Chicago Teachers go on strike, affecting 400,000 students

Not to mention the completely hostile approach toward teachers taken by Mayor Emmanuel upon assuming office. The first action of his appointed school board was to deny teachers a raise that was part of their contract. He then aggressively and successfully pursued a longer school day. So teachers were not only going to not be compensated commensurately with the significant increase in their workload, but they were denied their scheduled pay raise. Talk about disrespect...
 
How so?

 


Why are they any different from someone like myself who sees pay remain stagnant, and in some cases declining, due to the economic climate? Because they are unionized? Oh no they have to work more hours? They have to re-negotiate benefits packages? Welcome to the real world..

Here's the thing, why do they deserve a raise when the school system is failing?


Teaching (in the inner city) is the only job you can fail to achieve the goals set for you year after year, and STILL keep a job, then have the nerve to complain you deserve more :smh:

Pay teachers based on performance.

Bingo.

And the teachers refuse to let the principals hire their own teachers which Rahm wants to implement in order to hold the principals accountable for success.

Whenever people see a strike, they assume "the system" is getting down on the little guy, but IMO its flipped in this instance. The school district is trying to improve things and the unions want to keep the status quo


Why would they want to change the system. These teachers care about the power they wield to keep the $$$ coming in and could care less about the children imo. And anyone saying these teachers are underpaid or they need to be paid more because they live in CHI... they are making almost $20k more than the average income in the city and only have to work 9 months a year. I don't give one damn for these teachers.

You guys need to realize, the main issue isn't more money, the issue is pay being determined by standardized test scores. Like I previously said, Chicago currently bases a teacher evaluation 25% on standardized test scores, Rahm wants to bump that up to 40%. That is not fair.

There are many factors that go into poor test performance and the teachers have absolutely no control over them. A broken house, hunger, drugs, negligence, abuse, and whole lot of other factors will make testing harder for certain students. 

And then, there is the test itself which contains bias for certain demo's. There is a push to get rid of the public schooling system and to privatize schooling. That will be the worst thing that could possibly happen to the kids.

If 25% of teacher evaluations is based standardized testing, what's the other 75% based on?
 
More than anything, this whole thing is extremely depressing. I'm not mad at the teachers Union for striking, it's within their rights to do so and it upsets me when people decry Union's as this terrible thing that has no benefits and simply sucks money out of governments. I think it sucks for the kids and I hope that the end result is happier teachers who can put more of their effort into teaching rather than worrying about paying the bills.
 
Once again I don't agree with what JD said.

I just can't believe NTalkers are out there trying to report him and ban him for stating his own opinion.

This is not what NT is about, this is not what America is about. He did nothing wrong, if you feel otherwise debate him. Show some numbers and stop running to daddy.
 
im seeing some mixed reactions to the teachers striking...so should the teachers strike for better pay, or should they never strike because they have to watch over kids? its a double edge sword the way i see it but i def agree that teaching isn't easy so i can see why they'd strike. also someone needs to post sources on these teachers pay, i refuse to believe they're getting paid well for an inner city teacher.

what u guys think? :nerd: :nerd:
 
im seeing some mixed reactions to the teachers striking...so should the teachers strike for better pay, or should they never strike because they have to watch over kids? its a double edge sword the way i see it but i def agree that teaching isn't easy so i can see why they'd strike. also someone needs to post sources on these teachers pay, i refuse to believe they're getting paid well for an inner city teacher.
what u guys think? :nerd: :nerd:


"A Chicago Public Schools spokesperson said average pay for teachers, without benefits, is $76,000."
http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2012/06/12/how-much-do-chicago-public-school-teachers-make/


Hell that's what principals make down here ...:smh:
 
Not that $76,000 a year is not a lot of money, because it definitely is, but the average CPS teacher also has more than 13 years on the job. It's not like they're starting out at $76,000. Also, the cost of living in Chicago is one of the highest of any city in the country. Finally, the CEO of CPS started that job making $250,000. Just to provide some context...
 
Just curious, maybe somebody can shed some light.....

How can they want smaller class sizes AND more money?

If you want smaller class sizes, they have to hire more teachers, find more class rooms, which probably means opening more schools....but if CPS has to pay more teachers, where are they going to find this extra money for these pay raises they want?
 
Just curious, maybe somebody can shed some light.....
How can they want smaller class sizes AND more money?
If you want smaller class sizes, they have to hire more teachers, find more class rooms, which probably means opening more schools....but if CPS has to pay more teachers, where are they going to find this extra money for these pay raises they want?
That's exactly the issue...If they agree...Where does the money come from? 
 
