catalyst-chicago.org

Teachers union to sue board over larger class sizes

From Sun-times ... it seems there is no case law to support this suit. And it's not electioneering grandstanding? Come on. Marilyn said this at May 26 Board hearing ... and they're still "going to file"?
http://www.suntimes.com/news/education/2364186,teachers-union-class-size...

"CTU attorney Jennifer Poltrock said she could find no other legal case involving physically dangerous class sizes. Villages and municipalities file suits to ensure that occupancy levels of homes or businesses do not exceed certain levels, but Poltrock said she could not find any similar cases involving classrooms."

CORE fileD a lawsuit against the Board for budget and TIF details. A much more direct route, and with long-lasting impact.

Teachers union to sue board over larger class sizes

So this is a lawsuit that hasn't been filed over layoffs that haven't happened yet? The law firm of Poltrock and Poltrock has made a lot of money from CTU since Marilyn took over, but their legal counsel has really been lacking. As a last second election surprise this is really kind of lacking in both style and substance. We do need to fight against these layoffs and against these overcrowded classes, but this lawsuit is not the way to do it.

Teachers union to sue board over larger class sizes

you get what you pay for.... let me take that back. CTU is getting ripped off big time!!! Teachers you have the responsibility to kick out Marilyn! Obvious!

Teachers union to sue board over larger class sizes

The anonymous moonbats are out again.

Sigh.

Yes, I suppose Marilyn did say something like this at the May 26 Board meeting. I was in my classroom teaching that day, so I'm not quite sure.

According to President Stewart's letter dated June 3rd, "this morning CPS hand-delivered a letter to my office asking the Chicago Teachers Union to bargain over the 'impact' of decisions they intend to implement at a special Board meeting in June."

That makes it news.

Marilyn Stewart is president of the Chicago Teachers Union--having garnered 76% of the votes in the 2007 election--at least until her term ends at the end of this month. I believe she will be turned out of office on June 11th, but until that time comes, she has the constitutional right to continue governing the Union.

Granted, everything Stewart does right now is political, but the same can be said of everything Karen Lewis and CORE does during the election season.

Don't you haters ever get tired of it?

Teachers union to sue board over larger class sizes

There seems to be a lot of ignorance out there about how the Board is approaching the Union for concessions.

Many people are citing Article 47-2.2, which is the loophole given to the Board by state law allowing them to renege on contract raises if they cannot fund them.

Reporter Rachel Schneider writes: "The board has until June 15 to notify the union if it does not have the money for raises. "

That's not quite right.

The contract language actually says that the raises won't happen unless the Board adopts a resolution saying it can afford to fund the raises 15 days before the start of the new fiscal year (which would be June 15). This is quite a bit different than what the reporter says.

Further, for the past few years, the Board has not adopted its budget until the August meeting (which is nearly two months AFTER the start of the new fiscal year). The resolutions have not been adopted until that time (again, more than two months late), and yet the raises have always been paid.

According to Marilyn Stewart (and if she were lying, it seems that the Board could easily contradict her on this matter), back in her letter to the membership dated May 2nd, the Board is not using Article 47-2.2 at this time.

Instead, they are asking to talk to the Union on the basis of Article 49-2. Further, Article 28-1 (Class Size) states: "Prior to Board adoption of any amendments to this policy altering the class size provisions contained herein, notice and an opportunity to meet and confer regarding alterations will be provided to the Chicago Teachers Union at least 45 days prior to implementation."

Finally, there is Article 47-3, under which the Board asserts that it has not waived its rights under Section 4.5 of the IELRA.

These provisions all give the Board the upper hand, as it were, in changing policy on class size. Basically, the Board just has to sit down and tell the Union how it's going to be.

[The Union could lobby to have the law changed. We haven't been very successful on the legislative front lately.]

Thus, under this scenario, they don't have to open their books to the Union.

President Stewart should be commended for taking the approach she has done. Class sizes must be consistent with existing municipal codes on building and room occupancy.

Karen Lewis, if elected, should continue with this strategy.

