A raft of past programs have failed to substantially improve the reading skills of middle grade and high school students. CPS is trying once again, as part of a federal project that aims to help teens learn how to analyze complex non-fiction.
Join the conversation
We encourage our readers to leave comments and engage in dialogue about our stories. But before you do, please check out our "rules of the road."
Recent Notebook Entries
Right Now On Notebook
By:
By:
Subscribe to catalyst-chicago.org by e-mail
Other Blogs
catalyst-chicago.org feeds
Current Issue
Judge delays enforcing teacher layoff injunction
A federal judge today put a hold on an earlier order that CPS negotiate
with the Chicago Teachers Union to retroactively change its teacher
layoff process.
A federal judge today put a hold on an earlier order that CPS negotiate with the Chicago Teachers Union to retroactively change its teacher layoff process.
The district is appealing U.S. District Judge David Coar’s Oct. 4 recall ruling and argued that no recalls should be made until the appeal had run its course.
CTU President Karen Lewis says she plans to ask the appeals court to expedite the process. Although many teachers have found other jobs, she says that about 400 tenured teachers are still out of work.
In their motion for the stay, CPS attorneys argued that they have a good chance of winning their appeal, in which case a recall would not be necessary.
The stay is the latest in an ongoing battle between the district and the union that stems from budgetary layoffs over the summer. In making the layoffs, the board did not abide by seniority. Some were done because the teacher had unsatisfactory ratings; others because the position was no longer needed at the school. For example, a principal with three science teachers might have decided he needed only two.
Union officials contended that the district violated their collective bargaining agreement, which calls for the teachers with the least seniority to be let go first. When Coar issued his ruling on Oct. 4, Lewis declared it a victory for tenure.
Lewis contends that Coar’s ruling meant teachers would be reinstated and given back pay.
But district officials have a much different take. On Tuesday, Huberman reiterated the position that Coar’s ruling only called on the district to work with the union to develop recall rules.
And while that doesn’t seem like such a big deal, Huberman said the district was appealing the decision to settle the underlying point of whether teacher quality can be considered during budget layoffs. CPS officials have said that state law allows them to consider things other than seniority.
“I will pick this fight any day of the week,” Huberman said. “This is a fight about getting the best teachers in front of students.”
Huberman said the union has done an injustice to laid-off teachers by giving them the impression that they would have their jobs back.
About 200 of the teachers who were laid off had unsatisfactory ratings, Huberman said. CPS officials say about 56 percent of the teachers who were laid off have since found new positions.
Outside of the lawsuit, the union has filed 464 grievances with CPS over teacher layoffs. Union spokeswoman Liz Brown says that CPS has denied 95 percent of them.
On Wednesday, the union will hold a press conference to call on CPS to use a federal grant money to hire back teachers and lower class sizes. Union officials believe CPS has the “Edu Jobs” money but is not properly using it.
CTU's argument against the district's request for more time
Judge delays enforcing teacher layoff injunction
I am not clear how long the appeal to the 7th will take, I assume months. I am also not clear what the Judge orally stated in relation to the aspect of his order that required the CTU and CPS to meet over creating a re-hire process. I do not know if these meeting have been called off or not.
As to the laid off non-tenured teacher, I have no idea what to tell you as to whether the stay could increase or decrease the possiblity of you being hired back to CPS. If the CTU wins the appeal and the amended complaint forces CPS to use all $104 million in edu dollars to rehire then it could have an impact.
Judge delays enforcing teacher layoff injunction
The original order was for teachers who were "honorably discharged" - which meant that they were laid off without any salary or benefits instead of going to the reassigned teacher pool where they would have benefits and salary for a year.
These teachers would not get their postiion numbers back per se but would re-enter the reassigned teacher pool for one year. The only exception to this would be actual position numbers where senioritiy was ignored and the position still currently exists.
The judge found in favor of the CTU becaus CPS was unable to identify which teachers had been re-instated or re-hired to positions AND the number of these teachers who were unsatisfactory or not qualified.
Seniority should also not be confused. Seniority only exists where a teacher has BOTH the seniority and the qualifications. A Science teacher, as mentioned above, with 15 years experience could be laid off if he or she had the least seniority AND had no other certification qualifications to bump other teachers in the school. This was very confused because some teachers had multiple certifications AT ONE POINT, but may not have renewed them appropriately, so at the time of the layoffs, they were not eligible to bump other teachers.
