It was only a month ago that IEA’s Executive Director Audrey Soglin was still extolling the virtues of Illinois’ Senate Bill 7 at a meeting of the National Council of State Legislators.
She was still claiming it as a national model of school reform. She was still calling it “teacher-led school reform.”
There is no need to tell once more the story behind Senate Bill 7, the role of Jonah Edelman and his Stand for Children organization, the hundreds of thousands of dollars handed out to state legislators and the capitulation – no, not capitulation – the leading role of the IEA in Senate Bill 7 passage by the Illinois legislature.
But I admit that my stomach turned slightly yesterday when I saw a photo of the current IEA leadership holding IEA signs at Saturday’s Solidarity Rally.
I checked to see if “we’re sorry” was printed on them.
It wasn’t.
Among the many factors that led up to the Chicago teachers strike was Senate Bill 7. And it figures in the strike’s resolution.
Among the many issues of concern expressed by delegates and teachers to the settlement framework is the 30% portion of teacher evaluation that is tied to student test performance.
CTU President Karen Lewis and the team of negotiators did the best they could. But Senate Bill 7 makes 30% the floor. Nothing less can be legally bargained according to SB7.
To those who think that the Chicago teachers strike has nothing to do with an attack on collective bargaining, I would argue that it has a lot to do with collective bargaining rights.
Senate Bill 7 put major restrictions of Chicago teachers’ collective bargaining rights. Senate Bill 7 was the Democrat’s version – their answer to – Wisconsin’s Scott Walker.
It includes the now-famous 75% authorization threshold, requiring a three-quarters vote of all CTU members, not just of those voting.
It includes the limit to what is considered areas of mandatory bargaining and the expansion of the areas of permissive bargaining.
It was this part of the law that caused the Mayor to think he could get a judge to invoke an injunction yesterday. And if the strike continues past today, he may still succeed. Circuit Court Judge Ryan has scheduled a hearing for tomorrow.
The most controversial, and restrictive, according to Robert Bruno, director of the Labor Education Program at the University of Chicago-Illinois, was the imposition of “mandatory subjects.”
“SB7 has real implications for the ebb and the flow of the bargaining process,” said Bruno.
That permissive category is very broad, and it encapsulates a lot of the really important items that CPS and CTU are in disagreement over, but under SB7 they can only talk about these subjects and include them in a bargaining agreement if both sides agree to discuss those issues and agree that they are going to include them in the agreement.
In this case, said Bruno, the only subjects that the union can legally strike over are economic subjects – “so it’s about salaries.”
I was taken to task by a former IEA leader for not writing a post congratulating the IEA Board of Directors for canceling their meeting last weekend so that they could attend Saturday’s Solidarity Rally.
Congratulations are not in order.
It is even too late for an apology.
IEA chickens have come home to roost in Chicago.
Fred Klonsky 
You don’t have to “protect me” Fred go ahead use my name if you feel so inclined – I’m not hiding the fact that I support the IEA.
I support the IEA, Bob. But I don’t support the policies of the Ken Swanson – Audrey Soglin – Cinda Klickna leadership and its continued defense of this anti-labor law that they helped enact.
Bob I am a retired lifetime member of the IEA and I feel the same as Fred. The IEA is disturbing in it’s actions and representation (lack of) when it comes to both active and retired membership. It’s precisely this type of action and caution on the IEA”s and NEA”s part that has helped make educators/education the whipping boys of failed political and social policies. We must support all educators for we are the last bastion of hope for what is going on now. We must be able to count on each other because we see that we cannot count on any political party or anyone else , except for fellow workers.
I’m a CPS teacher and I want to thank you for opening my eyes to the real issue that we are facing. Shame on me for not knowing all this before
What’s important is to take your knowledge and share it and support those that are hard at work making things better for all of us.
Thank you, CPS Teacher, for the TERRIFIC rally by the CTU! You have been a shining example to teachers across the country!
Merge the national unions, and vote in Karen Lewis as President!
“In this case, said Bruno, the only subjects that the union can legally strike over are economic subjects – “so it’s about salaries”: Then CTU should ask for more money and stay on strike.
Bob, I support the IEA. Should the fact that I do not support the leadership’s “teacher-led reform agenda” categorize me a someone that doesn’t support IEA? Do you support this agenda? Should I be stigmatized for trying to make my union stronger by questioning the leadership’s motives in supporting “reforms’ that I, as a teacher, know are bad for my students and my profession. Should I be denied information about how IEA develops its plan of action to fight attacks on my pension? Is that the IEA you support?
I watched Swanson give away the farm and Klickna follow in his footsteps. She is uncomfortable being in the spotlight and uncomfortable leading us, especially when trying to follow the outstanding example Lewis has shown. The fiasco of the non-event in Springfield on August 17th that she spoke at and “Saturday – in the Park” for CTU shows this discomfort very graphically.
Bob, I agree 100% with Fred, and I have been saying the same thing to everyone I know.
I support the IEA–LOCALS & MEMBERS (but definitely NOT the current leadership!). I taught in a school district that was an IEA local–my best friend was the president, at one point–and our local was THE BEST. In fact, the last president lost his job–I would say–BECAUSE he was also such a GREAT local president, and continued to fight for the children, the parents/community and the teachers, to his last moment. When I retired, I felt honored that three past presidents were at the party (one, because she was my best friend, and the other two who were teachers at our school, one being that fine gentleman who fought hard for us all). Additionally, the long-time vice president was there (because she was retiring from our building, as well!). I had a party favor for everyone: I had copied the old “Rules for Teachers” from the internet–you know, the ones from the early 19th c.,etc., BEFORE we had a union–“Teachers must not stay out/be seen in town past 8 PM…
teachers must stoke the fire before students’ arrival…teachers must not be married…” (I’m sorry–don’t have exact list but, again, you readers have to know this–if not, Google it!)
Then, I made a short speech to the teachers (esp. the younger ones!) about how important the union is, and how they must stick together to keep it strong. Finally, I gave each of the presidents (& the vice president) a generous gift card, in order to thank them for helping my students (long story, here, about how union intervention saved the sp.ed.
students through the grievance procedure) and all of us (especially me–I was punished for being outspoken more than once in my career!).
Now the teachers in Illinois have been hamstrung by their own treacherous union leaders. For readers of the Chicago Sun-Times, Rev, Jesse Jackson eloquently explains the headache that is SB 7 (thanks Audrey, et.al.) on Page 25–“Big School Issues are ‘Off the Table.'” Tell everyone you know to read it!
He doesn’t mention the elephant in the room by label or by person, but we in the IEA/who have been IEA members KNOW the culprit(s). And, as I have so stated in previous comments–locals, gather your people together and throw the bums out, before they do even MORE harm to you and yours.
Pension reform, anyone?!