Chicago teachers asking for 30% raises over next 2 years

[BigSkyBob]

I did some Googling and every number I found was lower than $75k, which your source says is from 2008. This 2011 article, for example, says the number is 69k. Perhaps the source you cited is adding other forms of compensation to the salary. Generous either way, though.

And 30% is of course ridiculous, but that's how bargaining works.

No, that's not how bargaining works. "Bargaining" is suppose to be done in good faith. A good faith position would involve first asking for the upper limit of what is in probable range of outcomes, and negotiating from there. Asking for a fantastic number is tantamount to announcing your intention to strike.

[BigSkyBob]

krazen, you would do better to blame the rich,who absorb a far greater share of the worker's production than the humble teacher, and thus leave children in a state of poverty and hopelessness.

Teacher unions that try to prevent the termination of teachers whom can't or won't effectively teach children adds to hopelessness of the unfortunate students whom have to study in those teacher's classes.

[BigSkyBob]

Well, here comes the strike.


http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/11/12166509-chicago-teachers-vote-for-strike-in-battle-over-pay-longer-school-days





Of course, Chicago has only about 403,000 students, a shrinking population and tax base, and a massive 25,000 teaching force.

The next battleground is brewing.

Earlier the teachers asked for mediation and the report comes out in July. To guard against a mediation report that convinces some teachers to accept it without more hard negotiation the union got a strike authorization vote so that they can use that threat at the bargaining table.

So, threatening to strike was their initial bargaining position.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The longer workday is in all probablity a one-time demand.

[BigSkyBob]

I'm completely befuddled as to what krazen's on about here.  krazen, 75,000 is a middle class salary. 

75K sits in the second highest quintile that goes from about 60 to 100K according the 2010 data from the Census.

Not in chicago my friend.

 It always seems like these horrors of unionized teacher stories come from a metro area like nyc or chi twon where thecost of living is MUCH higher than normal. It serves to distort the middle-class standard of living such teacher's earn and likewise project it as a false 'coming soon to your community' warning to the rest of middle america.

Effecive ploy. Misleading, but effective.

The second quintile of 60K to 100K is for family income, so two teachers both earning 75K are in the top quintile nationally.

That aside, based on individual salaries in Chicago, what quintile are you claiming Chicago teachers are in, and what is the minimum salary necessary to be "middle-class" in Chicago?

[BigSkyBob]

I'm completely befuddled as to what krazen's on about here.  krazen, 75,000 is a middle class salary. 

75K sits in the second highest quintile that goes from about 60 to 100K according the 2010 data from the Census.

Not in chicago my friend.

 It always seems like these horrors of unionized teacher stories come from a metro area like nyc or chi twon where thecost of living is MUCH higher than normal. It serves to distort the middle-class standard of living such teacher's earn and likewise project it as a false 'coming soon to your community' warning to the rest of middle america.

Effecive ploy. Misleading, but effective.

The second quintile of 60K to 100K is for family income, so two teachers both earning 75K are in the top quintile nationally.

That aside, based on individual salaries in Chicago, what quintile are you claiming Chicago teachers are in, and what is the minimum salary necessary to be "middle-class" in Chicago?

1 teacher making $75k of course already makes twice the cities' average salary.

As cited at

http://www.illinoispolicy.org/blog/blog.asp?ArticleSource=4685

average family income in Chicago is $46,877.

I don't see the logic in claiming that a single worker making 50% more than the average family income of a city doesn't already live at a middle-class level.

[BigSkyBob]

I'm completely befuddled as to what krazen's on about here.  krazen, 75,000 is a middle class salary. 

75K sits in the second highest quintile that goes from about 60 to 100K according the 2010 data from the Census.

Not in chicago my friend.

 It always seems like these horrors of unionized teacher stories come from a metro area like nyc or chi twon where thecost of living is MUCH higher than normal. It serves to distort the middle-class standard of living such teacher's earn and likewise project it as a false 'coming soon to your community' warning to the rest of middle america.

Effecive ploy. Misleading, but effective.

The second quintile of 60K to 100K is for family income, so two teachers both earning 75K are in the top quintile nationally.

That aside, based on individual salaries in Chicago, what quintile are you claiming Chicago teachers are in, and what is the minimum salary necessary to be "middle-class" in Chicago?

1 teacher making $75k of course already makes twice the cities' average salary.

As cited at

http://www.illinoispolicy.org/blog/blog.asp?ArticleSource=4685

average family income in Chicago is $46,877.

I don't see the logic in claiming that a single worker making 50% more than the average family income of a city doesn't already live at a middle-class level.

Who decided that educators aren't allowed to earn an "above-average" salary?

I am noting that claims that 75K doesn't constitute a middle-class income in Chicago are bogus.

[BigSkyBob]

Um, krazen, do you seriously propose that a teacher in Chicago should make less than $75,000?  How could they possibly live?

Teachers in rural Missouri start at about $28,000 and max out around $45,000 - this is merely a subsistence level salary there, as is $75,000 in a large, expensive urban center like Chicago.

The starting salary of $28,000 is definitely criminal,

In a free market, wages are set at a level for which every job opening that occurs at least one qualified applicant is willing to take the job. That seems to be the case in rural Missouri. Advocating raising that wage seems to be to me more an exercize in rent seeking than a moral imperative.

[BigSkyBob]

47% of Chicago voters back teachers

http://www.suntimes.com/15081881-761/story.html

A subtext to this dispute is that teachers have pretty much had their way for the last two decades in Chitown along with the other public sector workers. The old machine was built on handing out public sector jobs. That's a hard culture to move against.

But, it is an easy culture to leave! People who objected to that culture have had the option of fleeing to the suburbs those two decades. Perhaps, they did.

[BigSkyBob]

Their compensation structure makes it far more logical to get rid of the worst dinosaur tenured teachers.

See charts.

http://illinoispolicy.org/blog/blog.asp?ArticleSource=5041

In their own words, you can get 3 new teachers for the price of 1 old one.

The unions of course went to court to keep the high paid dinosaurs and Karen Lewis is making a fuss about school closures.

Good lord man, you realize this line of thinking makes all raises impossible or very short-lived - just like in the private sector.  Anyone who gets a raise over time will inevitably be fired and replaced by someone cheaper.  Can't you see that this destroys any possibility of well-being, progress, or a decent life for ALL workers?

Your statement is predicated on the false premise that the amount of any raise would outweigh the added productivity of the person given the raise. While that may very well be true of seniority-based raises, a person given a merit-based pay raise could more than justify the additional salary.

[BigSkyBob]

Isn't strike-buster Rahm Emmanuel supposed to be a "progressive"?

At some point you reach the Thatcher endpoint. At that point, some "progressive" has to step forward and a prioritize which options are more "progressive," and which are least.