correct?

My biggest problem with some of the unions is for example: a lot of school districts base layoffs on seniority. Therefore as long as you've been there for a long time you stay. Doesn't matter if you're doing a great or terrible job. You get to stay simply because you've been there a long time.

Doesn't really address the question...it seems to me more and more people have this attitude "if I don't have those perks, then they shouldn't". Why do so many people care about the perks of others? Where not talking about wealthy people, mostly middle class.

As for layoffs based on seniority...I much prefer that system as to "he/she is a better ass kisser" so he/she doesn't get laid off.

bootlegger10

lukin2006 wrote:

Hartydog wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

I live in an automotive town...and right now they are in negotiations with the Detroit 3...and the one thing I hear people complain about (especially those who don't work there) is their pay, pension and benefits. Its the same thing here with the Chicago teachers...seems more and more people have this attitude "if I don't get those perks, why do they?" am I correct?

My biggest problem with some of the unions is for example: a lot of school districts base layoffs on seniority. Therefore as long as you've been there for a long time you stay. Doesn't matter if you're doing a great or terrible job. You get to stay simply because you've been there a long time.

Doesn't really address the question...it seems to me more and more people have this attitude "if I don't have those perks, then they shouldn't". Why do so many people care about the perks of others? Where not talking about wealthy people, mostly middle class.

As for layoffs based on seniority...I much prefer that system as to "he/she is a better ass kisser" so he/she doesn't get laid off.

These perks are bankrupting the school systems and auto industries. That is why some people are commenting. Teachers with these perks that many Americans do not have are on strike because they want more. The taxpayers have to pay for all of these perks. You may have noticed that the US and most municipalities are cruising to bankruptcy.

81

Why do i care about these perks? Really? You asked that?

Who do you think pays for the perks? Let me give you a hint. Joe Taxpayer

Thirty Bills Unpaid

bootlegger10 wrote:

I just can't understand in an economy that is struggling at best, a state near bankruptcy (Illinois), and a school system near bankruptcy (Chicago Public Schools) that these teachers feel like they should have leverage to turn down 16% pay increases. They should be happy they have jobs. Sorry, right now the leverage is with the employers in fields where the workforce is larger than the jobs available.

If I were a Chicago parent who was working two jobs for half the pay of the teachers, or didn't have a job at all, I would be livid at these teachers. I just can never understand how these union employees can't figure out they are pushing themselves out of jobs by forcing these high salaries and pensions. The auto industry was going bankrupt because the union employees were getting paid way too much.

There seems to be some disinformation about. From what I read, the teacher's union turned down 2%. An independent arbitrator suggested 15-20%.

I suggested that if people are so strongly opposed to teachers making a good living... then maybe we should adopt a 2 year diploma program at community colleges for people to receive their accreditation instead of 5-6 years at a university. Then we could pay them an 'okay' wage without the pension and other benefits that so many people seem to be opposed to as well!

This way, to become a teacher... you wouldn't have to: forgo 5-6 years of working and earning a wage; spend obscene amounts of cash at a university to receive your accreditation; and enter a job that typically pays $40-45,000 in its first year. It's tough to be down approximately $300,000 out of the gates (years sacrificed at school not being able to work combined with debts accumulated at university) and earn $40,000 for your efforts. The wage of $70,000 has been tossed around- without having looked at the CPS pay grid... I can confidently tell you that is the wage a teacher makes after (typically) 7-8 years of service.

I'm not sure you would be motivating good people to seek careers in teaching, but your 'economic' problem is solved right? It seems as if people on this forum might prefer such a model. Am I correct?

Nobody gets into teaching to become rich. Most get into teaching for the right reasons.

Don't get me wrong- there are plenty of problems within the education system. Accountability being a major one, but let's get real... there are plenty of excellent teachers who more than deserve their wages and benefits. People should not forget about them by ruthlessly slamming the teaching profession and calling them nothing more than greedy.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

81 wrote:

Why do i care about these perks? Really? You asked that?

Who do you think pays for the perks? Let me give you a hint. Joe Taxpayer

And I pay a ton of taxes for our medical system. None in my family are sick. We don't smoke. We maintain as healthy a lifestyle as possible. Yet... I pay for the people that cannot stay away from the trough at the Golden Corral and for the people that smoke two packs a day.

I pay a ton of taxes for publically funded defence lawyer teams going through multiple appeals for the pedophile rapist.

I can give you a dozen more examples of taxpayers' wasted money. You think that the teachers and the schools are the leeches? Know your enemy.

You don't support a strong education system? Don't you think it might be our best bet at proactively curbing many of the problems we face today?