• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

90 Percent of Chicago Teachers Authorize Strike

tessaesque said:
They're the highest paid in the state, and generally higher than the national average.
Sometimes a pay cut is necessary.
Click to expand...
If a pay cut was necessary, then Rahm Emmanuel shouldn't have proposed to lengthen the school day which would require him to pay teachers, administrators, etc. more than they get now.
 
Boring Bob said:
So... they're going to do what's best for the students by keeping them out of the classroom for extra months? Brilliant.
Click to expand...
There is so much misinformation in this thread that it is laughable.

It's doubtful that a strike would last for months. Moreover, they haven't decided to strike, they authorized a strike in case one is necessary. And finally, strike days are always made up so that students don't lose a day of school.

Edit: This thread is a breath of fresh air actually. Knowing how much of Chicago supports CTU and seeing it side by side with the lack of support with CTU here which is largely based on misinformation actually makes me optimistic that a lot of the anti-union nonsense on DP is not a reflection of much of the public.
 
Last edited:
tessaesque said:
They're the highest paid in the state, and generally higher than the national average.
Sometimes a pay cut is necessary.
Click to expand...

Changing the subject, I see.
 
ThePlayDrive said:
If a pay cut was necessary, then Rahm Emmanuel shouldn't have proposed to lengthen the school day which would require him to pay teachers, administrators, etc. more than they get now.
Click to expand...

It doesn't require that they're paid more.

Have you ever worked a salaried job? There were several instances when I was asked to work over time as a salaried employee. It comes with the territory. These teachers are absolutely selfish, demanding well and above what most other educators across the country make...to provide an education ranked at the end of the spectrum.
 
tessaesque said:
It doesn't require that they're paid more.

Have you ever worked a salaried job? There were several instances when I was asked to work over time as a salaried employee. It comes with the territory. These teachers are absolutely selfish, demanding well and above what most other educators across the country make...to provide an education ranked at the end of the spectrum.
Click to expand...
You sound ridiculous. It's not selfish to think you should be paid for your work and thank God 86% of Chicagoans, including me, agree with that. What has the world come to when people don't think they should be paid for their work?

And we're not talking about working overtime. Plenty of teachers do that on their own without asking for a cent and will continue to do that. Hell, my mother worked "overtime" all the time without getting paid for it for her over 30 years as a teacher - pissed me off when I was a kid. We're talking about extending work hours. When you extend work hours (for no logical reason, in fact), then you pay people.
 
Last edited:
ThePlayDrive said:
You sound ridiculous. It's not selfish to think you should be paid for your work and thank God 86% of Chicagoans, including me, agree with that. What has the world come to when people don't think they should be paid for their work?

And we're not talking about working overtime. Plenty of teachers do that on their own without asking for a cent and will continue to do that. Hell, my mother worked "overtime" all the time without getting paid for it for her over 30 years as a teacher - pissed me off when I was a kid. We're talking about extending work hours. When you extend work hours (for no logical reason, in fact), then you pay people.
Click to expand...

They are paid for their work. In fact, they're quite frankly overpaid for their work. What part of "highest in the state, and higher than most of the country" is hard to wrap your head around? The school system in Chicago is ranked painfully low, on top of it. Why should teachers be paid even more than they already are for substandard performance?
 
tessaesque said:
They are paid for their work. In fact, they're quite frankly overpaid for their work
Click to expand...
Whether they are "overpaid" is a matter of opinion. Maybe other districts and other states are "underpaid."

Besides, my points and the points in this thread have nothing to do with overpaid or underpaid. They have to do with being paid for your work. If your work day is extended, I think you should be paid for it, especially if your work day is being extended for no demonstrably good reason. You have said absolutely nothing to counterargue that notion. You've merely changed the subject to discuss your opinion on being overpaid.

Why should teachers be paid even more than they already are for substandard performance?
Click to expand...
Do you have proof that the poor results in Chicago are directly linked to teachers' "substandard performance"?
 
Last edited:
ThePlayDrive said:
Whether they are "overpaid" is a matter of opinion. Maybe other districts and other states are "underpaid."

Besides, my points and the points in this thread have nothing to do with overpaid or underpaid. They have to do with being paid for your work. If your work day is extended, I think you should be paid for it, especially if your work day is being extended for no demonstrably good reason.


