I agree - anyone who had their courses pre-approved should be paid. If they're not, that's an individual contractual dispute between the District and the individual Teacher - I don't see that as a reason for a general strike to take place.

However, as I've said previously, going forward, I believe we need to change the way pay raises are given.

Lila - David is correct - commitments should be honored.
But I am curious, as we all want to know the FACTS; what schools are acceptable - can you give examples of education which has been pre-approved for raises? While I am sure they would approve major universities and education specialty schools such as National Lewis, can you name others? I ask, becuase in the private sector it is rare to pre-approve raises for degrees. Some businesses pay for top MBA programs, but continuing education is often an unpaid requirement of some professions (a cost for the professional, to keep their career up to date. And a reason some non-teachers are so confused.)
So please give some examples. Thank you.

Thanks Rick... Much appreciated.

I concur with Richard - David is an honorable person who has a lot of ideas - some of them are good and some of them not so good. When we debate ideas, he always focuses on the issue - never any personal attacks on me or others. David certainly doesn't deserve some of the ad hominem attacks he has received on Patch.

I don't see eye-to-eye with David on most things, but we need knowledgable people like David who have different opinions and ideas of how to do things.

Piling on to what Rick and Dan said, I find that David does his homework and is open to the ideas of others. Wheneve I have a discussion with him, I always find we have an engaged and honest conversation. Since working with david on the High School referendum, I have come away with a much higher level of respect and believe I have learned much.

Yes, arming teachers with handguns and calling striking teachers terrorists are very sane and rational thoughts.

Walter: As I've said many times, and continue to say, I support the Federal Safe Schools Act. If you have issues with that, you may want to discuss them with your Federal representatives.

Also, if you review the posting I made regarding the definition of terrorism, yes - Unions have acted in a terroristic manner (cf: Wisconsin recently), and yes, using our children as weapons against us in order to force us to cede to their demands falls within that definition.

As I've said previously, we're happy to negotiate - but we ought to refuse to negotiate with those who would use our children as weapons against us because you can't have a good faith negotiation while under threat or duress.

Tripp and Dan - thanks much for your support. I too have learned much working with everyone on the Study Groups, and even during our lengthy discussions during the referendum... I look forward to continuing the process :-)

another Vote for the Green one! hes a good guy.

Those are fine schools, but in the public workspace they do not guarantee raises. All they guarantee is the ability for a raise.

And the (them!) comment makes me believe you are an angry teacher who feels that the district (which is in fact us taxpayers and parents) have been cheating them. While I agree that if a commitment has been made, it should be kept - it does not mean that in the future things have to work the same. Most employers are cutting back on their share of the health insurance split, giving raises below the inflation rate and cutting staff to a point where everyone is doing more with less pay. I appreciate the hard work my children's teachers do, and I believe they deserve to get paid well. But the "us and them comments"l are unproductive and seem to justify a defensive posture and excuse to walk out on the children. Many people work without contracts. Many teachers I know would love to work in the district. Not only becuase of the pay, but becuase the majority of the children have parents that care about their children's education. Read to them at night, help with homework. Ask a few teachers in the City where they would choose to work? Or private schools in the suburbs. They would find the conditons in the top half of the suburbs to be worth paying for a bit of their health care, paying deductibles, co-pays and some of their own education. Not to mention the pensions. So please cut the anger and cut a deal; and don't walk out on the kids.

The NSEA and the BOE are scheduled to meet tomorrow for negotiations and the NSEA has announced that if no agreement is reached that they will strike on the 16th. The next BOE meeting was scheduled for the night of the 16th. Don't you think it is better for the BOE to meet BEFORE the negotiation and strike rather than after???

Pursuant to the Illinois Open Meetings Act, they have to give 48 hours notice prior to holding such a meeting, typically this is on the outside entrance at the location where the meeting will be held. In addition, if they have a website (and D112 does), they have to post it on the website 48 hrs ahead of time as well.

If they don't comply - then it's not a legal meeting and no action can be taken.

Violations of the IL OMA can be reported to the Illinois Attorney General's Public Access Counselor.

On the website it shows that the meeting was canceled on Oct. 5th, obviously this was changed to avoid listening to teacher comments and public comments. You can watch the tape of the Oct 9th board meeting, the room is practically empty. I heard Sherwoods parents were notified at 6:40pm that evening via email from the PTO. I do think this is a bit strange. @ Hummmm NO the board has plenty of time to have meetings but the public meetings are only once a month. Don't you think that was an important meeting? Maybe the BOE should have sent out an email blast regarding the change or a phone blast from the superintendent that seems to be happening daily. Way too important of a meeting to cancel and change without making an effort to make the community aware, makes it look like the BOE really doesn't care what we think.

Actually, anytime the Board meets with more than a certain number of members (2 or three - I'd have to review the OMA requirements before saying for certain), they have to follow the IL Open Meetings Act requirements - they have to give at least 48 hrs notice, post the notice at the entrance to the location where the meeting will be held, post it on their website, have an agenda. And if they want to discuss certain items in private, they can do that by going from an "Open" meeting to a "Closed Session" of that "Open" meeting, but that has to be on the Agenda as well, the topics to be discussed in closed session are subject to certain narrow exceptions, and the closed session is recorded - those tapes are regularly reviewed, and destroyed when no longer relevant. No action may be taken in a closed session, it has to be taken in the "Open" session when they come back from the closed session.

If you know of violations of the IL OMA - report them to the IL Attorney General's Office - Public Access Counselor.

Yes. And we have to make arrangements to care for our children during the strike while working to earn enough to pay HP property taxes...

"A concerned parent

Yes. And we have to make arrangements to care for our children during the strike while working to earn enough to pay HP property taxes..."

I know I chose to buy/live where I currently do....My guess is you had some choice and that choice probably had 'good schools' somewhere in it.

it honestly sounds like everyone is jealous of the rules that teachers work under. They did not make these rules, so the jealousy of 'job security & automatic raises' needs to stop. It is how that game is played. Either deal with it or move. Simple as that. Also, economy my ass. This district has been sitting on a surplus of money at the last contract negotiations. Tell them to stop buying ipads for the class room, among other things. Teachers are needed, Ipads are not.

@Bill: "...the jealousy of 'job security and automatic raises' needs to stop. It is how that game is played. Either deal with it or move. Simple as that."

From my perspective, it's not jealousy - it's disgust. More and more, public sector unions are trying to hold on to benefits that few, if any, have in the Private Sector - because they're restrictive and fiscally unsustainable.