Teachers union to sue board over larger class sizes

Danny first of all i filed a 44-9 on the municipal code in Oct of 2008. The union lost the grievance simply because the hearing officer asked "Is there 50 students in the classrooms today." The the answer was no. Case dismissed, this was at the 3-6 level already. The union refused to go further and the issue was never pursued. Fighting a potential municipal code violation is going to be tricky when you have 600+ facilities multiples by individual classrooms and then multiplied by teacher schedules.

When reporters asked for the data the CTU was using to file the law suit stewart's response was " We are working on it." It would seem that this data may take a month or two to compile and with schedules and teacher layoffs it may be near impossible to get an accurate schedule of home many students will be in every classroom in Chicago on June 8, 2010 when the CTU files this case. We teachers know that schedules were never finalised and are dynamic sometimes until the 20th day of the school year.

Unless stewart and team have some magic ball with every classroom schedule already printed with the number of students per class(each period) plus the measurements(square footage) for each classroom in the entire CPS system then I do not see how they could have any ruling to this case before school starts next September.

Again I filed this type of case two years ago and the union lost the case.

I my professional opinion as someone who has filed this exact case before this is only a publicity stunt to get votes. There are ways to win a case like this but stewart and her team are too incompetent and corrupt to do the foot work to win.

I have posted my case on firstclass by the way this was one of the reasons i was let go and i filed an IELRB claim which was taken up by the IELRA but the union refuses to give me any support to win my job back. In simple words I already did what the union says its going to do in Oct 2008 and was fired for it, but the union now refuses to help me get my job back.

I would not give this crew too much credit for anything they say or do.

there are other grievances that could be filed that are clear violation of our contract but stewart looks the other way.

John Kugler
kuglerjohn@comcast.net

.

Stewart allowed class size language to remain weak in 2007 contract
Deborah Lynch - June 09, 2010
http://www.substancenews.net/articles.php?page=1467&section=Article

CTU members facing class sizes of 35 and layoffs of up to 3,000 colleagues have Marilyn Stewart to blame, though she’s trying to blame the state for this one. Her recent all-member letter, four days before the run-off election, has a whopper of a lie in it, one members should know. Stewart’s June 3, 2010, letter states that "under state law there are some things they (CPS) can do because those items are permissive subjects of bargaining, such as class size." This is an outright lie meant to take the blame away from herself and her contract. Don’t believe it.

Permissive simply means that the Board and the Union can negotiate over class size — and they did. Stewart's own contract gives CPS the right to make changes to class sizes in Article 28-1, page 66 of the 2007-2012 CTU Contract.

She can not, and should not, blame the state law or anything else on this one.

Article 28-1. VI. Administrative Discretion in Exceptional Circumstances. The Chief Executive Officer or Chief Financial Officer is authorized to permit deviations from this policy where circumstances in the judgment of either of them require it.

Article 28-1. VII. Procedures for Modifying Class Size Policy

Prior to the Board’s adoption of any amendments to this policy altering class size provisions contained herein, notice and an opportunity to meet and confer regarding alterations will be provided to the Chicago Teachers Union at least 45 days prior to implementation.

It’s important to note that Stewart’s caucus, the United Progressive Caucus (UPC), lost many of our most vital bargaining rights in the 1995 law (the "Amendatory Act") that brought us mayoral control of the school system, when UPC CTU president Thomas Reece was in office.

The Illinois legislature prohibited only one K-12 teachers’ union in the state, the Chicago Teachers Union, from bargaining over such time-honored union issues as class size, staffing, layoffs, the calendar and much, much more. The UPC leadership then never really admitted the severity of the hit on our union, making those subjects “prohibited subjects of bargainingâ€. The reality was that between 1995 and 2002, class size was non-negotiable and completely and utterly unenforceable.

This attack on our bargaining rights — along with eight years of 2 percent raises in the boom times of the late 1990’s — gave rise to the PACT win of CTU offices in 2001. A major campaign promise and first order of business was to change the 1995 law and restore those lost bargaining rights. The Lynch team went so far as to say there would be no negotiations on a new contract unless and until the law was changed. We negotiated with City Hall, Springfield and, with the support of labor unions affiliated with the Chicago Federation of Labor and school reform groups we convinced to support us, we won the necessary change from prohibited subjects of bargaining to permissive subjects of bargaining.

