CTU is Going on Strike

[Iwritecode]

I do a lot of legal aid.

 

None of them are supporting the teachers, they just want their kids back in school so they dont get fired for taking days off. A lot of people are concerned that they are going to lose their jobs because they have to stay home to take care of their kids.

 

I went to the protests to try and see how many "regular" people were there, not many.

 

I don't understand why this is such a problem for so many people. What do they do with their kids the other 180 days/year they aren't in school?

[StrangeSox]

I don't understand why this is such a problem for so many people. What do they do with their kids the other 180 days/year they aren't in school?

 

There are a lot more options in the summer.

[Soxbadger]

I don't understand why this is such a problem for so many people. What do they do with their kids the other 180 days/year they aren't in school?

 

Summer camp, summer jobs, a million other things that people plan for. Some parents get part time jobs during the school year.

 

 

[Soxbadger]

There was just an advertisement against the Union.

 

Pretty shocking.

[LittleHurt05]

There was just an advertisement against the Union.

 

Pretty shocking.

 

Was Robert E. Lee in it?

[Soxbadger]

He aint nuthin but a yankee supporter. Give me Stonewall or give me death.

[caulfield12]

Romney told the donors:

 

There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what. ... These are people who pay no income tax. My job is is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.

 

Romney seems to be referring to the estimated 47 percent of Americans who did not owe federal income taxes in 2011 because their incomes were so low that they qualified for a tax credit, or because they didn't work at all. Last year, 22 percent of people who didn't owe income taxes were elderly people on Social Security, and an additional 17 percent were students, disabled people or the unemployed. More than 60 percent of the group were low-income workers, many of whom qualified for the child tax credit or the earned income tax credit. (These workers did pay payroll taxes for Social Security and other programs.)

 

www.yahoonews.com

[StrangeSox]

There was just an advertisement against the Union.

 

Pretty shocking.

I I've seen those for several days now. i don't know why it's shocking, though.

[Balta1701]

Romney told the donors:

 

There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what. ... These are people who pay no income tax. My job is is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.

 

Romney seems to be referring to the estimated 47 percent of Americans who did not owe federal income taxes in 2011 because their incomes were so low that they qualified for a tax credit, or because they didn't work at all. Last year, 22 percent of people who didn't owe income taxes were elderly people on Social Security, and an additional 17 percent were students, disabled people or the unemployed. More than 60 percent of the group were low-income workers, many of whom qualified for the child tax credit or the earned income tax credit. (These workers did pay payroll taxes for Social Security and other programs.)

 

www.yahoonews.com

This is all Rahm's fault!

[NorthSideSox72]

Lake Forest is back to school with no teachers (the shocker being Lake Forest had school on Rosh Hashanah). In my opinion the teachers have overplayed their hand.

 

These are, in my view, two very different scenarios (Lake Forest vs Chicago). CPS teachers make about half what LF teachers do, and CPS is pushing for lots of different changes, many of which are directly beneficial to students (like class size limits). LF, with their 6 figure average salaries, is just asking for more money, at a time when government is feeling the economic pinch. I really don't have any sympathy at all for the Lake Forest teachers, and they definitely overplayed their hand. CPS, I actually agree with the teachers on some of what they are trying to do.

 

[Y2HH]

These are, in my view, two very different scenarios (Lake Forest vs Chicago). CPS teachers make about half what LF teachers do, and CPS is pushing for lots of different changes, many of which are directly beneficial to students (like class size limits). LF, with their 6 figure average salaries, is just asking for more money, at a time when government is feeling the economic pinch. I really don't have any sympathy at all for the Lake Forest teachers, and they definitely overplayed their hand. CPS, I actually agree with the teachers on some of what they are trying to do.

 

The only thing the CPS teachers are trying to do is get more money, be it in the form of direct compensation, or added benefits/pension benefits, the same exact thing the LF teachers are doing. The difference, however, is the LF teachers aren't trying to disguise that fact...they're just saying give us more. The CPS teachers are using these added benefits for the students, which would be nice, to achieve their primary goal, and that's better benefits/more money for themselves...they don't actually care about the other stuff, though. They just realize that by tying it all together, strengthens their other positions.

 

I have no sympathy for any of them.

[Balta1701]

The only thing the CPS teachers are trying to do is get more money, be it in the form of direct compensation, or added benefits/pension benefits, the same exact thing the LF teachers are doing. The difference, however, is the LF teachers aren't trying to disguise that fact...they're just saying give us more. The CPS teachers are using these added benefits for the students, which would be nice, to achieve their primary goal, and that's better benefits/more money for themselves...they don't actually care about the other stuff, though. They just realize that by tying it all together, strengthens their other positions.

 

I have no sympathy for any of them.

You have some impressive telepathic abilities to know for certain from the minds of the teachers that the evaluation stuff and class size stuff are simply unimportant. How many mind-melds did you need to conduct to establish this? Is your selected population statistically significant?

[Y2HH]

You have some impressive telepathic abilities to know for certain from the minds of the teachers that the evaluation stuff and class size stuff are simply unimportant. How many mind-melds did you need to conduct to establish this? Is your selected population statistically significant?

 

This was a stupid counter argument.

 

I base it on the fact that this is EXACTLY what unions do via collective bargaining, over and over. You don't need to be a mind reader to see it, either, you just have to open your eyes, which you've shown you won't do with that ridiculous post.

Edited September 18, 2012 by Y2HH

[Balta1701]

This was a stupid counter argument.

 

I base it on the fact that this is EXACTLY what unions do via collective bargaining, over and over. You don't need to be a mind reader to see it, either, you just have to open your eyes, which you've shown you won't do with that ridiculous post.