Most regular employees are considered "at-will" - they can be terminated for no reason, or any reason other than one which is a result of being in a protected class (age, race, religion, etc...). Why should teachers in D112 be treated any differently?

Automatic raises aim to treat all employees the same - but as we know - all employees are NOT the same. They perform at different levels. Why shouldn't they be considered for raises at different levels based upon their performance? Granted, rating teachers isn't an easy task - there need to be ratings that vary depending upon class level, coursework, etc. but that's certainly achievable - why should we automatically give a lousy teacher the same raise as a great teacher? All it does is tend to drag everyone down to the lowest common denominator. You can't be fired because you have job security, you're getting a raise no matter what you do - so why strive to do better?

Remove the 'job security', remove the automatic raise - set achievable and fair targets for consideration of a raise, and people will work to achieve it.

I agree with HP Parent. The teachers are acting like spoiled children. Also, do these teachers get paid for makeup days, should they strike? If so, the strike is of no risk to them, which is ridiculous and enabling them to fold their arms and demand what they want.

Of course taking one's skills and transferring to another District assumes that there is an available position in another District. It also assumes that one is willing to either commute whatever the distance is (and likely absorb those costs), or move and then have to deal with relocation costs.

I'm not saying it'll never happen, but I doubt it's as likely as the Union is trying to make it out to be. Also, who's to say it's not happening now?

@ DGreenberg - I think we all know or that it is understood that the teachers are not immediately going to jump ship. What will happen is that they will be scouring the openings all the time and leave when they find it as there will always be openings in surrounding districts due to non-tenure dismissal, retirement, etc. So it can/will happen over time and you will one day realize that wow, how did our schools get so bad?

Most of the teachers I know from various schools (I am not a teacher) do not live in HP and they already commute to get to work. You point of relocation or commute is not a valid one.

Actually, I'm more than happy to consider teachers for raises who have performance that demonstrates they should be considered for a raise. Those who perform better get more consideration. Those who have advanced degrees get additional weighting on that consideration.

But the days of automatic raises for all has to end. We need to have a fixed pool of money set aside for raises - not everyone considered for one will get one if the pool is exhausted, and no - we ought not to give special consideration or priority to someone who was considered last year but didn't get a raise, otherwise it just lets them 'coast' for a year on their past performance.

We must always strive to become more effective and efficient at providing education to our children. I'm not looking to rightsize the educational service to balance the needs to the District and the Taxpayers/Children.

Residents here regularly spend up to $8000 per child to send the kid to day camp or overnight camp. They complain about the cost but would never think of not sending them. They find a way. The money is there.

And one could argue that the value is there already and currently not being funded fairly.

BL
Steve, couldn't agree with you more

What someone allegedly chooses to spend on camp has no bearing on what the salaries for anyone should be. And just because someone may have some extra discretionary funds doesn't mean that they ought to be deprived of those funds and forced to give them to some other entity.

And how quickly do you think that they can replace ALL the striking teachers? My guess is your/the children would not finish the school year before the next one started.

No striking teacher should EVER be fired. It is their right to strike and that right should NEVER be taken away even if you do not agree with their striking points. Strikes are a last resort and are not taken lightly by union memebership.

@Susan: "No striking teacher should EVER be fired. It is their right to strike and that right should NEVER be taken away even if you do not agree with their striking points. Strikes are a last resort and are not taken lightly by union memebership."

Sorry, but I respectfully disagree: Anyone who strikes should do so with the full knowledge that they can be fired as soon as they walk out the door. Sure, it's their right to strike, but we, the taxpayers and the District reserve the right to terminate employees who refuse to work and who would use our children as weapons against us.

This intent to strike by the NSEA is not a "last resort" - it's a strike of choice. We're happy to negotiate, but the fact is that the NSEA is asking for more money than we're going to be able to take in under the tax cap - so that money has to come out of reserves. We need those reserves for upcoming infrastructure needs - and to maintain our credit rating for money we may have to borrow for those infrastructure needs (otherwise the taxpayers have to pay more in interest for the borrowed funds). Those infrastructure changes may indeed reduce the number of teachers we need as well.

Finally, it was FDR that said Public Employees ought not to be allowed to unionize because it's wholly incompatible with good government - he was right. And so was President Regan - anyone remember that issue he solved with the Air Traffic Controllers?

http://district112teachers.org/informational-flyers/1012-response-to-district-salary-posting/

@MS. This is some of the wors B.S. that I have read. First, I am not a teacher, but with a strike, the teachers clear out all personal belongings as they know full well that they have the ability to lose their job. So warning them is wasted time as they already know and it is a risk they are taking. Like I posted before. I pity anyone that would have to sit down and interview/hire the mass # of teachers to replace them. It most certainly will impact the students as there would be no school until it was finished. You'd be into the next school year before finishing this one. If that were to happen, best of luck with the quality you would attain. most teachers will not leave their current school to apply as I bet the majority would be out of work teachers that either were let go for obvious reasons or new teachers fresh out of college....

It all depends on what number of teachers we have to interview - some may choose not to get fired and return to work. Some may not. Regardless, it's entirely possible to hire hundreds of employees quickly. I've personally hired 200 in a week all by myself.

I'd be willing to believe that with more than just one person - say perhaps 10 administrators, that we could hire what we need rapidly - and it wouldn't take a whole school year. As an experienced interviewer - I'd even be willing to assist the District in that task.

I wouldn't wait by the phone if I were you.

David, I appreciate your challenging the conventional wisdom, but in the case of hiring new teachers, I think you are lacking an appreciation of what teachers do and how they work within the District’s curriculum. Without trying to be patronizing to you, before my kids went to school I didn’t really understand this connection either.

Because of teacher maternity leaves, we have had several teachers fill in mid-year. On paper, these folks all had fine credentials. But none of them had time to really come up to speed on the curriculum and, in at least one instance in middle school, my daughter had a “lost year” in science class because of a replacement. Moreover, teachers sign on to work for a year at a time – the only teachers looking for work right now are the ones not hired by other districts – in other words, as a group, they're not the best of the bunch.

Hiring a large number of teachers now would be kind of like the Chicago Bears firing their entire team and replacing it. Sure, there are lots of qualified, unemployed football players – but (a) they aren’t as good as the regular Bears and (b) it would take them at least a year to come up to speed. I would feel badly for any student whose classroom teacher was replaced mid-year and it is utopian to think that one could hire en mass w/o seriously negative repercussions

Dan, I agree that it would take replacements time to come up to speed. But this current situation where a Union threatens to go on strike (or does do so) when they don't get what they want is quite disruptive as well. At least if we fire those that walk out we send a clear message that we're not putting up with these unreasonable tactics any longer.

