Labor actions like the current strike by the Chicago Teachers Union usually involves two sides presenting very different takes on the important issues that separate them. The New York Times story on the strike (9/10/12) by Monica Davey gives a fairly comprehensive account of what the school district thinks about its offers to the union. But the union’s side of the story is hard to find.
Chicago teachers on strike.
The Times calls it “a dispute over wages, job security and teacher evaluations.” That isn’t false, but that framing makes it seem like teachers are looking to protect a narrow set of interests. If you read the union’s side of the story, you know they are stressing a different set of issues—from class size to charter expansion to enhanced social services in the schools.
The second paragraph stresses the problems this will cause for parents (presumably those who aren’t themselves teachers):
Coming as the school year had barely begun for many, the impasse and looming strike were expected to affect hundreds of thousands of families here, some of whom had spent the weekend scrambling to rearrange work schedules, find alternative programs and hire baby sitters if school was out for some time.
When it’s time to talk specifics, the Times goes right to Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s office:
Late Sunday, Mr. Emanuel told reporters that school district officials had presented a strong offer to the union, including what some officials described as what would amount to a 16 percent raise for many teachers over four years—and that only two minor issues remained. “This is totally unnecessary, it’s avoidable and our kids do not deserve this,” Mr. Emanuel said, describing the decision as “a strike of choice.”
Well, that could be his offer, according to “some officials”—and maybe it would “amount to” such a raise for “many teachers.” Or it could be something else. Some union officials claim Emanuel canceled a previously negotiated pay increase. In any event, part of Emanuel’s plan is to lengthen the school day by 20 percent; does this mean that teachers are being asked to work longer for less money?
(Read this exchange between ABC host Terry Moran and political science professor Corey Robin and Doug Henwood of the Left Business Observer on whether these salary figures should be taken at face value. The short answer is no.)
The Times goes on:
Negotiations have taken place behind closed doors since November, concerning wages and benefits, whether laid-off teachers should be considered for new openings, extra pay for those with more experience and higher degrees, and evaluations. District officials said the teachers’ average pay is $76,000 a year.
When you see references to “evaluations,” you should know this is about tying teacher evaluations—and hence a teacher’s job—to student performance on tests. There is considerable controversy over the validity of various testing/evaluation schemes.
And does that salary figure represent a teacher’s wages, or salary plus benefits like health care and retirement? I haven’t a clue, but a CBS reporter found that the union pegs the average salary at about $5,000 less than what the school district claims.
This strike could have national political implications—just like the fight in Wisconsin over collective bargaining. This means the story is important, and at times can look pretty complex. This Times account gives readers very little information; what they do give makes it seem like Chicago teachers walked away from what “amounts to” a very generous offer for “many teachers.”
Notice how the Times cloaks its cheerleading for the mayor with frettage over how the strike will impact parents and students.
What you won’t see in its coverage is much, if any, attention paid to the significant numbers of those very same parents and students out on the picket line with those “selfish” teachers.
Today’s DEMOCRACY NOW! provides much of what’s missing in the corpress’ lopsided take on the issues.
Speaking of picket lines
Dear Misleader once made a pledge to walk them with unions.
But he doesn’t want to walk with them.
He wants to walk over them.
And many union “leaders” lie down to let him.
These folks don’t seem to have an inclination to that make that declination, do they?
The horrific conditions in major urban centers are the product of the destruction of infrastructure and industry and an offensive against working class living standards going back decades. Now the same ruling class that is responsible for the crisis is utilizing it to justify the destruction of all of the gains previously won by teachers in decades of struggle.
The ruling class in the United States has a long-term strategy of undermining and dismantling the public education system. This is why the entire political establishment is viciously opposed to the Chicago teachers strike.
It is not simply a matter of one city. The concern is that if the Chicago teachers are not decisively defeated, teachers throughout the country—and workers in general—will be encouraged to fight back…
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2012/sep2012/chic-s12.shtml
as what would amount to a 16 percent raise for many teachers over four years
That’s what something like 4 percent per year, which can easily be eaten up with “Fees and insurance and retirement.” Every pay raise I have gotten since working at the college has been ‘consumed’ by the inflation of the area, the increased fees they charge for everything, and higher contribution to retirement so the Regents can pocket upwards of $55 a year in personal expenses and such.
So it would be no stretch of the imagination to say that 16% means really nothing in the long run.
It’s also worth noting that well over 90% of the comments to that article were supportive of the teachers and what they were striking for.
Nicholas Kristoff ran a similar column denouncing the teacher’s strike, and again, well over 90% of the comments supported the teachers and the strike.
The Times ran a third article coming out against the teacher’s strike, but allowed no comments.
What should I get paid? I have yet to see a newspaper tell me my worth because they really do not know what this job entials. Why is it that those in the private sector have no limits on their potential but those in the public sector do? Why is my family considered the sacrificial lamb? If you want to retain quality teachers within the profession, you must pay them good wages. Nearly a third of the teachers leave this profession within five years. What’s wrong with this picture?