In fact, in my first of only two meetings with Mayor Daley, shortly after taking office, I told him straight out that “reform†in Chicago would never happen if teachers had no voice, that our voice was honored at the bargaining table, and if he wanted our participation in improving our schools he needed to support the restoration of our bargaining rights.

So in 2003, and again in 2007, the Board did negotiate over these previously prohibited subjects of bargaining. In our contract — the one Stewart has been castigating for six years now (then made minor changes to and called it the best contract in CTU history) — class size again was negotiable and enforceable. We agreed to the class size referral process as a speedier, less confrontational way to get class size problems resolved, which turned out to be true. We created the class size supervisory panel which was to meet monthly at strategic bargaining, ostensibly to ensure speedy implementation of class size recommendations. And we won the extra $2 million for staffing overcrowded K-3 classrooms. Our contract did include language on exceptional circumstances.

So Marilyn Stewart agreed to a contract with the above language which is now coming back to haunt her — and our union’s members. CPS is taking advantage of this contract language because Stewart agreed to it, not because of any state law.

She should be taking (and getting) the full blame now for the current crisis and any accompanying layoffs. And CTU members should be holding her accountable this Friday.

Teachers union to sue board over larger class sizes

Chicago Teachers Union Votes for New Leadership
June 8, 2010 — Lew Rosenbaum

Tonight, Channel 9 reported on what appears as a bold move by Marilyn Stewart of the CTU: sue the school board for violating the safety of the children by increasing class size to 35. The rationale behind this is building occupancy safety requirements. Schools must provide 20 square feet of space for each child and adult regularly in a classroom. Stewart moved on this issue as the school board threatens to cut 700 teachers and increase class size. Curiously, she chose three days before the union election, what appears to be a grandstand play to show her militance and get more votes.

There are problems with this suit. One is that it shifts the attention of the public from the real issue: increasing class size under current circumstances as terrible for learning. Regardless of the size of the room, increased numbers of students overwhelms even the best teachers. Under the burden of the current high stakes testing regime, it is even worse. The lawsuit takes the eyes of the public off the real issue.

Another issue is that as the school board whips into high gear to cut the budget deficit that they allege is there (a smoke and mirrors problem: the city has taken hundreds of millions from the schools through tax benefits to corporate development, for example), they will use any excuse to close schools or “turn them around.†Overcrowding is one tried and true method of retrofitting a school, meanwhile firing the teachers there while the school is supposedly brought up to “standards.â€

Letters have also been circulating among the teachers smearing the caucus that opposes Stewart. One such letter intimates that a caucus that listens to any interests other than teachers is against the teachers. On the contrary, the CORE caucus has been working with parents and students and other community members since its inception 2 years ago as part of a Grassroots Education Movement, leading the battle to end school closings and protect both publicly funded education as well as teachers’ jobs and rights. Seems to me that is a winning combination, not a losing one.

I am a former teacher and an associate member of CORE today. I am a member because I believe thoroughly in the kind of union that is willing to mobilize and organize to win. That will not sit on its legal laurels to fight. And that will not bargain away the rights of teachers or students. If you are a teacher, I urge you to vote for the CORE slate in the election at your school Friday, June 11.

http://chilaborarts.wordpress.com/2010/06/08/chicago-teachers-union-vote...

Teachers union to sue board over larger class sizes

I think we can build a better case using hiring and layoff data that shows start dates. To me it is inconceivable that we have someone hired in 1998 laid off and then a 2010 new hire. I understand the '95 law that changed hiring practices and loss of bumping rights, but when we have system wide layoffs then should we not have system wide placement of displaced teachers into open positions?

I am now in the middle of an EEOC claim for just that. I applied for 4 open positions and later found less senior or new employees into the system got the positions. Working with Toni Barnes and DARTS with our limited resources we have found this to be system wide, so I do not think that it is individual principals deciding they want to hire a non-certified inexperienced teacher for their students over an experienced teacher, but quite possibly directives from HC. This is only speculation and I have no proof yet, just a couple of incidents.

