CTU is Going on Strike

[DukeNukeEm]

I hate to post this again, but this is just too hilarious:

 

"The median household income for a Chicagoan is $38,625 thus the average Chicagoan who works 240 days a year makes appx. $19/hour."

 

Hahahahahaha. f***ing awesome.

That makes total sense. Median income exists to show what the average person makes, not what people make on average. Let me guess, you went to Chicago Public Schools?

[cabiness42]

I talked to my stepmother last night, who is a teacher in South Bend. She said that Chicago teachers make 20% more than them, have 10% shorter workdays, and better benefits. She has zero sympathy for the Chicago teachers and she's the most pro-union person I've ever known.

[Y2HH]

The issue with this is timing, or a lack thereof.

 

We have a presidential election approaching, where all the news is about the economy...states having their credits downgraded, cities hemorrhaging money, raising sticker fees, sales taxes, property taxes, etc...people being laid off, high unemployment, salary freezes...and in the midst of this, we have teachers wanting additional raises/benefits/perks to the tune of going on strike.

 

Ignoring the fact that a lot of struggling families really needed their kids to be back in school so they could work part time, or, you know...get a f***ing education. So in the face of all of that, they want me/you/us to sympathize with them? I know teachers, I won't sympathize with them...so I sure as hell won't sympathize with the ones I don't know, either.

[StrangeSox]

Here's the CT segments about the strike:

 

http://chicagotonight.wttw.com/2012/09/10/...teachers-strike

http://chicagotonight.wttw.com/2012/09/10/...reform-illinois

[StrangeSox]

I have nothing to contribute about the actual issue at hand but teachers really do b**** more than any other profession.

 

Based on what my wife tells me, this is true.

[Balta1701]

That's the average salary, which indicates the teacher has worked 14 years.

 

Also, why didn't you bother trying to refute the second part of my post?

 

Lastly, I've been trying to find the 16% pay increase proposal from the City of Chicago and not a newspaper article. Anyone got it? Sorry, I really just can't find it. It's probably a moot point since it seems that the unions have agreed to it. Thanks.

 

 

I haven't been able to find that number, except for newspaper articles citing what CPS alleges to have offered. FWIW, The Tribune cites that same number in its editorial column that will be published tomorrow.

 

But yes, the dollars seem to been agreed upon.

Here's what I had yesterday.

Regarding compensation, the Chicago Teachers Union says the raises proposed by CPS do not fairly compensate them for a 4-percent raise that they did not get and were supposed to get previously -- and, they say, the offer also does not compensate them either for the longer school day being implemented.

 

The district officials say what they can offer is limited simply because they are threatened by a $1 billion deficit at the end of this school year. CPS Board President David Vitale does believe that a fair offer is on the table. He said the deal comes with a 3-percent raise the first year, and 2 percent the second, third and fourth years of the deal.

3% followed by successive 2%'s comes to just over 9% raise over the lifetime of the deal. Restoring the 4% raise they didn't get still doesn't push things to 16%.

 

The assumption seems to be that there are some other seniority related increases that will offset the remainder, but basically as far as I could tell yesterday the raises on paper were nothing more than cost of living increases.

[Cerbaho-WG]

That makes total sense. Median income exists to show what the average person makes, not what people make on average. Let me guess, you went to Chicago Public Schools?

 

That's only true in a normal distribution. Income is not normally distributed.

[StrangeSox]

statz skool is now in session

[Cerbaho-WG]

I don't think your second point is worth arguing...

 

Why don't you both to refute the fact that they are walking out on their students?

 

So I'm right. Thanks.

 

The fact that they're walking out is such a red herring. Are conservatives here enraged because 1) they're walking out on students or 2) people are using their rights to unionize, collectively bargain and strike? If you say number one, you're full of s***. Full stop.

[iamshack]

Hey buddy keep missing the point of that one example everyone here could relate to!

Sorry buddy, but you made this lame point like 5 times in the thread. It was really a laughable point.

[StrangeSox]

Sorry buddy, but you made this lame point like 5 times in the thread. It was really a laughable point.

 

The point wasn't "oh no, they can't post on SoxTalk!"

 

edit: but keep the work-hours posts flooding in! There were 112 posts in this thread between 8am and 5pm yesterday.

Edited September 11, 2012 by StrangeSox

[iamshack]

The point wasn't "oh no, they can't post on SoxTalk!"

 

edit: but keep the work-hours posts flooding in! There were 112 posts in this thread between 8am and 5pm yesterday.

This still isn't even a valid point...this is about a lack of internet access during their working hours. It has nothing to do with some increased level of output or some difficult task they must do.

 

I guarantee you the level of analysis I do on a daily basis requires a higher level of thinking than just about any CPS teacher does in all of Chicago.

 

So because I am also able to post on Soxtalk simultaneously that means they should go on strike?

 

I mean what the hell is the point you are even trying to make?

Edited September 11, 2012 by iamshack

[StrangeSox]

Some more background on how much or how little teachers actually work:

 

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2011/06/25/...worlds-longest/

 

 

Among 27 member nations tracked by the OECD, U.S. primary-school educators spent 1,097 hours a year teaching despite only spending 36 weeks a year in the classroom — among the lowest among the countries tracked. That was more than 100 hours more than New Zealand, in second place at 985 hours, despite students in that country going to school for 39 weeks. The OECD average is 786 hours.

 

And that’s just the time teachers spend on instruction. Including hours teachers spend on work at home and outside the classroom, American primary-school educators spend 1,913 working in a year. According to data from the comparable year in a Labor Department survey, an average full-time employee works 1,932 hours a year spread out over 48 weeks (excluding two weeks vacation and federal holidays).