I've also said that if we haven't started interviewing for a spot, we ought to rehire the previous teacher if they want to reapply. If we've started interviewing for the spot, we should compare/contrast them against an applicant - we could end up getting someone who is more qualified and can hit the ground running.

The ISBE reports 60,000 candidates in the pipeline - some are new teachers, some retired that are still certified, some who went on to other careers but retain their certification, some who were on sabbatical. So while some in that set might be unacceptable candidates, I don't believe that all would be.

We get to interview the painter, get a cost estimate and then assign value to the cost versa end result. Finally, we get to judge the end result and choose to dispute the payment, give poor reviews or even go to the better business bureau. I have never had the opportunity to interview or choose a teacher in the public system:)

For the love of god you people come up with some of the goofiest comparisons known to man.

Walter:

Just replying to Phillips' analogy and statement re painters and teachers:)

I agree they should receive a fair salary, and the opportunity for performance based increases. But there shouldn't be any guaranteed raises tied to indices such as inflation.

The simple reason being that the factors which are involved in determining those indices are totally outside of our control, and planning for them is difficult at best, a crapshoot at worst. If the advice the District receives on the index is too low, where do the additional funds come from - educational programming cuts? Loans? If the advice the District receives on the index is too high, then we may have set aside too much money, and that is then typically used against us by other entities who say "Oh they have the money - look at this fund balance...".

Another reason is occasionally those indices are revised upward or downward at some point after they were issued. If we granted salary increases based upon an incorrect index (again, no fault of our own - rather of the Federal Government's), then what? Should we adjust the salaries upward/downward? How do you plan for that occurrence? What kind of set-asides are needed? What does that adversely affect?

Except for these crazy pension and Social Security payment schemes, I can't think of too much that gets a COLA (Cost of Living Adjustment) - which is itself tied to one or more indices such as "Inflation"

Most in the Private Sector don't get raises tied to inflation, nor should those in the Public Sector.

This district has become a starter district, teacher turnover is rampant and veterans are encouraged to take early retirement, leaving the district to save money by hiring new, young, untested and unmentored teachers. Our curriculum constantly changes and who's paying attention? Not Braeside, not Ravinia....they want to keep what they have while 4 more buildings take a fall in scores. The district needs to close schools, consolidate both students and programs, retain and reward only the best teachers, hold everyone from parents to support staff to administrators accountable for student success and go after impact funding from the government. Taxpayers are bleeding out money, home prices are falling, people and teachers ARE leaving and parents have NO say. Board meetings are a waste, the board operates in a vacuum, teachers look the other way when curriculum sucks and when fellow teachers stink. I think the parents should go on strike, then the teachers will really see how easy they have it here in a community dedicated to their children's education that makes THEIR jobs easier. You hate it here? Do something about it! Don't just ask for money, ask for fundamental CHANGE.

Widget, I agree with your observation about curriculum change and “who is paying attention”? D112 has almost completely turned over its top curricular staff in the past 3 years (i.e., Behlow, Wennstrom, etc.) and I’m not convinced that the curriculum is moving in the right direction. I also agree that the School Board needs to ask more questions regarding subject area curriculum, the process by it is set, what courses are offered and how children are assigned to different classes. I have been to several School Board meetings and I’m not sure when the critical thinking/question asking on the Board occurs – it must be during the closed door sessions when the real analysis and decision-making occurs.

I disagree with the premise that either administrators or teachers don’t care about the curriculum. I have met with passionate teachers and administrators who care deeply about what is taught and how it is taught. I don’t always agree with their judgment – but I do think they genuinely are concerned. The problem with improving curriculum in D112 is two-fold – first, D112 is a large bureaucratic organization where change occurs at a glacial pace and two, because of the need to make sure that each class in each grade at each school is teaching the same material in the same way, teacher innovation (i.e., teaching “outside the box” using non-sanctioned materials and methods) is stifled.

Part of the problem with some posters villifying teachers is that at least some of these posters comment on any dispute involving teachers no matter where it occurs.

In days past, commenters on various topics were generally restricted to Letters to The Editor of their local paper, and information on local topics was quite restricted so unless one lived in a particular locale they might not even know about the problem.

Now in the 21st Century, we've got Social Media, Blogs, and local news sites such as The Patch which allow us to see what's happening on a broader scale, and comment on it as we see fit.

Interestingly enough, this new media allows us to see the tactics used by organized labor to get their way, and offer solidarity to our fellow taxpayers, just as this new media allows organized labor to offer solidarity to their fellow members throughout the State via their websites.

Speak of the devil.

Tripp, the teacher's union isn't in any hurry to negotiate. They seem to have left last night's session and said they won't meet again until October 15 (Monday). Why aren't they meeting around the clock?

Why isn't the Board anxious to meet? They could have countered with more dates. That is part of the negotiation process. I guess you really can't make assumptions unless you were at the meeting Ed. Is it possible the Board is game playing? They can spin it any way they want.

The Board's email this morning says the union started last night's session late and then says, "At the end of the evening, the Union proposed scheduling another mediation session on Monday, October 15 at 5:00pm. " Sure, the board could have countered, but if the union is really committed to a solution, a five-day gap doesn't seem to really convey that. The union, not the board, is calling for a strike.

Well, Ed, are you aware that the entire (union) negotiations team is made up of Full Time working teachers? How would propose them negotiating around the clock and continuing to do the professional and excellent job of teaching their students and your children?
You, nor I, were at the meeting - how do you know the board is willing/available and offering to meet sooner than the 15th? You do not. You are making grand assumptions. It was the BOE who stalled this process from Sept til Oct by almost four weeks - that is a fact!

Ed:

If your information is correct, then shame on the Union. Mark Steuin indicates it was mutual decision, so then, if that is true, shame on all of them. In any disagreement, there is plenty of blame to go around.

Walter + Ed:
It sounds as if everyone agreed to meeting on Monday. Nowhere in the district email does it state that the union refused to meet at any point before Monday.

This is still a spin. The board is offering a contract. If the Union, threatening to strike and not agreeing to that offer, says they next want to meet on Monday, then why would the board waste their time trying to push sooner? Maybe negotiations are done differently in public schools than in my business.

http://district112teachers.org/informational-flyers/1012-response-to-district-salary-posting/

http://district112teachers.org/informational-flyers/1012-response-to-district-salary-posting/

It may end up with binding arbitration. The teachers simply want a fair settlement. They want the district to honor the lane advancement for the teachers that followed procedure, got course and lane approval, went out and financed course work for anywhere from $5,000 to $15,000. This is how it has been done in the past; if the district wishes to change policy, fine, but honor the agreement made previously with those teachers. It doesn't matter if you agree or not, this was board policy. If they can't honor their word or signed paperwork (principal, head of curriculum and superintendent), why would anyone trust the BOE on anything? If the BOE and union choose to negotiate on future professional development that follows a different path, that is up to them, but to leave teachers in serious debt that would have never occurred if the district hadn't approved it in the first place is harsh.