Do you have proof that the poor results in Chicago are directly linked to teachers' "substandard performance"?
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that poor results in Chicago are linked to an overwhelmingly large number of low-IQ children? Teachers have just as much to do with education results as anybody else. If they were really trying to advocate for the children here they'd be demanding changes in methods, improvements in coursework guidelines, or striving to promote a higher rate of success in the classroom. They wouldn't be bitching about getting paid even more than they already make when the city is essentially broke in the name of "fairness".

What's happening to the children of Chicago isn't fair. The teachers are already sitting pretty damned high on the hog.
 
Last edited:
tessaesque said:
Are you suggesting that poor results in Chicago are linked to an overwhelmingly large number of low-IQ children?
Click to expand...
Hahaha, you completely abandoned the subject of this thread and went on a complete tangent. We all know what that means.

In your own words:
tessaesque said:
Not at all. Is this your way of saying you can't refute my point?
Click to expand...

Teachers have just as much to do with education results as anybody else. If they were really trying to advocate for the children here they'd be demanding changes in methods, improvements in coursework guidelines, or striving to promote a higher rate of success in the classroom. They wouldn't be bitching about getting paid even more than they already make when the city is essentially broke in the name of "fairness".

What's happening to the children of Chicago isn't fair. The teachers are already sitting pretty damned high on the hog.
Click to expand...
So, if I don't blame the teachers, then I MUST think kids are stupid. No, the education system does not exist in such a false dichotomy. On the contrary, the education system is a complex interaction of teachers, students, parents, environment and policy. I see the problems of the Chicago education system as ones mostly located in environment and perpetually bad policy decisions with students being the absolute least problem - meaning they aren't even a problem - they're kids.

For an example on why policy is a problem, Mayor Emmanuel wants to extend the school day as means of improving education. However, there are no demonstrable positive of effects in extending the school day. Moreover, how students currently spend their school with the time they already have is demonstrably ineffective. This is one of the reasons CTU has continuously argued that Emmanuel should focus on making a better school day instead of a just a longer one. I agree with that. The city needs to focus on making the current day an effective day before they just randomly extend it. That's policy and adults, not kids.
 
Last edited:
They are paid for their work. In fact, they're quite frankly overpaid for their work. What part of "highest in the state, and higher than most of the country" is hard to wrap your head around? The school system in Chicago is ranked painfully low, on top of it. Why should teachers be paid even more than they already are for substandard performance?
Click to expand...

EDIT: Self-refuting Tessaesque argument: "Teacher pay does not correlate with student performance. Teachers are overpaid. "
 
Last edited:
ThePlayDrive said:
Mayor Emmanuel wants to extend the school day as means of improving education. However, there are no demonstrable positive of effects in extending the school day. Moreover, how students currently spend their school with the time they already have is demonstrably ineffective. This is one of the reasons CTU has continuously argued that Emmanuel should focus on making a better school day instead of a just a longer one. I agree with that. The city needs to focus on making the current day an effective day before they just randomly extend it. That's policy and adults, not kids.
Click to expand...

First of all, if there really are no demonstrable positive effects in extending the school day, then perhaps it begs the question that perhaps it should be shortened. Which, of course, would be ridiculous.

Aside from the additional learning time, an extended school day keeps kids busy for longer periods of time. Oh, and safe. Surely there is advantage to that.
 
Khayembii Communique said:
EDIT: Self-refuting Tessaesque argument: "Teacher pay does not correlate with student performance. Teachers are overpaid. "
Click to expand...

Right now, City of Chicago teachers are given raises based on "steps and lanes" -- steps being 'another year in front of the blackboard' and lanes being more hours towards an advanced degree. We don't need advanced degrees. We need teachers who can teach. All the knowledge in the world -- all the degrees we have to offer -- mean nothing if we can't teach kids to read and write.
 
Well, I didn’t read the whole thread but if they want a 24% raise, I'd tie any raise to the proficiency of graduating students. On top of that, I tie all compensation to the proficiency of graduating students, oh, and I'd have independent outside the state auditors do the accounting. Chicago is one of the highest compensated school districts yet it’s one of the worst performing. Doesn't seem to add up in the real world, in terms of fair pay for fair results. I know in libby world it doesn't matter it's all about the kiddies, right? Blah blah, that rhetoric went the way of the dinosaur years ago, and no one is buying it anymore. The City isn't a profit based system, and as Don pointed out, cannot be expected to pay for things it cannot afford.

I actually like the fact the Emmanuel is the Mayor here. He may be a progressive but he's got an ego and he likes to win. Why not leak out to the press that the city will be posting jobs for Chicago teachers this summer? Chicago is a great city (except the ghettos of course) who wouldn't want to go work there?