 

So, even though they get lots of time off, they still put in almost as many hours as the average full-time employee.

[Soxbadger]

So I'm right. Thanks.

 

The fact that they're walking out is such a red herring. Are conservatives here enraged because 1) they're walking out on students or 2) people are using their rights to unionize, collectively bargain and strike? If you say number one, you're full of s***. Full stop.

 

Im pretty sure that most conservatives would call me a liberal.

 

Im not enraged, I just dont believe that CTU is living in reality. Unions were created so that the worker would have better bargaining power with the employer. A classic example is the Home Stead Strike, where even though Carnegie Steel was making barrels of money, they tried to REDUCE wages 22%.

 

Unions were not created so a class of people can create a barrier of entry to a necessary public service. Unions were not created so that necessary public interests could be leveraged against regular common people.

 

There is no Carnegie here, there are just Chicago taxpayers who have already paid all they can pay. Usually there is risk for the union, if they go to far, if they ask for to much, the business may fail and no one has a job. Rahm cant just fold CPS, he cant say that the teachers have become unreasonable and there is no way that CPS will ever be fixed. So the teachers can do whatever they want, because they know no matter how unreasonable they are, there will be a job for them.

 

If you would like to know more about my stance, perhaps you should read the Walker-Wisconsin thread where I fully supported unions and went after Walker. So if someone as pro-union as I am cant agree with CTU, they have a significant issue.

[StrangeSox]

This still isn't even a valid point...this is about a lack of internet access during their working hours. It has nothing to do with some increased level of output or some difficult task they must do.

 

I guarantee you the level of analysis I do on a daily basis requires a higher level of thinking than just about any CPS teacher does in all of Chicago.

 

So because I am also able to post on Soxtalk simultaneously that means they should go on strike?

 

I mean what the hell is the point you are even trying to make?

 

I explicitly stated what my point was several pages ago. It isn't about lack of internet access or the total level of mental difficulty of their job.

 

[Soxbadger]

So, even though they get lots of time off, they still put in almost as many hours as the average full-time employee.

 

What full time employee only works 1,000 hours per year?

 

Some firms expect attorneys to bill 200 hours a month (50 hours per week). That is 2,400 hours.

[iamshack]

What full time employee only works 1,000 hours per year?

 

Some firms expect attorneys to bill 200 hours a month (50 hours per week). That is 2,400 hours.

No one else does work outside of the office except teachers.

[bmags]

Has anyone else taken on how comparing things with median on one data and average on the next isn't really that misleading?

[StrangeSox]

What full time employee only works 1,000 hours per year?

 

Some firms expect attorneys to bill 200 hours a month (50 hours per week). That is 2,400 hours.

 

Please read the rest of that post and the article for your answer!

[iamshack]

I explicitly stated what my point was several pages ago. It isn't about lack of internet access or the total level of mental difficulty of their job.

And that point was refuted by multiple people. It was pointed out that they administer tests and quizzes to their students while they sit on their phones and text. They show videos. They have reading time and study halls.

 

They certainly don't lecture continuously.

 

I'm willing to agree that their lack of access to a computer and internet continuously like many white collar professions probably reduces the time spent looking at internet sites for personal reasons, but they make up for that in other ways. Just like plenty of white collar professions did prior to the widespread use of the internet in corporate America.

 

 

[StrangeSox]

No one else does work outside of the office except teachers.

 

Many workers do not. That's why it's the average full-time employee hours. When taking into account all of their non-instruction hours, teachers work about half a week less worth of hours in a more compressed schedule.

 

No one is claiming that teachers work more than anyone else in this thread. You're being intentionally obtuse.

[StrangeSox]

And that point was refuted by multiple people. It was pointed out that they administer tests and quizzes to their students while they sit on their phones and text. They show videos. They have reading time and study halls.

 

Tests and quizzes are not given daily. Videos are strongly discouraged in many school districts because it's lazy teaching. Same with silent reading. Much more often than not, teachers are up in front of the classroom for 50+ minutes out of every hour they're instructing.

[Y2HH]

Many workers do not. That's why it's the average full-time employee hours. When taking into account all of their non-instruction hours, teachers work about half a week less worth of hours in a more compressed schedule.

 

No one is claiming that teachers work more than anyone else in this thread. You're being intentionally obtuse.

 

Warden Samuel Norton: What? What did you call me?

 

Andy Dufresne: Obtuse. Is it deliberate?

 

Warden Samuel Norton: Son, you're forgetting yourself.

[Soxbadger]

Please read the rest of that post and the article for your answer!

 

I did read the rest of the post.

 

Once again, you need to read your own post. They only spend 1,000 hours instructing. That is their job. You have been arguing that teachers spend so much time at school teaching, but now by your own admission they only spend 1,000, with almost another 1,000 coming OUTSIDE OF THE CLASSROOM, where they can, POST ON SOXTALK, and take MENTAL BREAKS.

 

Most people go to a job and have to do at least 1,600 hours at the work site (that is 8 hours a day for 200 days), I dont know anyone who has a 48 week work year and gets 2 weeks vacation, plus all federal/state holidays (read your own post for gods sake).

 

1,932 hours a year spread out over 48 weeks (excluding two weeks vacation and federal holidays).

 

Last I checked there were 52 weeks in the year, where did that other month go?

Edited September 11, 2012 by Soxbadger

[StrangeSox]

damn it, I mixed up deliberate and intentional.