To some extent good schools, and other amenities in our community attract families - young and old - who are searching for housing. However, when buyers look at a home - they typically have a price range in mind. And when they find a property they like in that range, they'll start looking at other features - schools, parks, taxes, utility costs, licensing, fees, transfer taxes, etc.

Unfortunately, our taxes are higher than other surrounding locales which are also in the "Top 10" of school districts and that has an adverse effect on purchasing decisions because someone can get a bigger house, bigger property for lower taxes.

I've spoken with many Realtors in our town and region and our high taxes are a turn off to many buyers, so I'd argue that we've reached a point of diminishing returns with regard to an ever-growing tax burden. Because if someone wants to sell their home, they need to reduce the price in order to offset the tax burden - and that leads to a downward price spiral.

If we want to attract young families - we need to balance the "features" and the tax burden.

Based on a little bit of research, I think HP is in the middle ranks of tax burdens in this area – let me share my findings. I define tax burden as the Tax Bill/Assessed Value.

Looking at Lake County, Lake Forest – with 1.5% - is the lowest. HP (2.4%) is lower than Deerfield (2.6%) is lower than Buffalo Grove (2.8%). Looking at Cook County, Northbrook is lowest at 1.8%, followed by Glencoe and Winnetka at 2.0% and Evanston at 2.2%.

What do these figures mean in context? For a $300,000 house, you would pay $4,500 in Lake Forest, $7,100 in HP and $6,000 in Glencoe.

The large discrepancy with Lake Forest is mostly due, I think, to the fact that LF is a much more affluent town with a larger tax base. For a similar neighborhood and size of house, you clearly get more for your money in HP than in LF – a significant part of that is, no doubt, due to the lower taxes in Lake Forest. But that has always been the case, and I would argue, this fact was probably “baked in” to your home price when you bought it.

With respect to Glencoe, I think part of the discrepancy is affluence, part is the fact that we have a much better Park District in HP and part of the fact is that we have a neighborhood school system which is economically less efficient than Glencoe’s grade-level system. Choose Glencoe – get a less diverse community with grade-level schools and lower taxes. Choose HP – pay more, but get more diversity, neighborhood schools and a better Park District.

Given our demographics and socio-economic diversity, we are not as uniformly affluent as LF, Glencoe and Winnetka and we are probably closer to Evanston (2.2%) as a comparison. And, while the $300K homeowner pays about $500 more in HP than Evanston, we really get a lot more for our money here

http://district112teachers.org/informational-flyers/1011-response-to-district-112s-october-10th-newsletter/

I'm not sure what Cities you're referring to - but in HP, the Council salaries are in the $10K range, while the Park Board and School Boards are volunteer positions.

Raising taxes rarely if ever captures the revenue that one expects. This is because such surcharges are typically a turn-off to attendees. A municipality might get the surcharge the first time, but once someone sees it on their receipt they'll think twice before attending an event.

Witness TicketMaster and LiveNation - both of whom seem to have a never-ending stream of add-ons, fees, etc when someone wants to purchase a ticket to an event.

Walter:

There is no doubt that they will levy the max and yes, taxes could go up if the administration prevails. The issue is how these dollars are spent and if we concur that they should go to meet teacher demands as regardless, we pay the bill.

Forest:

I have not advocated the Board meet all of the teachers "demands", nor have I said that the Board is entirely wrong. However, I have major issues with the fact that the BOE supports a bloated administration (in terms of size and salary) and gave the superintendent a bonus last year. As a small business owner, I have issues with the administration asking the teachers to sacrifice benefits while not soing the same. I don't ask my employees to take cuts unless I, too take them. And believe me, in my profession the last 5 years I have cut plenty.

I admit since I have teachers in my family, I am pre-disposed to their situation. It might interest some of the folks who comment here that there were many teachers in the CPS system whose salaries were reduced as a result of their recent agreement. Teachers often use the monetary issues to bargin for things like class size and aides, which was the case in Chicago.

Tripp, I understand your perspective about mutual sharing of loss – it is one to which I subscribe. But, in looking at the behavior of the top administrators, I think a better comparison to District 112 than a small business is an $80 million business, doing business in multiple markets, in the midst of a significant restructuring that is trying (not entirely successfully) to meet many different customer needs.

Put more simply, D112 is not an easy gig and needs significant work. For example, since the 3 districts were consolidated 18 years ago, it is only in the last few years that every 3rd grade classroom in the District was doing the same work – ridiculous that it took so long, but an example of either (1) how hard this District is to manage or (2) how poor previous administrations were. You know the AYP, building, salary and curriculum challenges the District faces – these are not easy things.

In the corporate context, management would probably get stock options that wouldn’t vest until the enterprise was profitably back on its feet. One can’t do that in the not-for-profit world. So, while I don’t like to see anyone – much less non-classroom administrators – overpaid, I understand the need to retain top talent. I’m not knowledgeable enough to know what an appropriate compensation package is – I assume the BOE has outside people advising them.

Da:

You assume that the administrators in 112 are best in class. I would disagree with that statement. I don't believe we've had competent administrators since the first superintendent, Darrell Lund. He was fearless enough to stand up to the local politics because he was on the edge of retirement. Instead, we run off great people like Guy Schumaker, now superintendent of Libertyville 70, rather than empower them.

I agree we should compare the district to a larger business. However, if that was the case then the administration would have been replaced many times over. I couldn't imagine an 80M business that would put a production manager, for instance, in charge of HR. Yet, the district had a former building principal acting as HR manager and drawing an assistant superintendent salary.

Teachers don't get their full salary for life. Where did you get that idea? All state employees get a pension, it is in the constitution. They get a percentage of what their salary was based on the last 4 years of work. They don't get social security. If you are going to rant and rave, at least get your information correct. In order to get a full pension, you have to work 32 years. The district will take whatever money it can; if it doesn't go to salaries, it will go toward something else.

llwrt--

You hit the nail on the head with "if it doesn't go to salaries, it will go toward something else." 112 parents want the money going towards "something else:" facilities, more teachers for accelerated programs, smaller class sizes.