According to the order above, CTU and CPS do not have to negotiate a call back process at this time because it is possible that the order will win appeal and the damages done by moving forward could irreperably harm CPS even with the appeal. This has been done in part because CTU has moved for the Illinois Employment Agency to force CPS to provide back pay and benefits for the "Honorably Discharged" Teachers.
This is the way that I understand it at least, and I have read the judgments.
Judge delays enforcing teacher layoff injunction
The original order was for teachers who were "honorably discharged" - which meant that they were laid off without any salary or benefits instead of going to the reassigned teacher pool where they would have benefits and salary for a year.
These teachers would not get their postiion numbers back per se but would re-enter the reassigned teacher pool for one year. The only exception to this would be actual position numbers where senioritiy was ignored and the position still currently exists.
The judge found in favor of the CTU becaus CPS was unable to identify which teachers had been re-instated or re-hired to positions AND the number of these teachers who were unsatisfactory or not qualified.
Seniority should also not be confused. Seniority only exists where a teacher has BOTH the seniority and the qualifications. A Science teacher, as mentioned above, with 15 years experience could be laid off if he or she had the least seniority AND had no other certification qualifications to bump other teachers in the school. This was very confused because some teachers had multiple certifications AT ONE POINT, but may not have renewed them appropriately, so at the time of the layoffs, they were not eligible to bump other teachers.
According to the order above, CTU and CPS do not have to negotiate a call back process at this time because it is possible that the order will win appeal and the damages done by moving forward could irreperably harm CPS even with the appeal. This has been done in part because CTU has moved for the Illinois Employment Agency to force CPS to provide back pay and benefits for the "Honorably Discharged" Teachers.
This is the way that I understand it at least, and I have read the judgments.
Judge delays enforcing teacher layoff injunction
The formal writen court order in this stay is limited to the following statement from the Court: " Motion hearing held on 10/19/2010 regarding # 63. As stated on the record and for the reasons stated on the record, The Defendants’ Motion to Stay Enforcement of Injunction pending appeal [63] is granted." Apparently the Judge made oral comments on the stay that will appear in a transcript.
Until that transcript is made avaiable drawing further conclusions on what the judge read into the record is subject to interpretation of both the CPS and CTU. It is best to get the record itself to draw conclusions.
I think one point should be clarified for readers of Catalyst and teachers who may have been laid off. In the CPS motion to stay the injunction the CPS argues that it is likely to win appeal in the 7th. Reading this I think many teachers will jump to the conclusion that the Judge agreed with this statement in granting the stay, and that is formally correct.
But, and isn't there always a but in legal issues, the idea that CPS is likely to win the appeal in the 7th is based on the following. That CPS needed to effectively show that it had about a 49% possiblility to succeed on appeal, the formal legal phrase is CPS was required to show only that it had a “less than a fifty percent chance of success†on appeal. How much less is not required to be stated by the Court is issuing the stay.
By granting this stay the Judge is in no way stating he agrees with CPS that his ruling was legally incorrect and will be over turned by the 7th.
Also Catalyst readers should also know the CTU amended its orginal complaint on October 15, 2010 (Document #: 69 ) One part of this amendment I think is of interest to readers of Catalyst reads as follows:
"Finally, plaintiff CTU seeks to ensure that the Board does not engage in any reprisal or retaliation or other attempt to frustrate the remedy of this Court. Specifically, CTU has a reasonable basis to be concerned that the Board is withholding grant money received from the State Board of Education for the purpose of recalling teachers in order to frustrate such right of recall and claim that financial exigencies require it to hire new hires off the street. The Board has received or is receiving $104 million which is intended primarily for the recall of teachers. The Board has represented that it is will spend only $70 million for such use and is withholding the remaining $34 million that would allow for the recall of all the teachers affected or subject to recall rules that the Board is obligated by the Court’s order to develop. Plaintiff CTU seeks the opportunity to determine whether the Board is seeking to frustrate the teachers’ rights to recall by withholding some of this money in reprisal or retaliation for the assertion of the claims in this case."
Rod Estvan
Judge delays enforcing teacher layoff injunction
How does this affect those teachers days or even several months of being tenured and have excellent ratings. Also I am a special ed. teacher looking for employment.
Add your comment