Tim-
 
MaggieD said:
Right now, City of Chicago teachers are given raises based on "steps and lanes" -- steps being 'another year in front of the blackboard' and lanes being more hours towards an advanced degree. We don't need advanced degrees. We need teachers who can teach. All the knowledge in the world -- all the degrees we have to offer -- mean nothing if we can't teach kids to read and write.
Click to expand...

Automatic step increases cause bloat.
 
Well, I didn’t read the whole thread but if they want a 24% raise, I'd tie any raise to the proficiency of graduating students.
Click to expand...

There is not a direct causation between teacher performance and student performance.

Right now, City of Chicago teachers are given raises based on "steps and lanes" -- steps being 'another year in front of the blackboard' and lanes being more hours towards an advanced degree. We don't need advanced degrees. We need teachers who can teach. All the knowledge in the world -- all the degrees we have to offer -- mean nothing if we can't teach kids to read and write.
Click to expand...

A 1% to 5% pay increase, on average this is an increase in wages at pace with inflation (3% for 2011 IIRC), so the nominal increase in wages turns out to be no increase at all in real terms.

The annual 4% raise was blocked in 2011 by the board of education.
 
Last edited:
Khayembii Communique said:
There is not a direct causation between teacher performance and student performance.

A 1% to 5% pay increase, on average this is an increase in wages at pace with inflation (3% for 2011 IIRC), so the nominal increase in wages turns out to be no increase at all in real terms.

The annual 4% raise was blocked in 2011 by the board of education.
Click to expand...

If there isn't a direct "causation" between teacher performance and student performance, then perhaps we don't even need degreed teachers. In fact, I'm sure we don't -- especially in CPS. Student performance is down right embarrassing.

As to the annual 4% raise? What don't people understand about recessions? About deficits? Most people in this country didn't get 4% raises last year. Most people are being asked to make some sacrifices. Most people are being asked to work harder and make do with less. The teachers' unions are greedy pigs.
 
If there isn't a direct "causation" between teacher performance and student performance, then perhaps we don't even need degreed teachers. In fact, I'm sure we don't -- especially in CPS. Student performance is down right embarrassing.
Click to expand...

You can have the best teachers in the world but if you give them nothing but rocks with which to teach children in a warzone where the children don't have motivation to learn due to the environment in which they live you are going to have poor student performance.

I don't know if you're just being facetious or are really that ignorant.

As to the annual 4% raise? What don't people understand about recessions? About deficits? Most people in this country didn't get 4% raises last year. Most people are being asked to make some sacrifices. Most people are being asked to work harder and make do with less. The teachers' unions are greedy pigs.
Click to expand...

I brought up the 4% raise to show that they do not necessarily get annual raises, as their contract states the board votes on it.

As for the "so what" attitude, I find it absolutely disgusting that this "shared sacrifice" rhetoric is actually viewed as reasonable when it is not the normal working people that should sacrifice but the people that got rich off causing this crisis in the first place (what you hypocritically call "job creators"). The fact that you think that teachers asking for a raise commensurate with in increase in work are "greedy" just shows that you're completely unreasonable and/or delusional.

Your argument:
1. Cut taxes!
2. Oh no, deficit! Cut spending!
3. "Shared sacrifice"
 
Last edited:
Khayembii Communique said:
You can have the best teachers in the world but if you give them nothing but rocks with which to teach children in a warzone where the children don't have motivation to learn due to the environment in which they live you are going to have poor student performance.

I don't know if you're just being facetious or are really that ignorant.



I brought up the 4% raise to show that they do not necessarily get annual raises, as their contract states the board votes on it.

As for the "so what" attitude, I find it absolutely disgusting that this "shared sacrifice" rhetoric is actually viewed as reasonable when it is not the normal working people that should sacrifice but the people that got rich off causing this crisis in the first place (what you hypocritically call "job creators"). The fact that you think that teachers asking for a raise commensurate with in increase in work are "greedy" just shows that you're completely unreasonable and/or delusional.

Your argument:
1. Cut taxes!
2. Oh no, deficit! Cut spending!
3. "Shared sacrifice"
Click to expand...

So then, the reverse would also ring true according to your philosophy; that is, if they want more pay for more work, then wouldn't it be also fair to lower pay for poor performance? Or is it your contention that their pay should only ever go up, NOT down for any reason? I'm curious..


Tim-
 
Khayembii Communique said:
This is dishonest. The CTU is fighting a pay cut in real terms.
Click to expand...

