I am sure that it has nothing to do with the concerns that we raised here yesterday about transparency and the sniping that has gone on between the IEA and the IRTA, but today IEA President Cinda Klickna released a statement on the IEA website about their intentions to file a suit against SB1. She also called for a united effort on behalf of all pension system members by the organizations that represent us. This is the first we have heard on the subject since SB1 was passed by the Illinois General Assembly nearly a month ago. Good news. We hope the united effort and transparency will continue.
A lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Senate Bill 1, the pension cutting bill passed by the legislature and signed by Gov. Pat Quinn in early December, is being developed by IEA and the other unions that comprise the We Are One Illinois (WAOI) coalition.
That suit is being designed to defend the constitutional rights of hundreds of thousands of active and retired public employees in Illinois’ three major state retirement systems.
IEA’s share of the lawsuit funding will come from the IEA Crisis Fund, which was approved by the 2013 IEA Representative Assembly in anticipation of a constitutional lawsuit. Donations to the Crisis Fund can be made here.
WAOI will challenge SB1 as violating the constitution and ask for a stay of the legislation’s implementation pending a ruling on its constitutionality.
On Friday, December 27, a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of SB1 was filed in Cook County Circuit Court by the Illinois Retired Teachers Association (IRTA) and the Illinois Association of School Administrators (IASA).
The suit covers retirees participating in the Teachers Retirement System and active administrators.
The lawsuits challenging SB1 are not in conflict with each other. It is anticipated that all plaintiffs will be working together. In fact, attorneys for all affected groups have already been in contact and will continue to confer.
According to IEA President Cinda Klickna, “We are all in this together and we will all need to cooperate for the benefit of all the men and women who would (sic) injured by SB1.”
Fred Klonsky 
Here’s to the new year, and let us hope the pension cuts are thrown out for good. If the case is tied up in court, let’s hope at least an injunction until the cuts are thrown out!
“I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together”: really?
Too little too late with regard to Klickna’s message. It’s a kneejerk reaction to yesterday’s blog. Obviously a nerve was hit. With regard to donating to the IEA crisis fund, isn’t that where part of union dues go to, possible litigation? At least that was what I’ve been told for all the years I’ve paid my dues. Why would I contribute more to an association that was willing to negotiate active and retirees’ promised benefits away under the auspices of “shared sacrifice”? And where is NEA in all of this? Why aren’t they giving money to IEA for its defense fund? NEA, like IEA practices give and take in reverse. They take our money only to give us excuses as to why pension “reform” is needed. With associations like IEA bargaining our benefits away, who needs enemies, or politicians for that matter? If every active teacher declared “fair share” and/or all the districts ended their relationship with IEA, believe me there’d be a change of attitude on IEA’s part with regard to how easily they side with the politicians they’re in cahoots with. When hit in the pocketbook people and organizations sit up and take action accordingly. This is what may need to happen in order for IEA to have an “attitude adjustment.” with regard who they’re representing and what their members deserve.
She probably wanted to go on record before the year ended, influenced by comments here I’m sure. Elma if you go “fair share” you end up withholding very little. When I did so, out of over $300.00 dollars in dues they gave back about $18.00, it’s a shell game.
“”Understand this: If American workers are being denied their right to organize and collectively bargain, when I’m in the White House, I’ll put on a comfortable pair of shoes myself. I’ll walk on that picket line with you, as president of the United States of America. Because workers deserve to know that someone’s standing in their corner,” he said at a rally in Spartansburg, S.C., in November of 2007.” http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/146091-obama-in-2007-ill-walk-on-that-picket-line-if-bargaining-rights-threatened
“”Understand this: If American workers are being denied their right to organize and collectively bargain, when I’m in the White House, I’ll put on a comfortable pair of shoes myself. I’ll walk on that picket line with you, as president of the United States of America. Because workers deserve to know that someone’s standing in their corner,” he said at a rally in Spartansburg, S.C., in November of 2007″ http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/146091-obama-in-2007-ill-walk-on-that-picket-line-if-bargaining-rights-threatened
When I feel threatened, then I will stand with you. Isn’t that what Klickna is really saying? The IEA needs new leadership that actually represents the interests of all members instead of using the position to sell others out while the leadership “sits at the table” with their own perks protected.
Enough is enough. They keep getting re-elected. The “Fair Share” threat means nothing because they still get your money. Decertify them and try someone else, if you don’t like what they do. It seems to be the only thing they notice.