Not that $76,000 a year is not a lot of money, because it definitely is, but the average CPS teacher also has more than 13 years on the job. It's not like they're starting out at $76,000. Also, the cost of living in Chicago is one of the highest of any city in the country. Finally, the CEO of CPS started that job making $250,000. Just to provide some context...

Yeah, but they avg. starting salary for new teachers is still bout 52K, which is still above the avg. FAMILY income in Chicago.

And with that said Chicago isn't even top 10 in cost of living, DC's cost of living definitely higher and DC teacher's are getting paid 8k less on avg.

I don't know how the teachers possibly expect to decrease class size and increase their salary at the same damn time. No wonder the kids are failing, the teachers can't even comprehend simple arithmetic :smh:
 
For the 2011-2012 school year, first-year teachers earned $47,250 annually; teachers with a master’s degree were eligible to earn supplemental pay (around $3,000 annually).*

http://chicagoteachingfellows.ttrack.org/YourTeachingCareer/SalaryBenefits.aspx

Not Chicago, but I'd highly recommend some of you guys to watch "Hard Times at Douglas High." It was a documentary on HBO that focused on Douglas HS in Baltimore. One of the features in the documentary focused on a new teacher who was extremely motivated to try to help some of these kids out. Over the course of the school year, you see the life get sucked out of him due to how hard it was to teach some of the kids he was dealing with...not getting support from the parents or the administration. Sad to say, but he ended up quitting mid-year.

You guys see the 76k that some of the teachers are earning but don't realize that those that are around or above that mark have been in the system for 10+ years. Some of these schools do set teachers up to fail. It's no coincidence that there is a high turnover rate in many school districts in big cities around the US.
 
If 25% of teacher evaluations is based standardized testing, what's the other 75% based on?

:nerd:

I don't know about Chicago, but here it's part standardized test scores and the rest is based on administrator reports. They include a 1hr session in front of the admins, an admin sitting in for one of your classes, and routine 10-15 minute meetings with an admin to make sure everything is going well.
 
Last edited:
Just curious, maybe somebody can shed some light.....

How can they want smaller class sizes AND more money?

If you want smaller class sizes, they have to hire more teachers, find more class rooms, which probably means opening more schools....but if CPS has to pay more teachers, where are they going to find this extra money for these pay raises they want?


Not that $76,000 a year is not a lot of money, because it definitely is, but the average CPS teacher also has more than 13 years on the job. It's not like they're starting out at $76,000. Also, the cost of living in Chicago is one of the highest of any city in the country. Finally, the CEO of CPS started that job making $250,000. Just to provide some context...

Yeah, but they avg. starting salary for new teachers is still bout 52K, which is still above the avg. FAMILY income in Chicago.

And with that said Chicago isn't even top 10 in cost of living, DC's cost of living definitely higher and DC teacher's are getting paid 8k less on avg.

I don't know how the teachers possibly expect to decrease class size and increase their salary at the same damn time. No wonder the kids are failing, the teachers can't even comprehend simple arithmetic :smh:

You think that's ridiculous huh? How about the Mayor and the School Board extending the school day by 90 minutes this year and adding two additional weeks to the school year... while denying teachers the raise that they were promised as part of their previous contract (a raise that was essentially the rate of inflation)?

Also, $52,000 is not ridiculous as a starting salary for an inner-city public school teacher in my eyes. If you disagree, then that's simply a matter of opinion. I, for one, am happy that teachers in Chicago are being paid well as they should be everywhere...
 
Just curious, maybe somebody can shed some light.....

How can they want smaller class sizes AND more money?

If you want smaller class sizes, they have to hire more teachers, find more class rooms, which probably means opening more schools....but if CPS has to pay more teachers, where are they going to find this extra money for these pay raises they want?

That's exactly the issue...If they agree...Where does the money come from? 

Bro, we're talking about Chicago here, not Flint, Michigan. While the city and the state are in terrible financial shape overall, there is always money for priorities in Chicago. I would say educating the city's children should be a relatively high priority...
 
Not that $76,000 a year is not a lot of money, because it definitely is, but the average CPS teacher also has more than 13 years on the job. It's not like they're starting out at $76,000. Also, the cost of living in Chicago is one of the highest of any city in the country. Finally, the CEO of CPS started that job making $250,000. Just to provide some context...

Yeah, but they avg. starting salary for new teachers is still bout 52K, which is still above the avg. FAMILY income in Chicago.

And with that said Chicago isn't even top 10 in cost of living, DC's cost of living definitely higher and DC teacher's are getting paid 8k less on avg.