For those who don't understand KC's point, the following example offers an illustration.

If teachers were paid for a 7-hour day (I don't have the numbers prior to the first increase in working hours) and earned $20 per hour (hypothetical figure, but any dollar amount would work), they would earn $140 per day. The Mayor has proposed increasing the workday to 7 hours and 40 minutes and guaranteed a 2% wage hike (no guarantees beyond the first year are offered). That would increase the daily compensation to $142.80 in this hypothetical case. The hourly compensation ($142.80 / 7.67 hours) would come to $18.62. That would represent a 6.9% cut in the hourly compensation figure (the wage increase would be < increase in working hours). Hence, there would be an effective wage cut and even before considering inflation, there would be a real wage cut. Once inflation were factored in, the real wage cut > 6.9%.
 
Last edited:
Hicup said:
So then, the reverse would also ring true according to your philosophy; that is, if they want more pay for more work, then wouldn't it be also fair to lower pay for poor performance? Tim-
Click to expand...

You assume that students performance is only influenced by the teacher. How is the teacher responsible for a student that doesn't want to learn or a student's parents that don't give a **** and don't provide an environment for the student to study?

There are factors that are simply beyond a teacher's control.
 
Hicup said:
So then, the reverse would also ring true according to your philosophy; that is, if they want more pay for more work, then wouldn't it be also fair to lower pay for poor performance? Or is it your contention that their pay should only ever go up, NOT down for any reason? I'm curious..
Click to expand...

You cannot measure teacher performance based on student performance, so how will you measure teacher performance?

Further, explicit pay cuts while not unheard of are fairly uncommon. Companies are more willing to reduce benefits on a group scale or wait until it is economical to lay off employees than target individual employees' paychecks for cuts. The idea of fluctuating pay based on performance is unrealistic in any place of business, not just here.

don said:
For those who don't understand KC's point, the following example offers an illustration.

If teachers were paid for a 7-hour day (I don't have the numbers prior to the first increase in working hours) and earned $20 per hour (hypothetical figure, but any dollar amount would work), they would earn $140 per day. The Mayor has proposed increasing the workday to 7 hours and 40 minutes and guaranteed a 2% wage hike (no guarantees beyond the first year are offered). That would increase the daily compensation to $142.80 in this hypothetical case. The hourly compensation ($142.80 / 7.67 hours) would come to $18.62. That would represent a 6.9% cut in the hourly compensation figure (the wage increase would be < increase in working hours). Hence, the terminology of a real wage cut.
Click to expand...

And this is not even factoring inflation into the equation, the largest factor in worker pay cuts over the past 40 years.

EDIT: NVM you factored it in with your edit. :)
 
Last edited:
donsutherland1 said:
For those who don't understand KC's point, the following example offers an illustration.

If teachers were paid for a 7-hour day (I don't have the numbers prior to the first increase in working hours) and earned $20 per hour (hypothetical figure, but any dollar amount would work), they would earn $140 per day. The Mayor has proposed increasing the workday to 7 hours and 40 minutes and guaranteed a 2% wage hike (no guarantees beyond the first year are offered). That would increase the daily compensation to $142.80 in this hypothetical case. The hourly compensation ($142.80 / 7.67 hours) would come to $18.62. That would represent a 6.9% cut in the hourly compensation figure (the wage increase would be < increase in working hours). Hence, there would be an effective wage cut and even before considering inflation, there would be a real wage cut. Once inflation were factored in, the real wage cut > 6.9%.
Click to expand...

Seems a bit misleading, Don, if, as you say the mayor is proposing a 2% pay increase is he increasing their salary, or the hourly rate? Not sure how it works in this scenario but the math is different if you use one or the other metric, is it an hourly raise of 2% or a salaries increase of 2%?

Using your example:

Hourly wage is $20 increase of 2% = $20.40 per hour worked.
Previous work day of 7 hours (using your example) nets you $140
increased work day 7 hours and 40 minutes at the new pay rate of $20.40 is 0.34 cent a minute = $13.60 for that extra 40 minutes.
Total for new work day in compensation = $153.60 per work day.

Tim-
 
TheNextEra said:
You assume that students performance is only influenced by the teacher. How is the teacher responsible for a student that doesn't want to learn or a student's parents that don't give a **** and don't provide an environment for the student to study?

There are factors that are simply beyond a teacher's control.
Click to expand...

Beyond a teachers control, yes, however these metrics are not beyond control when structuring a pay scale.

Tim-
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom