I’m going to keep saying it isn’t so.

It now appears that the special session of the Illinois General Assembly that the Governor has called  for August 17th to address the pension issue may be a bust.

On the other hand, these folks have been known to do great damage in less time than it takes to microwave some popcorn.

If not August 17th, they will come back to a post-election session where there will be even less popular constraints on these crooks and liars.

As a result you would think all of our attention would be on the pension issue. Instead the leadership has decided to continue to pursue their defense and mischaracterization of Senate Bill 7.

I wrote on this yesterday. I’m not looking to pick a fight. But let me tell give you some background.

The truth is that the IEA leadership has made efforts recently to reach out to many of us who blog and to others who have expressed views that have not followed the party line.

This is good. Not good for us. Good for them. They need to hear from others than just the palace guard.

We still disagree on many things, including how to approach the pension fight. But talking to each other never hurts, right?

It is definitely a departure from the past leadership of Ken Swanson who treated those who were critical of IEA policy with slightly less respect than was given to Rodney Dangerfield.

Then out of the blue, they decide to resurrect this nonsense about Senate Bill 7 and how it was teacher-led reform. 

NEA Media tweets this stuff all over the internet. IEA Executive Director Audrey Soglin is on a panel with Senator Lightford extolling Sentate Bill 7 at the National Conference of State Legislators.

After my comments yesterday, some in leadership were critical of me.

They told me I wasn’t being fair to Audrey.

But I have nothing personal against Audrey Soglin.

Here is the thing: Soglin says that Senate Bill 7 was teacher-led reform. She says that teachers are better off now than before it became law.

Is she going rogue with this? Or is that what the present elected leadership thinks as well?

I’m saying it isn’t so. The membership, in the only vote that they have been allowed to take on Senate Bill 7, says it isn’t so.

So, is it just Audrey? Or  is it the elected leadership too?

I’ll tell you this: If they keep claiming Senate Bill 7 as a win. If they keep calling it teacher-led reform. If they keep claiming teachers are better off as a result of it. Then I’m going to keep saying it isn’t so.

6 Replies to “I’m going to keep saying it isn’t so.”

  1. Practically speaking, S.B. #7 simply eliminated teacher tenure. Most teachers I know think that is true…and many, many teachers are very angry.

  2. No one who is paying attention thinks SB7 is good for teachers. Even a former superintendent told me last winter, “SB7 is EVIL!”

    I wish I knew where this came from, but I’ve heard the tale that when asked what safeguards are in SB7 for experienced tenured teachers who lose their jobs because of lowered evaluation scores (read that as retribution for being a strong union leader and negotiator), Audrey’s comment was that we need to rely on the good will of the superintendents to do the right thing. Did anyone else hear this, or am I just having more post-apocalyptic nightmares? ~Denise

  3. Just go back to Edelman’s video. He says he hired — in addition to 11 of the best lobbyists — a fantastic pr firm to keep discussion of SB7 out of the media.
    And he was very pleased that it worked so well. As a result of Stand for Children, amazingly few teachers had been aware of or understood SB7 when it was passed in 2011.

  4. I cannot find anything about SB7 on the IEA website that is not filled with flowery words about how great it is. I was looking for just the facts kind of handout or PowerPoint to give to our membership but could not find a thing that was not full of brainwashing talking points, it was so embarrassing, and how stupid do they think we are. I cannot tell our membership it was teacher led reform because no one believes it was and it discredits our local union. IEA continuing to push this line is making it hard for those of us in the real world working with our membership. They do not feel represented; they feel abandoned and wonder who is representing them and what our dues are paying for if it isn’t to represent them.
    How do we get new leadership? If you want to run for an office in the IEA, how do you get on the ballot?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s