I believe you're simply incorrect about the pensions. The compounded COLAs result in any teachers eventually receiving pensions (75% of ending salaries) that exceed their ending salaries (or come very close to doing so). Also, you suggest that it's unfair that teachers don't receive social security, but they don't pay into ss. Also, social security starts at 67. Teachers start receivng their pensions in their 50s. Sounds like a pretty good deal to me.

They also pay into the pension. That is not to say that they are too generous, but we need to be clear about the facts. The biggest issue is not with rank and file teachers, but the people that game the system by getting several payouts. Some are greater than $ half a million annually.

Richard--

The abuses are wrong and make for good stories in the media, but they have little, if anything, to do with why the pension fund is scheduled to go under by 2029. The benefits are too rich, especially the compounded COLAs. Regarding your statement about contributions, in at least 2/3 of the school districts in Illinois, the school districts pay, as a benefit, the teachers' required contributions. I'm not sure whether 112 does this or not. If anyone knows, please advise. Also, if you review the 112 teachers' counter-offer, it appears that they're attempting to spike their pensions by receiving outsize raises in their last years of employment. This further compounds the pension problems, which would eventually be shifted to 112 under pension legislation being considered in Springfield.

The spiking became the norm after the state limited the spiking to the 6% per year for the last 4 years. This has become the norm across the state. I believe that it should be banned everywhere and that this should be done by state law. The reason that the limit was put in place was because some districts were spiking by as much as 100%. This is not confined to 112.

No David, do not put words in my mouth; I do not get social security- including what I paid out over all those years prior to becoming a teacher. Teachers cannot apply until 60 or 32 years of service. If at age 60, you don't have a large number of years in the system, the payout is minimal. Most of us "second career" teachers will teach until we drop, just like everyone else. The district would probably apply extra money to those nice fat admin salaries. You don't get to choose where they put their money.

So should they actually strike, parents won't find out until late, late at night on the 15th. Not cool.

BL
Forest, were you at the negotiation session? If not, why do you assume it's the teachers who don't want to meet?
Your statement that teachers are using kids to get what they want is offensive and ludicrous. How about considering that the Board is spinning their tale of the information to promote their agenda, at the expense of the the outstanding professionals who have dedicated themselves to educating the children of this community.

I did not see anything in the article about the union saying they refused to meet until Monday. It looks like it was a suggestion. Did the district propose earlier dates and get turned down? I would definitely be upset if that was the case!

It’s not about the children. It’s never about the children. It’s about protecting the power, perks and profligacy of public employee union monopolies. Students are the first and last casualties of the ruthless Big Labor war against fiscal discipline. I will say this over and over this is not about dist 112 teachers it is about NEA and IEA political power. This up coming strike was pre planed for maxim media coverage, we in Highland Park are being used by one of the largest trade unions in the country.

http://district112teachers.org/informational-flyers/1011-response-to-district-112s-october-10th-newsletter/

Teachers won't either Ernest. Works both ways.

Mark, thank you for clarifying, as I was also questioning the Monday date.

JC-
It does not sound like there was any kind of deadline set regarding proposals. A meeting time is just that, a time to meet. Were the teachers meeting with the mediator between 5:00 and 7:00? Did they have access to the mediator before then?

http://district112teachers.org/informational-flyers/1011-response-to-district-112s-october-10th-newsletter/

Jesse:

The number of administrators in 112 far outnumber what is present at 113. Also, no one, as far as I know, is receiving a 250k/year pension on top of their salary in 113, like Mr. Dada is. That being said, I agree that salaries of administrators in general are out of control and we should be receiving value for what we are paying.

I wouldn't usually bother to answer this type of post but everyone needs to understand something:

1. I am not the head of anything. Our members decide what the dues should be.

2. I do not tell our members what they should do anymore than the District's attorneys tell the Board what to decide.( The Board always has two attoneys at the bargaining table.)

3. The NSEA is lead by teachers who teach at District 112 and are elected by their peers. They make the decisions for themselves. This includes deciding whether to strike.

Mr. Stein

I am puzzled why the attorney that is working with the Teacher's Union, is blogging, while the Union and the School District are in negotiations. Seems very unprofessional for an attorney. Unless it reflects your moral character, and if it does, I feel sorry for the teachers you are working with along with the entire process.

Golly gee Mr. HP, Why does Bruce Hyman send out all those emails and blog on the district web site? He's the president of the board and on the board negotiating team. I guess you just don't know much about IEA but you sure do know a lot about making petty, snotty, comments. I think the teachers are just fine with Mr. Stein. Maybe you
should do more research on what his role is with the IEA rather than guessing.

http://district112teachers.org/informational-flyers/1011-response-to-district-112s-october-10th-newsletter/

What makes you think that teachers are quiet and what makes you think that the District Office/BOE really cares about teacher opinion over curriculum and working environment? How much control do you have over your work environment? If you honestly think that teacher opinion is valued by admin, then you are mistaken. The only thing teachers have some control over is their contract. Not very nice widget. What do you expect the teachers to do? Public opinion didn't seem to help either at board meetings.

Widget - I am the parent of a special ed child who will be more affected by a strike as much or more any other student, as he thrives and grows with structure. I nor did any other special ed parent choose to be a special ed parent.
I am only going to comment on this situation concerning special ed, as I fear any other comments may influence my son's education.
Special Education has had more cuts than just about any other area of the school per student the last few years. And I have been to the School Board meetings to watch the pain. Therapists, Social Workers, Teachers Aids, and yes even administration for special ed have all been cut down or frozen the last few years, and, in addition, my son cannot go to his home school Braeside where his older brother thrived in the classroom. There have been no change in class sizes for typical kids during the past few years, Special Ed has had more cuts than general education and more than luxurious dual language program, which many parents love. And NSSED, which supports special ed, has been shredded.

If they cut special ed any more, parents may start litigating when their children's needs are not met according to the law - so it will cost the district more money and thus the taxpayers - which I am one.

So please don't be so flippant with your special ed comments, unless you are going to educate my child next week when the teachers walk out.

Bluntly put Widget! Strangely enough I find myself agreeing with much of what you say.

The elephant has officially entered the room :-)

I agree with you Widget, well put!

Check out the IEA website JL- that should answer your questions. I missed where he has to justify his salary to you. I am sure that the district's two lawyers on the board team make just as much. Did you want their email?- I am sure the District Office will give it to you.

