Chicago Public Schools officials freshened their economic offer to teachers Wednesday but teachers union officials immediately labeled the deal "unacceptable'' and held firm to a Sept. 10 strike date.
I am still unsure why public sector unions exist, or how they are allowed to bargain against the taxpayers who not voluntarily support them. There is a big problem with this situation. But it is the Chicago school...
CPS didn't budge from its May offer of four years of 2 percent raises, but for the first time it formally dropped the requirement that the fourth-year raise be tied to a form of merit pay and "differentiated compensation,'' Chicago Teachers Union officials said."I have some reasonable news: The board has moved off of merit pay,'' CTU President Karen Lewis told reporters after the union's House of Delegates held its monthly meeting.[...]
http://bigeducationape.blogspot.com/2012/09/chicago-public-schools-teachers-monday.html
How can you be unsure of why public sector unions exist? Anyway, this isn't the issue. The problem is that these unions are so archaic in their thinking and refuse to step into the 21st Century. The Chicago Teachers Union needs to STOP supporting low performing teachers. Why can't the union set standards for, and evaluate their members, and provide help to low performing teachers themselves? Maybe then they would be prepared to deal with merit pay. Merit pay isn't going away. It's a great idea. If they keep fighting to support policies that hurt children's learning, they don't deserve across the board raises. Parents want to see results WITHOUT privitization. Get with the times CTU!
ReplyDeleteThe issue with public unions is that taxes are taken involuntarily from the private sector workers, and to compound that problem those public sector workers lobby for increased benefits and compensation, despite employment rates nearing 25%. Even though over the last couple of decades spending on education has doubled, performance has flat-lined, even fallen in some areas.
Deletehttp://bit.ly/7buAiM
Compared to necessarily efficient private education options, public schools can only compete because of over-subsidization. Unions should not exist in public sectors, and Wisconsin is a prime example of the savings to taxpayers when they are broken. Like him or not, Walker proved that the nature of public unions is not in the interest of taxpayers, nor the students, which leaves the question, whose interests are being served?
http://bit.ly/Kme6px
You generalize by offering that parents want results without privatization, but the results from private institutions are proof positive that public school systems just can't compete, even with protectionist policies from the government. We spend $11-12k per student each years, yet test scores are abysmal despite constantly increasing education spending by government. Just throw more money at it, I'm sure that will fix it. Oh, wait, it hasn't...
http://bit.ly/4EQWsb
A legacy of failure in public education is reason enough to consider private market solutions proven to provide positive results. If free market solutions are being more widely accepted as government programs go bankrupt in every field, why the defense of education over any other industry? If it's for the children, then why limit their success potential by letting bureaucrats set policy without potential for success, when private institutions excel in all regards?
http://bit.ly/OqHkT9