I don't know how the teachers possibly expect to decrease class size and increase their salary at the same damn time. No wonder the kids are failing, the teachers can't even comprehend simple arithmetic :smh:

Exactly, like I said before, some jobs transcend the money. Police, teachers, military....hell the President's salary is far below that of most world leaders...he should go on strike
 
It's only a double edged sword because the system and this countries policies have made it that way. This country is built with inhumane principals and policies. What does everyone expect? We talk about kids not even wanting to be in the classroom, but who would? Every second of my life on TV, it's an advertisement encouraging me to buy something. It's an ad of Lebron James and his millions of dollars in contract money when he didn't have to focus on education. I see Lil Wayne who didn't have to focus on education. There's reality TV shows. People forget how influential these young kids are. You can't sell them those images and philosophy yet expect them to buy into school seriously. Those are the "heroes" (couldn't be further from that) that are given to us to idolize and model after. And quite frankly the parents that did go to school are still struggling especially in this economy. Anyone with any type of ambition wouldn't strive to be barely making it. And when it comes to "inner-city" or more appropriately termed particularly African-american and minority youth, there just aren't many examples of college educated people who live a struggle free life. The school route is simply not looked at as an advantageous route. Then you have teachers who are tasked with the job of teaching these disinterested youngsters, and all they do is complain about the students and underfunding of the school. It's the overall system! Complain about how Kim K is marketed towards them, and how much we allow athletes to make as opposed to a person dedicating their life to teaching kids. Complain about the inequalities that these kids face in their everyday lives every second of their existence as opposed to pay raises. Complain about how these kids are constantly neglected in their home without real love because of the burdens and barriers this system has placed on their parents. I'm not making excuses for everyone, I'm just stating how deep this problem really lies...
 
It's only a double edged sword because the system and this countries policies have made it that way. This country is built with inhumane principals and policies. What does everyone expect? We talk about kids not even wanting to be in the classroom, but who would? Every second of my life on TV, it's an advertisement encouraging me to buy something. It's an ad of Lebron James and his millions of dollars in contract money when he didn't have to focus on education. I see Lil Wayne who didn't have to focus on education. There's reality TV shows. People forget how influential these young kids are. You can't sell them those images and philosophy yet expect them to buy into school seriously. Those are the "heroes" (couldn't be further from that) that are given to us to idolize and model after. And quite frankly the parents that did go to school are still struggling especially in this economy. Anyone with any type of ambition wouldn't strive to be barely making it. And when it comes to "inner-city" or more appropriately termed particularly African-american and minority youth, there just aren't many examples of college educated people who live a struggle free life. The school route is simply not looked at as an advantageous route. Then you have teachers who are tasked with the job of teaching these disinterested youngsters, and all they do is complain about the students and underfunding of the school. It's the overall system! Complain about how Kim K is marketed towards them, and how much we allow athletes to make as opposed to a person dedicating their life to teaching kids. Complain about the inequalities that these kids face in their everyday lives every second of their existence as opposed to pay raises. Complain about how these kids are constantly neglected in their home without real love because of the burdens and barriers this system has placed on their parents. I'm not making excuses for everyone, I'm just stating how deep this problem really lies...


/thread


strong cosign to all of this. but to add to this its really on the parents to teach their kids and gear their kids in life to aspire to be someone via an education, not by filming yourself getting your throat stretched like kim k. we do live in a backwards society to an extreme degree where you can be filthy rich by being some entertainer vs spending years in school to save lives as a doctor with 100Ks in debt. it really starts at home, and if that fails than 9/10 times its a wrap for the kid. i still firmly believe education is important and necessary in life.


76k a year is an excellent salary, and those teachers who really strive to educate their kids the best they can and put up with the ******** are easily worth 100K+. the difference in the cost of living in this country and the typical lower to middle class avg salary is steadily increasing. its costing more and more to do very little these days. society needs teachers more than they need w.e is on TV so im all for better benefits/salary. smaller classrooms tho? idk. here in nyc, the entire city is overcrowded, so i would expect the school system to reflect that.
 
Not that $76,000 a year is not a lot of money, because it definitely is, but the average CPS teacher also has more than 13 years on the job. It's not like they're starting out at $76,000. Also, the cost of living in Chicago is one of the highest of any city in the country. Finally, the CEO of CPS started that job making $250,000. Just to provide some context...

Yeah, but they avg. starting salary for new teachers is still bout 52K, which is still above the avg. FAMILY income in Chicago.

And with that said Chicago isn't even top 10 in cost of living, DC's cost of living definitely higher and DC teacher's are getting paid 8k less on avg.

I don't know how the teachers possibly expect to decrease class size and increase their salary at the same damn time. No wonder the kids are failing, the teachers can't even comprehend simple arithmetic :smh:

Exactly, like I said before, some jobs transcend the money. Police, teachers, military....hell the President's salary is far below that of most world leaders...he should go on strike

So... let me get this straight. Because you believe that a job like teaching "transcends money," teachers should not be decently compensated nor should they have the right to strike?