@llwvrt Actually, no, Mr. Stein doesn't need to justify his salary to us. He really should be justifying his salary to YOU and the hard working teachers in NSSD112. As a long time teacher (who was forced to pay union dues only to watch excellent teachers shuttled out the door without any union support throughout the years), I think it would be helpful for all of us (current and retired IEA members) to know just what he does all day, aside from reading and responding to the Highland Park Patch comments.

lol "the strike." I'm not worried. But thank you for trying to make this a justifiable discussion.

This is a very useful document. I wish the D112 BoE had published it two weeks ago.

Interesting that you say starting to fragment, no it always was fragmented the teacher are being sold a bunch of B.S. by the IEA leadership, again this is standard play book stuff for the union. The NEA thru there local IEA is pushing 1960’s union tactics, divide and conquer. (1) Send union members inflammatory materials for months leading up to the vote. (2) Seek out young parents thru PTO interactions, and find sympathetic younger woman to voice their support for the union’s position. (3) Push the false property value falling argument. (4) Publish administrations payroll and show the great disparity between the two. There great loss up in Wisconsin has started a new yet very old union tactic blackmail and fear.

I truly doubt that Joe.

To play devil’s advocate caring about children is neither in the union’s charter or the fiduciary responsibility of union officials. There responsibility is to the teacher members of the union. Unfortunately big unions like NEA don’t care about their members either .

Joe:

I understand that the Teacher Unions' charter does not include education or children as the children do not pay union dues.

However, when they bring to bear the propaganda of falling home prices, teachers leaving et al, it is hard to take them seriously and since they negotiate on the teachers' behalf, would it not be wonderful if they negotiated in good faith to reward performing teachers and enhance the education process. Unfortunately, marginal and below median teachers also pay union dues :)

I confess that I am not in favor of unions. No doubt they had historical value in the past, today it is difficult to understand how they add value. If I am unhappy in the private sector, I take my economic contribution and move it to another entity. I have constantly heard in this discussion how much better and how much more neighboring districts pay, so why not go to those districts? Do they have so many open positions? What happens when their contract comes up and a strike is threatened there? Do they come back to HP?

Forest you and I are on the same page. Many people are unaware that the teachers union stared out as a professional association not unlike the AMA they provided training and governmental lobbying, in the late sixty’s they evolved in to a trade union. They took their play book straight from Jimmy Hoffa and the Teamsters. Last year at their convention NEA officials told the crowd that while professional issues were important, “NEA and its affiliates should never lose sight of the fact that they are unions”. Another fact is NEA pays there lobbyist to fight any attempt to make Illinois a right to work state.

Can I play devil's advocate for a minute Forest? Teachers provide tremendous input into what they think would be better for the students. It is up to the BOE to decide what is appropriate and acceptable. When it comes to curriculum, the BOE makes decisions and the materials show up at the school, frequently without teacher input. Teachers are frequently shot down for their ideas and I can't envision the BOE accepting a contract that says teachers can strike if they think the district curriculum is less than stellar. What is it that you would like to see the teachers do? Easy for you to say "they don't care." The process is there to fire marginal teachers, other teachers don't want them either. It makes the next teacher's job twice as difficult as they work to fill in the gaps and still keep pace. The principals currently have a process to follow - for untenured teachers it is fairly easy to get rid of a teacher. For tenured, a little more work on the principal's part. It prevents a teacher from losing a job because their boss doesn't like them personally. Principals are human too. As for high performance - how do you determine that? What standards? If you are special ed - those standards have to be different. Speech path - different. How do you judge art? Music? The ISAT measures how well you take a test. Should ELL be measured the same as native born English speakers? Braeside the same as Wayne Thomas? What is a fair, consistent, method for determining merit?

I'd like to know just what VALUE the Union brings to the taxpayers. I've asked this question several times, and all I hear are crickets in the room.

I myself have never used hate in any of my comments, I have simply pointed out facts about large trade unions. In my life I have worked with some of the largest unions in the country, the teamsters, Iron workers AFL-CIO, IBEW 134 the thug arm of the Daily machine I will add. Anonymity is best used when dealing with big union, anyway people I want to know me know me.

If by telling someone their comment was petty, then I am guilty. Telling Alexa to gather information and take it to the board. Guilty. Hate? No way. Sorry Ed. The rest is factual. Or pointing out that there are two sides.

Not sure why this was directed at me? "Hate? NO way. Sorry Ed."

pseudonyms have been used by writers for thousands of years, and have been an American tradition since our founding fathers used to pummel each other in the press. There are many recent books and articles discussing this as our Congress is a wee bit dysfunctional at the moment. So to imply people are wrong to use a false name is wrong. Being NASTY and RUDE is wrong. Hiding behind a name is not.

Do you think any of these people may have children in the schools and don't want their children to be abused by teachers if they say something against the Union?

To quote the scholars on ESPN. "C'mon Man!"

I'd like to know what 'hate' I have contributed. I am pro-teachers and anti-administrators. I am not a teacher nor do I work for the district. I have stated facts and or very educated opinions. My name is Bill and is irrelevant in all of this. What is relevant is the issues at hand, There will be a strike and it is apparent that the board does not seem to care. While this is a 'business' per say, it is not a for-profit, which it seems it is being run as to allow the administrators to look 'good' on paper to further their career. Those names have already been mentioned in this and other stories regarding the strike. What is most important is that the kids get the high-quality education that is known for in the North Shore school districts as well as what is paid for in property taxes. Both sides need to come to some kind of agreement, but seeing as the teachers have conceded quite a bit thus far (saving the district a large sum already) it is time for the Board to pony up in good faith.

I used a pseudonym because I am a parent of two young NSSD 112 students and I do not wish to put them in an uncomfortable situation. Also, I have previously only posted a link to the LF Settlement, which hardly can be considered hate speech.

WOW, So the Teacher's Union does not care about making negociating meetings, parents, community stakeholders, taxpayer's and as we already know, they do not care about the kids. What do they care about? Union Dues and Strikes? Hard to get warm and fuzzy about the Union. I support teachers and deplore the Union. Have any signs I can use?

My bad, Ed. Sorry. Didn't have my glasses on. Directed toward Richard. Apologies again Ed.

The "thugs" on this site are the people who make sarcastic and nasty comments in an effort to silence those who disagree with them. Personally, I'll continue to comment when I see fit to do so. Believe it or not, its part of my job to make sure that our viewpoint is out there.

Teachers in general, the NSEA, the IEA, and NEA all do care about education and children. We have routinely bargained over special education, reductions in class size, mentoring for new teachers and issues of this kind. One of the agreements that we've reached with District 112 is that new teachers will attend two additional days of orientation without additional compensation. Their mentors, who are veteran teachers, will also be required to attend at no cost.