And right there we have a good summary. None of the other benefits workers have ever gotten are important. 5 day work week? Child labor laws? Improving classroom conditions? All disingenuous and you have no right to thank unions for any of those, you should be thanking the generous people who granted those benefits. They're the good guys. Unions are just greedy and out for money, totally unlike anyone else.

[Y2HH]

And right there we have a good summary. None of the other benefits workers have ever gotten are important. 5 day work week? Child labor laws? Improving classroom conditions? All disingenuous and you have no right to thank unions for any of those, you should be thanking the generous people who granted those benefits. They're the good guys. Unions are just greedy and out for money, totally unlike anyone else.

 

This is a completely different argument now.

 

There was once a use for such unions, that use no longer exists. They're now corrupted, bureaucratic demonizations of what they were originally created to be. And again, if you can't see that, it's because you're sticking your head in the sand purposefully.

 

Businesses CANNOT and would not, in this country, get away with 7 day work weeks, no-child labor laws, etc...all illegal now, with or without unions.

Edited September 18, 2012 by Y2HH

[Balta1701]

This is a completely different argument now.

 

There was once a use for such unions, that use no longer exists.And again, if you can't see that, it's because you're sticking your head in the sand purposefully.

 

Businesses CANNOT and would not, in this country, get away with 7 day work weeks, no-child labor laws, etc...all illegal now, with or without unions.

No, it really isn't. You've basically now said that unions are being honest when they fight for things you deem to be useful, like child labor laws, but being disingenuous when they fight for things like fair evaluations for teachers or reduced class sizes.

 

If "Reduced class sizes" and "Better teaching conditions in Chicago Schools" come out of this as a side-benefit of the Unions pretending to argue in favor of that, then the Unions have done a pretty good thing and been incredibly useful.

 

Why do you think those things are illegal?

[southsider2k5]

The only thing the CPS teachers are trying to do is get more money, be it in the form of direct compensation, or added benefits/pension benefits, the same exact thing the LF teachers are doing. The difference, however, is the LF teachers aren't trying to disguise that fact...they're just saying give us more. The CPS teachers are using these added benefits for the students, which would be nice, to achieve their primary goal, and that's better benefits/more money for themselves...they don't actually care about the other stuff, though. They just realize that by tying it all together, strengthens their other positions.

 

I have no sympathy for any of them.

 

The difference between the two is the Chicago teachers aren't allowed to strike because of economic reasons. They had to make up other things to "justify" their strike. Apparently Lake Forest has no such restrictions.

[Balta1701]

The difference between the two is the Chicago teachers aren't allowed to strike because of economic reasons. They had to make up other things to "justify" their strike. Apparently Lake Forest has no such restrictions.

Wait, that sounds like the opposite of everything that's been said here? Everything I've raid says that the strike has to be about payroll and that they can't strike over "Class sizes and evaluations", so to deal with the toher issues they have to have payroll issues included. Am I wrong?

[Jenksismyhero]

No, it really isn't. You've basically now said that unions are being honest when they fight for things you deem to be useful, like child labor laws, but being disingenuous when they fight for things like fair evaluations for teachers or reduced class sizes.

 

If "Reduced class sizes" and "Better teaching conditions in Chicago Schools" come out of this as a side-benefit of the Unions pretending to argue in favor of that, then the Unions have done a pretty good thing and been incredibly useful.

 

Why do you think those things are illegal?

 

Apples and oranges. Banning child labor and sweat shops and reducing class sizes by 3-5 students are two entirely different things. Unions were needed when coal towns raped their workers in every possible way. That never happens now because of the massive shift in labor laws in this country. Unions now are just as corrupt as the employers they are negotiating with.

[Balta1701]

Apples and oranges. Banning child labor and sweat shops and reducing class sizes by 3-5 students are two entirely different things. Unions were needed when coal towns raped their workers in every possible way. That never happens now because of the massive shift in labor laws in this country. Unions now are just as corrupt as the employers they are negotiating with.

[Jenksismyhero]

Wait, that sounds like the opposite of everything that's been said here? Everything I've raid says that the strike has to be about payroll and that they can't strike over "Class sizes and evaluations", so to deal with the toher issues they have to have payroll issues included. Am I wrong?

 

They started the strike on the pretense that they wanted a pay raise. The CPS has given them what they want on that end, but the delegates are refusing to OK the agreement because they also want the extra stuff - reduced class sizes, no school closings, teacher transfer priority, etc.

[Jenksismyhero]

 

Yeah, please give me an example of where a company literally owns a town (the bar, grocery store, etc) and employs 90% of the population. Please give me an example of anything close to that in the last 30 years.

[Balta1701]

They started the strike on the pretense that they wanted a pay raise. The CPS has given them what they want on that end, but the delegates are refusing to OK the agreement because they also want the extra stuff - reduced class sizes, no school closings, teacher transfer priority, etc.

But 10 posts up I was just told that all the other issues other than the pay raise were distractions and the union really didn't care about them. THat's what I challenged in the first place.

[Jenksismyhero]

But 10 posts up I was just told that all the other issues other than the pay raise were distractions and the union really didn't care about them. THat's what I challenged in the first place.

 

Well yeah, he's wrong on that, unless he's throwing in "easier job" (less students, shorter school day, more guarantees that a s***ty school won't be closed) as a "benefit."

[Y2HH]

Well yeah, he's wrong on that, unless he's throwing in "easier job" (less students, shorter school day, more guarantees that a s***ty school won't be closed) as a "benefit."

 

My point was simply this.

 

They're being greedy douchebags just like the LF teachers are being, only the LF teachers are being more up front about it.

 

That is all.