The race to the bottom lives on. Until the middle class understands that there’s a war out there, a war against us, we will continue to lose members. As members of the middle class, whether Democrat, Republican or Independent, we need to begin to become aware that millions of us are continuously voting against our own economic interests. Everytime you hear the phrase ” Job Creators”, or “Ever got a job from a poor man?” you talking to either a millionaire or a sucker.
A raise for people trying to educate our children? Unconscionable!!!! Next we will have other peons asking for stuff in a society that thinks only of the 1%…give those guys another tax break will ya!
While the Chicago teacher do have some legitimate concernes and most of thier requests seem for the most par reasonable I against them striking, Government (public) employees have an obligaion to the people. When workers go on strike in the private sector the people are at the most just slightly inocnvenianced. If workers at a Grocery store/Supermarket go on strke the people can go to another grocery store/Supermarket but, if teacher in a city or town go on strike there is no school and it is the student who are suffering.
Apparently M.S. Smith thinks public employees should just be slaves, taking whatever they are offered, whether he considers the offer “reasonable” or not. Without the right to strike, collective bargaining is collective begging. I guess that is all right with Mr. Smith, who considers them public (ie, his) servants. That Rahm — serious progressives are “f**king retards” — Emanuel wants teachers to work a longer day for the same pay should remind us that workers struck and died for the eight-hour day. This is what happens to people who get all their information and almost all their ideas from the NYTimes and WaPo — Fox News for people who can read.
I always thought bringing Rahm into his inner circle was the worst thing Obama could of done.The pit bull is like a bad Omen spreading bad feelings everywhere he goes.That said I love that this time he finds himself on the opposite side of the coin.No longer can he help with a pen stroke, and believe money shall fall from the trees(or from a rich mans pockets).No longer can he just generate unending debt and get away with it so easily.No now he must deal with pay roles and budgets in the real world.He must deal with a teachers union that in Chicago has high pay/great benefits ,and lousy results.During a time when most Americans have low pay…and holding their job depends on results.The same problem with the teachers in Neshaminy,Pa is going on.People there are strongly AGAINST the teachers by the way.There the teachers union has refused to pay ANYTHING into their healthcare.The times article does give little information.It is time the people got that information.This should be an open process with open hearings.All collective bargaining sessions should be on TVin this matter.All contracts public knowledge BEFORE being signed.After all the deal they sign behind closed doors is not their money.It is the money of those who live there.Drag Rahm and the teachers union into the light of day.If the teachers want more money and small classrooms with better hours then let them plead their case to the people.Not lawyers in the dark of night.
Just wait, McSchool is coming. And with it the impoverishment of many stable, middle class towns. Teachers (who are not overpaid by the way – and I am a tech writer, not a teacher) substantially contribute to a stable tax base in most towns. In the town I grew up in, approximately 30 percent of the homes had a family member who taught in a pubolic school. Teachers made massive contributions to local businesses, car purchases, home goods, real estate purchases, etc. Destroy teaching as a middle class profession and you can say goodbye to a significant portion of your middle class who buy things and invest in homes because they have relatively stable jobs. Say goodbye even to family stability in many cases. If you have no promise of a decent income, you are much more likely to have family disintegration.
Just wait, McSchool is coming. And with it the impoverishment of many stable, middle class towns. Teachers (who are not overpaid by the way – and I am a tech writer, not a teacher) substantially contribute to a stable tax base in most towns. In the town I grew up in, approximately 30 percent of the homes had a family member who taught in a public school. Teachers made massive contributions to local businesses, car purchases, home goods, real estate purchases, etc. Destroy teaching as a middle class profession and you can say goodbye to a significant portion of your middle class who buy things and invest in homes because they have relatively stable jobs. Say goodbye even to family stability in many cases. If you have no promise of a decent income, you are much more likely to have family disintegration.
auspicious bunny
Im a little worried that what you just said sound like subsidizing teachers to keep the tax base stable.That makes some economic sense, but isn’t that kind of true for every profession?In the sense that if we all were better paid …or paid a great wage,wouldn’t we all contribute more to the tax base?The problem is not me opening a school and hiring the best teachers at 200 grand apiece that parents pay to send their kids education.That is free market.The problem is how does the tax base afford what the teachers are asking for?
Solidarity Forever! to all of the Chicago teachers putting themselves on the line for the value of public education!
Yes yes Tishado putting themselves on the line for their unions…..I mean the value of their contract.I mean the value of public education.
Right on, Bob Young! And thanks for that, tishado.
Michael E — you replied to my earlier post that you are “worried” that what I said about teachers as an important part of our tax base “sounds like subsidizing teachers to keep the tax base stable.”
Paying a professional salary to well-trained, certified and deserving public school teachers, who go to work and work hard every day and who have invested in their own education and certifications with “subsidizing” anyone.
Teachers are an important part of our tax base, yes — that is true. I assumed it was obvious it is also true that they are hardworking, professional members of our society and our communities — who deserve competitive salaries and decent benefits.