Where we differ with our critics is that we also believe that teachers have worth and deserve to be treated as professionals. And yes, that does include the right to be fairly compensated and receive a decent benefits package.

District 112 is not broke. It has the highest financial rating possible from the state. It has an overall fund balance of over $23,000,000. It has an unheard of balance of over $12,300,000 in working cash. We also already know that there will be an additional suplus of approximately $1,7 million dollars this year.

NSEA, IEA, and NEA are all run democratically. Leaders are elected. The NSEA will not take any action that its members won't support.

@Mark: It could be argued that "Teachers in general, the NSEA, the IEA, and NEA all do care about education and children." because that's their bread and butter. Some may genuinely care about kids because that's their nature, some may care about the money. What's the percentage of each? I don't know - but that's the skepticism that comes into play during these debates.

"We have routinely bargained over special education, reductions in class size, mentoring for new teachers and issues of this kind." - One way to argue this is because Special Ed and reductions in class size preserve jobs, increase members, and increase dues. It is 100% true or something less? Again, I don't know - but more skepticism.

"One of the agreements that we've reached with District 112 is that new teachers will attend two additional days of orientation without additional compensation. Their mentors, who are veteran teachers, will also be required to attend at no cost." - Why should EITHER the new teacher or the veteran teacher get additional compensation above and beyond their current salaries for orientation days? Compare and contrast with the Private sector. Why should D112 teachers be treated any differently?

@Mark: "Where we differ with our critics is that we also believe that teachers have worth and deserve to be treated as professionals. And yes, that does include the right to be fairly compensated and receive a decent benefits package."

Sure teachers have worth and deserve to be fairly compensated. No one disputes that. If they want to be treated as professionals - they need to act like professionals. Stamping their feet, crossing their arms, putting on black shirts, picketing and filing an intent to strike until they get their way is anything but professional - it's childish at best, extortionist at worst.

How many professionals are required to take continuing ed to maintain their license, to keep up on changes in the market, and to serve their customers? How many do it on their own dime (well, maybe except for a tax deduction, but I digress...)? Why should D112 teachers be treated any differently?

"District 112 is not broke. It has the highest financial rating possible from the state. It has an overall fund balance of over $23,000,000. It has an unheard of balance of over $12,300,000 in working cash. We also already know that there will be an additional suplus of approximately $1,7 million dollars this year." - so what? Companies worldwide have money in funds and don't give it all to the employees. D112 is no different - we have additional needs that we need funds for - and those reserves are not a piggybank for teacher salaries, nor should they be.

This isn't a topic that's unique to our District - it's State Law, and there's lots of work going on toward making certain the metrics are fair and achievable rather than arbitrary. I've always stated that the metrics need to be targeted toward the course, class level, etc.

It certainly wouldn't be fair to rate a teacher with a gifted science class, and a teacher with a remedial science class in the same way. Student performance be the only metric a teacher is rated upon - attendance, willingness to undertake extra duty, publications, etc. should all be brought to bear in the overall teacher performance rating.

As for getting back pay when a former student makes it big? Nope - and the simple reason is that it introduces a level of fiscal uncertainty that's virtually impossible to plan and set aside funds for.

Moreover, how can it be proven that any one particular teacher had such an impact on a student who made it big that they ought to be retroactively rewarded? Such rewards would tend to negate the contributions of parents, and other individuals in a student's life (including other students!). Also, consider this: What if the performance of the teacher of the student who made it big was poor when that student was being taught by the teacher? Why would you want someone rated poorly to share in some type of reward?

Interesting information compiled by the NSEA about the administrators. Certainly the Admin salaries are too high, the benefits too much ($50+K in mileage allowances, really?). They're next up on the list of issues to address by the taxpayers.

As for misleading the public about part time employee salaries - I seem to recall a footnote on the chart from the District that explained that...

Scott, I appreciate your comments. The Union has been attempting to negotiate for some time. The Board was "busy." The Union attempted to do this civil and friendly manner and the Board wasn't interested. I am beginning to believe that the Board wants this. If the teachers agreed to continue bargaining, there is nothing to stop the Board from playing games, stretching out the meetings to one or two a month because they aren't in any hurry, until the weather is miserable and then say, "Too bad - we are initiating our offer." This could have been settled last spring but the Board didn't want to sit down and have a discussion. It is awfully hard to make a power play when you don't have an audience.

@Scott, you make good points. The district has known about a lot of things coming down the pike. Does anyone wonder if the BOE is purposefully making bullies out of the teachers so that they can turn around ask the taxpayers to pay out more money to fix the district's woes since the teacher negotiations cost the district too much money? How about the idea that still NOTHING will happen with this BOE or any because they wait too long to do things since their election cycle is every two years. Boundary change? Won't happen now, not with elections so close. Building closures? Won't happen either. Then Behlow with leave with his pension, house, car, etc. and still nothing will happen because the BOE will claim their board members are too new or the superintendent is too green. Excuses up and down the line. People need to wake up and demand the BOE fix the overhead issues, the impact funding deficit and the curricular downfall of this district. Work with good teachers, hold themselves and everyone accountable, stop waiting for the next cycle of crap and do what they said they would do: make some difficult changes. Really? It's not difficult to screw special ed without telling the parents or teachers involved in those programs. It's not difficult to pander to DL at the expense of other programs. It's not difficult to bus children w/out regard to where they live. No, it's cowardly, lazy, dastardly, arrogant and dirty. Today teachers are the bad guys, parents next.

I have heard from several people that the Board promised to pay for continuing education. Now if this is a fact then your union is truly not doing their job, this would be considered a breach of contract and the union’s legal representative would have made the proper civil litigations by this time. So it seems someone is feeding you a load of B.S. or Mark Stein and his teams have failed to do their job. Most everyone knows that we have too many schools in this district and the administration cost are way out of line, but right now the 500 pound gorilla at the door is the teachers union.

Nothing that Joe posted above is true.

Ok Mark, then why are people saying this?

Thank you for clarifying. Public view. Hmm.

Anon:

I don't want this to go on 2 years. I don't want it to go on one more day. I was just suggesting that, in light of all of the "beliefs" expressed in this forum, perhaps getting everything in the full view of the public might force both sides to work something out.