:rofl:

And this strike isn't even really about salary, as I stated before...
 
Not that $76,000 a year is not a lot of money, because it definitely is, but the average CPS teacher also has more than 13 years on the job. It's not like they're starting out at $76,000. Also, the cost of living in Chicago is one of the highest of any city in the country. Finally, the CEO of CPS started that job making $250,000. Just to provide some context...

Yeah, but they avg. starting salary for new teachers is still bout 52K, which is still above the avg. FAMILY income in Chicago.

And with that said Chicago isn't even top 10 in cost of living, DC's cost of living definitely higher and DC teacher's are getting paid 8k less on avg.

I don't know how the teachers possibly expect to decrease class size and increase their salary at the same damn time. No wonder the kids are failing, the teachers can't even comprehend simple arithmetic :smh:

Exactly, like I said before, some jobs transcend the money. Police, teachers, military....hell the President's salary is far below that of most world leaders...he should go on strike

So... let me get this straight. Because you believe that a job like teaching "transcends money," teachers should not be decently compensated nor should they have the right to strike?

:rofl:

And this strike isn't even really about salary, as I stated before...

Id say 52k is decent compensation. My mom was a teacher, and I am in school to be a teacher right now. But it is also incredibly unrealistic to expect more money, and smaller classes...my point was that there are people who are equally.qualifies, in different fields who work much harder and much more often
 
Last edited:
A lot of people in this thread (understandably) don't really understand the context of this situation.
Chicago has been trying to phase out public education as we know it and replace it with a scattered collection of publicly-subsidized charter schools for over a decade now. It started under former Mayor Daley and has continued unhindered under Mayor Emmanuel. This process has directly damaged public schools, their students, and the wider communities. The basic process of this assault on public schools is as follows...
1. Labeling every school in certain areas "under-performing" or "failing" due to low student scores on standardized tests. These scores are almost entirely due to forces beyond the school's control, including the socioeconomic conditions facing students in these schools.
2. Deeming these schools "turn-around schools" in order to get rid of the current school administration and teaching staff and install a new one picked by CPS administration. The explanation is that they are trying to help "turn the school around." Students, parents, and communities are almost always against this happening. NEARLY ALL, IF NOT EVERY SINGLE ONE OF, THESE "TURN-AROUND EFFORTS" FAILS. CPS knows that they will fail. They are intended to fail.
3. Closing "under-performing" neighborhood schools under the excuse that they are under-performing...
4. ...and then sending those students to an equally under-performing school in another community. Test scores are not improved and students have to deal with taking multiple forms of public transportation for longer distances to travel to and from school. This dynamic often creates tension within the schools absorbing these new students, as there are often differences in gang and hood allegiances that can touch off conflict when these groups are forced together in the same school. Most people don't know this, but this was the underlying issue leading to Derion Albert's unfortunate but not entirely unpredictable or unforeseeable death.
5. The closed schools are converted into charter schools and CPS money that formerly funded the public neighborhood school now funds the charter school. Many of these charter schools use selective enrollment processes thereby denying average neighborhood students the ability to attend school in their neighborhood. Those that don't use selective enrollment become dumping grounds for students that have dropped out or been kicked out of other schools. These schools are often among the worst-performing in the district.
6. The "success" of those charter schools that employ selective enrollment and therefore deal with a more "desirable" student population than the public neighborhood schools is then held up as a shining example of how charter schools are better than public schools. These charter schools often have private funding that also supplements the money they get from CPS. Thus, they are not playing on an even playing field. Also, the abject failure of so many other charter schools is ignored in favor of the desired narrative.
7. More and more public neighborhood schools are closed and converted to charter schools, reproducing if not exacerbating the achievement gaps that exist between selective enrollment public schools as well as those in "nice" areas of the city and those in the ghetto. This also saves the city money because standards are decentralized and they don't have to deal with unionized teachers and janitorial workers. This creates a "race to the bottom" where dozens of charter schools are constantly popping up saying that they can educate students for less and less money. The vast majority of these schools fare no better, and are often worse, than their public counterparts.
This is the backdrop for the stand-off between the CPS administration and the city of Chicago and the Chicago Teacher's Union. Increasing the weight given the student test scores in evaluating teacher performance and giving the administration greater power to fire and lay off teachers will serve to greatly speed up the aforementioned process which will end public education in Chicago. This fight is much deeper than a lot of you realize...


Excellent post, you could also throw in that the legacy system of TIFs for "blighted" areas continues to choke schools of necessary funding.
 
Back
Top Bottom