Like i posted on First Class I have done the Fire Code citation route and all it takes is the programmer to change the students and the complaint is mute. Now if there is systemic staff endangerment, that we can establish through data analysis, documents and testimony then we might have a strong case, but that would take a lot of work, plus the Board is the one that has all that information. There is a backdoor way to get all the data but the union would have to be more organized than it is now: including technology and data processing that is not from the 1970's.

I have done this already but to do it in 600 hundred schools would take time, that the Board could use to undermine the case. Did Stewart file an OSHA complaint? I would think if she is claiming a system wide danger to staff OSHA would be involved. Just speaking from past experience. I helped to get IL OSHA citations(on our own at the school level; almost 1 year from PPC to citations) against the Board but is is a long process where the Board and its agents do all kinds of dirty tricks.

Anytime anyone wants to see some of my filings they are welcome if you think that could help you with your situation.

John Kugler
kuglerjohn@comcast.net

Teachers union to sue board over larger class sizes

wrong we filed for 5 teachers in 8 classrooms an et al. grievance for all those affected. i posted the grievance for everyone to read it was clearly not for one teacher.

I disagree any case that is won that creates a precedent can potentially be used system wide for all teachers and staff. please stop pretending you know what i think. let me repost what your presidential candidate said on this matter so you can bad mouth her too as egocentric or does that label just apply to me?

what about the DARTS complaint that involves multiple schools and multiple teachers?

have you read the complaints and grievances i have filed on this matter? NO

have you even asked for the information? NO

you keep talking about the law does CPS follow it? NO

Stewart allowed class size language to remain weak in 2007 contract
Deborah Lynch - June 09, 2010

CTU members facing class sizes of 35 and layoffs of up to 3,000 colleagues have Marilyn Stewart to blame, though she’s trying to blame the state for this one. Her recent all-member letter, four days before the run-off election, has a whopper of a lie in it, one members should know. Stewart’s June 3, 2010, letter states that "under state law there are some things they (CPS) can do because those items are permissive subjects of bargaining, such as class size." This is an outright lie meant to take the blame away from herself and her contract. Don’t believe it.

Permissive simply means that the Board and the Union can negotiate over class size — and they did. Stewart's own contract gives CPS the right to make changes to class sizes in Article 28-1, page 66 of the 2007-2012 CTU Contract.

She can not, and should not, blame the state law or anything else on this one.

Article 28-1. VI. Administrative Discretion in Exceptional Circumstances. The Chief Executive Officer or Chief Financial Officer is authorized to permit deviations from this policy where circumstances in the judgment of either of them require it.

Article 28-1. VII. Procedures for Modifying Class Size Policy

Prior to the Board’s adoption of any amendments to this policy altering class size provisions contained herein, notice and an opportunity to meet and confer regarding alterations will be provided to the Chicago Teachers Union at least 45 days prior to implementation.

It’s important to note that Stewart’s caucus, the United Progressive Caucus (UPC), lost many of our most vital bargaining rights in the 1995 law (the "Amendatory Act") that brought us mayoral control of the school system, when UPC CTU president Thomas Reece was in office.

The Illinois legislature prohibited only one K-12 teachers’ union in the state, the Chicago Teachers Union, from bargaining over such time-honored union issues as class size, staffing, layoffs, the calendar and much, much more. The UPC leadership then never really admitted the severity of the hit on our union, making those subjects “prohibited subjects of bargainingâ€. The reality was that between 1995 and 2002, class size was non-negotiable and completely and utterly unenforceable.

This attack on our bargaining rights — along with eight years of 2 percent raises in the boom times of the late 1990’s — gave rise to the PACT win of CTU offices in 2001. A major campaign promise and first order of business was to change the 1995 law and restore those lost bargaining rights. The Lynch team went so far as to say there would be no negotiations on a new contract unless and until the law was changed. We negotiated with City Hall, Springfield and, with the support of labor unions affiliated with the Chicago Federation of Labor and school reform groups we convinced to support us, we won the necessary change from prohibited subjects of bargaining to permissive subjects of bargaining.