Forest - you couldn't be more off base. Truth - the union would prefer not to strike. Sorry that you have decided to believe all of the pap the BOE is spinning. Your choice. I have no reason to b.s. on here. I don't get extra brownie points or a cookie. A one year contract was asked for by the union. It says that in the board's postings. It would mean more negotiating but that would not be a problem. The BOE doesn't want a one year.The BOE doesn't want to settle. Believe what you want. I'm going to bed.

llwvrt

"Truth - the union would prefer not to strike." No doubt they would prefer the BOE to just give them whatever they demand. However, as in any labor dispute there are two sides and believe me, the Union is adding their share of spin.....teachers will leave.......

I think it is VERY clear that they now want a strike as the children out of school is their trump card. I believe it was you that said they did not want to wait until cold weather as it is not so comfortable to walk picket lines :) If the Union was truly against a strike don't you think they would negotiate prior to the day before the strike? If the Union stated that they would negotiate round the clock to avert a strike, I would be much more sympathetic to your statement.

Please let me know when the Board said that it wished to negotiate around the clock to avert a strike? Since the Board never made this suggestion, and didn't suggest meeting before Monday, this discussion is nonsensical.

Mark:

Nice try! The board has not declared it's intent to strike and as I recall they suggested another meeting but was told by the Union that they would not meet before 10/15, the day before the stirke. I am not anti teacher at all but let's not twist the facts here. Easy to spin but harder to back-up.

Forest, I have no idea where you get your information. It appears you have PLENTY of time on your hands, go to the NSEA website and sign up for email information. This way you can receive BOTH sides, it's no secret who has your ear. Wish I had more time to respond, but my husband and I are going out to spend time with our kids. Have a great day.

I was referring to the 10/11 email sent out updating the negotiations.

"At the end of the evening, the Union proposed scheduling another mediation session on Monday, October 15 at 5:00pm. The Board is committed to continuing negotiations and working diligently to reach an agreement and avoid a strike."

I would think that if the union were serious in negotiating, they would have declared their willingness to stay at the table until the issue was resolved. I do note that the board also failed in this email to indicate same, although they indicated a willingness to negotiate further and one can ascertain that had the union moved for round the clock negotiations there would have been dialog between 10/10 and now. If nothing else that type of approach by the union on the 10th meeting would have been a much better public relations move and an indication of their seriousness in resolving the matter.

The NSEA is not interested in engaging in what you refer to as a "public relations move." The NSEA is interested in reaching a settlement.

The NSEA has also made far more concessions than the Board has. The Board has hardly changed its position during this entire negotiation. The Board is the party that is attempting to drive a hard bargain.

I expect that some people on this Board will believe that the Board is doing the right thing. I also expect that a good number of people will conclude that this is not what they elected this Board to do. I don't believe that many people in the Highland Park Highwood community have a tea party mentality.

Mark:

Not sure what you mean by Tea Party Mentality? Were you refering to me? I do not even know what the Tea Party stands for. I assume ultra conservatives associated with Palin? I have never voted for her or anyone associated with her. She may be able to see Russia from her front door but I am actually there every two months so I guess our perspectives differ:)

I support teachers and education and have spent a good portion of my business career creating and providing them with many educational tools they use to support the curriculum. My objections to a strike have also been clearly stated.

Mark:

So the board needs to find you? Did they declare intent to strike? They indicated a willingness to negotiate, have YOU contacted them since the Oct 10th meeting to find a compromise and avoid a strike?

Dam Forest, he done busted us out, yep Forest is the president of are local chapter 847 united tea Party.
Mark, we were hoping you might join us for are annual squirrel hunt and barbeque. It’s fun for the whole family we just drink beer wave flags and talk about how much we love Sarah Palin.

Hey Mark, you boys have one of those big blow up rats, if not you should get one the kids would get a big kick out of that.

You could not be more wrong..it is the board that wants a strike and is egging the union on...that way they can look like the "good guys" even though they have no desire to meet any sooner then Monday to negotiate. If the board was really wanted to end this, then they could have easily called for meetings over the weekend...but they have chosen not to, must not be too important to them at the moment.

Carol, of course, you don't include the cost of the teacher's benefits (health care, pension contribution, vacation pay) into your calculation, and you wrongly assume that the teacher's salary would remain constant at essentially a starting salary over 20 years. I'll sleep better tonight if you confirm that you're not presently teaching math at Edgewood.

David R: Teachers do not receive vacation pay as a benefit. If you take the time to look on the district website at the Compensation Summary, you will see vacation pay only listed next to administrators. And yes, teachers receive health care benefits, as do administrators. Is this not something that a professional worker should receive as part of one's employee benefits? However, as noted in the report on the NSEA website, most administrators also receive family insurance or the cash option as a benefit. Pension contribution is only listed as a benefit for administrators as well. Teachers pay over 9% of their paychecks into TRS, which is in lieu of Social Security. You should check your facts.

Lou,

Your comment suggests that those supporting the BOE are doing so for property tax reasons. It has nothing to with that. Because of the tax caps, the amount of revenue the BOE has to work with is essentially fixed. Therefore, this boils down to whether we focus our fixed resources on smaller class sizes (more teachers, aides, etc.), more accelerated programs and facilities (have u visited Lincoln lately?) or whether we focus them on providing even richer pay for teachers that are already amongst the highest paid in the Midwest even under the BOE's proposal.

Lou, Both my kids have been through District 112 schools and in grade school 11 out of 12 of their teachers lived on the North Shore (HP. Deerfield or Glencoe). In Middle School, I don't know that most also resided in one of these suburbs. I don't know where you get your information from, but at least in our experience it was not true at all.

As a taxpayer who cares, I want to clarify that I have no quarrel with the teachers. My concerns are the union spin about teachers leaving, how wonderful our neighbor districts, how high they pay and regard their teachers. Continuing on about how our poor district will become nothing but a stepping stone and so on.
None of that is true regardless of the outcome in this labor dispute. No doubt you as a teacher seek a fair compromise and wish to be in the classroom doing what you enjoy. Having taught negotiation classes to high level Russian Managers, I recognize the dance taking place. No doubt they are buoyed by the CPS and LFHS strikes. I disagree with the unions seeming unwillingness to compromise with a best effort to avoid a strike bringing our children in as both hostage and pawn in the negotiations. If anyone thinks the union, not necessarily teachers, as they in some ways also become pawns to the union, intent is anything other than to strike then only the tooth fairy can save us:)
It may be that the union on their quest to bring the BOE to their knees may win the battle but it may be an expensive win if later they lose the war. Redistricting of some type as well as budget cuts could ultimately cost jobs. As I stated to Mark before, he can then say to the few, "sorry, it sucks to be you but remember you gave for the whole and we will light candles every Feb 29th on odd years at 3am, see ya." Naturally, the Union will still be there as their jobs are safe.