In fact, in my first of only two meetings with Mayor Daley, shortly after taking office, I told him straight out that “reform†in Chicago would never happen if teachers had no voice, that our voice was honored at the bargaining table, and if he wanted our participation in improving our schools he needed to support the restoration of our bargaining rights.

So in 2003, and again in 2007, the Board did negotiate over these previously prohibited subjects of bargaining. In our contract — the one Stewart has been castigating for six years now (then made minor changes to and called it the best contract in CTU history) — class size again was negotiable and enforceable. We agreed to the class size referral process as a speedier, less confrontational way to get class size problems resolved, which turned out to be true. We created the class size supervisory panel which was to meet monthly at strategic bargaining, ostensibly to ensure speedy implementation of class size recommendations. And we won the extra $2 million for staffing overcrowded K-3 classrooms. Our contract did include language on exceptional circumstances.

So Marilyn Stewart agreed to a contract with the above language which is now coming back to haunt her — and our union’s members. CPS is taking advantage of this contract language because Stewart agreed to it, not because of any state law.

She should be taking (and getting) the full blame now for the current crisis and any accompanying layoffs. And CTU members should be holding her accountable this Friday.

Teachers union to sue board over larger class sizes

Not only did John Kugler fail to sign his last post, but he closed with Jay's name. This may cause confusion for some people.

Or, perhaps that's John's goal.

Teachers union to sue board over larger class sizes

I would like to ask huberman various questions, but one in particular.
Is it true if you went to a doctor to have surgery, You would prefer a doctor who is certified, experienced, and highly qualified to one who is not highly qualified but promises to complete a problem and learn while having surgery. I believe I would not prefer the younger, inexperienced, enthusiatic doctor. I want someone who knows what they are doing. I also believe this high expectations should be considered and is in the Chicago Teachers Union and Board Contract. The law suit is because of violations and not because because of firing unsatisfactory teacher. This has to be investigated and the truth should be exposed.
Another question to Huberman is why do many principal have the right and power to ruin excellent teachers careers by lowers the teachers rating from Excellent to satisfactory because of the personal dislikes of teachers, age, and retaliation issues without any investigations. Why don't the board have other people come in to observe teachers , so evaluations could be more objective. Perhaps people from the union. I observe many cases where principals fired highly qualified teachers who were wonderful teachers to put friends and even distant family members in positions who had only type 29, which is not even a standard certificate and short term special education certificates type 12. I believe not only does this break teacher union contracts, but it breaks special education laws and other laws that protect students.
Thus, I would tell the Board of Education Please don't use untruthful rational that CPS is firing unsatisfactory teachers. There may be a few teachers that may not be good, however I believe most are being lefted in their positions because they are not highly qualified and inexperienced, and yes younger. Not to say all knew teachers are bad. But there is a reason why highly qualified teachers get paid more because you get what you pay for. They are better, indeed!
I see many older, wonderful teacher being fired. I see people who blow the whistle and being fired. I see teachers who disagree with principal who have proven to have progress with their students being fired before teachers with less tenure, certification, and experience.
This is just as bad in my opinion in the discrimination endured by African Americans and Mexican Americans in the 1960 because the hurt is just as strong.
I appreciate the hard work and the fearless effort this Teachers Union lead by Karen Lewis is implementing on behalf of the teachers. After all this is a TEACHERS UNION, and not the board union, not the principals union.
The Board is not doing the students any favors hiring inexperience, not highly qualified teacher like they claim. In fact, the are doing just the opposite and this is backed by all the research.
For all the teacher who are and were treated unfairly, please stay positive and never give up we will win the fight and get are dignity back.
I will leave you with a quote by Elenor Roosevelt, "know one can make you feel inferior without your permission..."

Teachers union to sue board over larger class sizes

I love to read this type of stuff. Good and attractive information I take from it..Thank you for posting such a nice article.